SoVote

Jun/8/23 10:12:00 a.m.
Watch

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet (Beloeil—Chambly, BQ)

Jun/8/23 10:12:15 a.m.
Watch

moved: That the House: (a) stand in solidarity with and express its support for all those affected by the current forest fires; (b) acknowledge that climate change is having a direct impact on people’s quality of life, and that it is exacerbating the frequency and scale of extreme weather and climate events (floods, tornadoes, forest fires, heat waves, etc.); (c) recognize that the federal government must do more to combat climate change, prevent its impacts and support communities affected by natural disasters; (d) call on the federal government to invest more in the fight against climate change, which is at risk of becoming increasingly expensive for both the public and the environment; and (e) demand that the federal government stop investing in fossil fuels and develop incentives, while respecting the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces, to promote the use of renewable energy and public transit.

148 words

The Speaker

Jun/8/23 10:12:15 a.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Salaberry—Suroît is rising on a point of order.

16 words

Mrs. Claude DeBellefeuille

Jun/8/23 10:13:52 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to indicate that, pursuant to Standing Order 43(2)(a), all of the Bloc Québécois's speaking slots for today's debate on the business of supply will be divided in two.

41 words

The Speaker

Jun/8/23 10:14:12 a.m.
Watch

Thank you. We will now begin the debate. The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly.

15 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet

Jun/8/23 10:14:21 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my speaking time with my esteemed colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé, who will be displaying the excellence we all strive for. Quebec and Canada are grappling with unprecedented wildfires. As we speak, we could even say it is a—

47 words

The Deputy Speaker

Jun/8/23 10:14:52 a.m.
Watch

I must interrupt the hon. member because there is apparently no interpretation yet. I will speak in French to check whether it has started, which now seems to be the case. The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly may continue.

40 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet

Jun/8/23 10:15:03 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, right now, in Quebec, we are seeing a level of devastation roughly 11 times greater than the average for the last 10 years. We have not even begun to assess the dramatic economic impact of these wildfires. Over the next few years, we will likely experience many phenomena that will dramatically worsen the impact of climate change. This is very worrisome. The seasons conducive to extreme events, whether they are tornadoes, extreme tropical storms that have an impact in our area, heat waves, droughts, wildfires or floods, will get increasingly longer, begin earlier and end later. The likelihood of extreme events will increase. The intensity of these events will also increase. These droughts, heat waves, floods and storms will have a very significant impact on Quebec. They will also affect people around the world. These people will have to try to protect themselves and prepare for the situation. One possible way for them to adapt would be to move somewhere else because the waters will rise, deserts will grow and lands that were once fertile will no longer be. We, the countries that can do so, will be responsible for receiving climate migrants. That will put additional humanitarian pressure on migration issues. On a billionaire friend’s yacht, people do not feel the water rising. At sea, a glass of champagne in hand, they rise with the ocean. However, when the water slowly rises or suddenly rushes over banks and shorelines, entire villages are destroyed, in places where people were unable to protect themselves. It is in places that could, in theory, protect themselves—such as major cities around the world—that massive and extremely costly infrastructure is needed. To a lesser extent, Quebec will face similar pressure. Every storm and every event slowly and irrevocably changes and adds to the misery in the world. Ecosystems are unable to adapt to this climate change. Animal species are more mobile, of course, but they are dependent on plant environments. Plant environments cannot move along with climate change. Plants cannot migrate fast enough to new areas with a climate that is conducive to their growth. The Observatoire régional de recherche sur la forêt boréale at the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi is studying these phenomena. The entire biodiversity of vast regions of the planet, and also of Quebec, is affected. We cannot naively say that the forest will move north, that we will have more space with potential for plant life to grow. It simply does not work that way because things are changing too fast. Within the space of a few decades, we are provoking what has historically taken thousands and tens of thousands of years through changes that others would have us believe are still natural, even today. The loss of biodiversity is also having an impact. The destruction of economic models comes with this destruction of ecosystems. There is still a massive share of the global and Quebec economies that rely on the growth of plant and animal life. I am talking in particular of fishing and agriculture, and also forestry. The forests in Quebec are in many ways a resource that is comparable in importance to petroleum resources in western Canada, aside from one small detail: They are a renewable resource. Not only is it a resource that does not contribute to climate change, but it is also a fundamental resource that is still the best way we know to capture carbon naturally and to reduce the phenomena that lead to climate change. Still, despite the importance of the forests for our economy, for the regions of Quebec, for our very identity as a people and a nation, today we see the effect of climate change. This effect is not direct. Let us not claim that science says certain things that it has not said. We cannot associate the 11-fold increases over the last 10-year average with a particular climate event, but the probability is increased to such a degree that science would never dare to deny again. This has an even more significant impact because Quebec's money, which should be invested in a much greener and much more sustainable economy for Quebec, is going into western oil, in the form of tax credits, direct subsidies or nonsense such as costly carbon sequestration or, worse, the hypocrisy of wanting to use nuclear energy, which is not a clean energy, so as not to use oil to extract oil. All of this sends us into a spiral of destruction. Is it not time to put an end to it? Is it not time, given the evidence of the damage caused by climate change, to put an end to all funding of fossil fuels, to rather use this money, especially in Quebec because that is our strength, to ensure a sustainable economy, and to explain to people that environmental challenges are not restrictions on what we can do, but a wealth-creation model that is not only different, but the bearer of increased wealth, especially in Quebec? As I have said before, we are open to having the necessary amounts that are now invested in oil but that would be invested in the green transition, stay in western Canada, which really needs to engage in this energy transition. We need to use this money immediately to fight forest fires, help communities in distress, support research to mitigate the consequences of climate change, which, even if we stopped everything tomorrow morning, would continue to exist, and finance municipal infrastructures to meet the challenge. We must, however, resist the temptation to make this a political instrument for centralization. We are starting to see that when people say that the Canadian military should be the main resource for fighting forest fires. Quebec has the institutions and the expertise needed to fight the forest fires. What do we not have? Because of the fiscal imbalance, we do not have money. It is the tried and true tactic of saying that, since the provinces do not have money and the federal government would like to take over their jurisdictions, everything will be taken over by the federal government, and the provinces will have to rely on the federal government. That is not what we want. We want our share of the money needed to adapt to the situation to go to Quebec and the provinces. Given the government's moral collapse, this may be an opportunity to give more meaning to the concept of state and to ensure that people actually see that our institutions, democracy and parliaments can still serve the common good with dignity, honour and respect. By voting this way, we will be taking action.

