SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 129 - Nov/17/22

Nov/17/22 12:19:52 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, I found it remarkable that, in the last year, we have seen a change in the Liberal Party on nuclear energy. I agree with the member that it is critical for any industrialized country to meet their climate change reduction targets to have, as baseload power generation, support for nuclear. The issue is that Catherine McKenna, when she was the minister of climate change and environment, did not support that technology. In fact, in all of the discussions of our Paris targets, it was never mentioned. That technology was not included in the green bonds program, as the member discussed. He has the opportunity in the Liberal caucus to make it clear that they should have included that technology, as well as the investments in small modular reactors. These are all positive steps. Maybe the member could tell the House what has changed within the government after six years of inaction on nuclear? Are they now going to pursue this as a part of their strategy?

168 words

Context: House Hansard - 129 - Nov/17/22

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Leader of the Opposition, CPC)

Nov/17/22 2:23:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, these are our allies and these are our customers, and all of them have better climate change performance than the government has in Canada. What it has done in Canada is raise taxes on people's energy use, energy that they must use. People do need to heat their homes if they live in rural Newfoundland, and they need to use oil to do it because that is all there is. The cost is already up 77% year over year and likely to go up further. Some families will pay as much as $6,000 to heat their homes. Is the government really going to tell them that they have to pay more for the government's failures on the environment?

123 words

Context: House Hansard - 129 - Nov/17/22

Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Lib.)

Nov/17/22 2:25:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, our government bought and will complete the building of the Trans Mountain pipeline. Our government absolutely understands that LNG is an important transition fuel and plays a valuable role for Canada and the world. I do want to point out that we understand that for projects to work, they have to meet environmental standards and indigenous people have to be consulted. That is how we are going to get projects in Canada built, including necessary renewable energy projects.

80 words

Context: House Hansard - 129 - Nov/17/22

Mr. Pat Kelly

Nov/17/22 4:54:46 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-32

Madam Speaker, I think resource extraction offers some of the best opportunities for remote indigenous communities to have access to jobs and the core services that the revenues these projects produce. We heard that earlier in the leader's speech. It is very important for indigenous communities, and indeed all northern and remote communities, that resource extraction can happen in Canada. Canada has a role to play in the world. Europe is risking freezing this winter and fuelling Putin's war because of our inability to get energy resources to Europe, where they are needed. It is a shame. The government carries tremendous responsibility for this failure of global energy security.

111 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 129 - Nov/17/22

Ms. Elizabeth May

Nov/17/22 6:40:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my heavens, I need to say a few things. I intervened in the National Energy Board process. I read all 23,000 pages of its so-called evidence, and I can swear on a stack of Bibles that nowhere in there was there a cost-benefit analysis. In fact, the National Energy Board blocked the evidence from Unifor, the largest union in the oil sands, when its representatives testified and had expert evidence that the pipeline project would cost Canadian jobs and that Unifor was against it. The National Energy Board said that jobs and the economy were not in its mandate and then magically ruled that, yes, there would be a lot of environmental damage if this went ahead, but it was in the national interest. I think the national interest is in a viable planet. I think the national interest is in making sure we try to stabilize at 1.5°C, and we know that every international body is saying no new fossil fuel infrastructure if we have an interest in human civilization surviving to when my daughter, now 31, is my age. By God, this must be stopped.

195 words