1130 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

Jun/8/23 10:24:49 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the members of the Bloc Québécois for the motion they have introduced in the House today. I want to congratulate them on bringing forward a motion of substance that genuinely calls on the government to do something meaningful within its realm of possibility. I want to express that I plan to vote in favour of this motion, not only because it is well crafted, but also because it is a motion on something we should be calling upon the government to do. When we talk about the government investing in fossil fuels, I think it is important that we do not invest in the creation, exploitation or extraction of fossil fuels. However, I believe there is still work for the government to do with dealing with abandoned oil wells, for example. Could the leader of the Bloc confirm that the motion is attempting to distinguish between investing in fossil fuels from an extraction perspective and dealing with abandoned oil wells and other impacts from previous fossil fuels extraction?

176 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet

Jun/8/23 10:26:10 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the reality is one of investments in the form of tax credits or assistance for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the process of extracting petroleum resources. The only petroleum resources that are safe to develop are biofuels and biogas. They exist, but that is not what we are talking about. The suggested approach is not really useful. If the industry were able to lower its emissions per barrel, it would only produce more barrels. Our money would then be used solely to maintain the level of greenhouse gas emissions. We need to go a step further and transition away from oil.

107 words

Mr. Mel Arnold (North Okanagan—Shuswap, CPC)

Jun/8/23 10:27:15 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I note that in the first item in this motion the member is calling on the government to express consideration for the people affected by the wildfires. I would like to bring the Bloc caucus up to speed on my private member's bill, Bill C-365 from the 42nd Parliament, which sought to consider the theft and vandalism of firefighting equipment as an aggravating factor in sentencing. The entire Bloc caucus voted against it. I would like to ask the member why.

85 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet

Jun/8/23 10:28:02 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there is not much I can say, because I am not familiar with the bill in question. It has not been on my radar for a long time. However, in the past few days, I have heard statements that have made it rather hard to differentiate between the positions of the People's Party and the Conservative Party, both of which basically claimed that wildfires are a ploy by environmentalists to make people panic. I was a bit alarmed by that. Today, we all have the opportunity to act reasonably for the good of the planet.

98 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/8/23 10:28:39 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the leader of the Bloc Québécois for his excellent speech. He talked about the disasters that are occurring in many regions of Canada, including Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, where I learned to speak French, and Abitibi-Témiscamingue, where I spent a lot of time. Of course, our thoughts are currently with the volunteer firefighters and emergency workers who are working in those areas and in other regions of Canada. The member reminded us that the government is spending billions of dollars on fossil fuel subsidies. We need to make the transition to clean energy. Other countries have already done it. What is the best way for Canada to make that transition and make its contribution to climate justice?

131 words

Mr. Yves-François Blanchet

Jun/8/23 10:29:45 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, a number of suggestions come to mind. As I recently said in the House, we need to walk the talk. In this case, that means that we need to do whatever it takes—even if we are hogtied and gagged—to prevent a government partner from spending billions of dollars on measures that support the oil-related economic chain. That in itself would be a major contribution.

71 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Jun/8/23 10:30:34 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was mesmerized by my leader’s speech. The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly is a hard act to follow. I always listen to him attentively, because I find him very inspiring. At the end of his speech, he mentioned something that I think we should all focus on today: the sense of state. Today’s motion by the Bloc Québécois is not a partisan motion. It is not a motion that points a finger at the bad guys and the good guys, but a motion that states a fact, that expresses an important problem we have for the most part ignored: the sense of state. I will begin by expressing our solidarity with the people affected by the terrible forest fires raging across Quebec. I am originally from Abitibi—Témiscamingue, and having lived for many years in Northern Quebec, I know many people who have been evacuated and who are not sure their homes will still be there tomorrow. I understand their distress. This is a situation of unprecedented magnitude. We must, of course, acknowledge the work of the people on the ground who are trying to put a stop to this horror and those who are taking care of people who have been displaced. I would also like to acknowledge our colleagues in the House who are directly affected in their ridings, who are on the ground and have been over the past few days. The hon. members for Abitibi—James Bay—Nunavik—Eeyou, Abitibi—Témiscamingue and Manicouagan are doing a remarkable job by being there for their constituents. This motion expresses our solidarity. Climate change exists. We are not here today to say that the forest fires are caused by climate change. However, there is something that we do know, and that all the scientists are telling us: Climate change exacerbates the conditions that cause dramatic events like the ones going on today by extending the wildfire season and the number of extremely hot and dry days. Scientists tell us that, even now, during heavy rainfalls, since the ground is very dry when the rain begins, it is unable to absorb the water. This causes erosion, the ground dries out again very quickly, and the next storm will likely spark another fire. That is one of many examples. I could talk about floods. We could talk about a lot of things. It is important that we realize what is going on. It is also important to recognize that the federal government has the greatest financial resources at this time. Our leader raised the issue earlier in referring to the infamous fiscal imbalance. There is an urgent need to stop investing in oil energy and allocate the funds to the right places, to the right resources, in order to trigger a fair and equitable energy transition for all regions of Quebec and Canada. I am addressing my Conservative colleagues from western Canada in particular. They constantly promote the oil industry. Today's motion is not a motion against the people in their ridings. It is a motion for the future of our entire population. We are telling them that we want to invest funds in their region to start the climate transition. It has to start sometime. That is the problem. The final point of the motion states that the federal government must stop investing in fossil fuels and start investing in renewable energy and public transit. That is not always the federal government's responsibility, so that also implies significant transfers. We need to revise our adaptation plan from two angles: first, mitigating climate change, and second, preparing the public for climate change. That is another crucial challenge. Currently, our municipalities are being left to deal with climate change on their own, even though they already have very little revenue for their development. It is important to decentralize these funds. It is important for our communities to be able to invest in their infrastructure, such as sewer systems or municipal wastewater treatment, because they know it better than anyone. Underground infrastructure is not very popular in the world of politics. There are many communities where various people in power failed to invest in basic infrastructure. It is important that funds be released for this purpose. The current wildfires are a natural phenomenon, of course, but their impact is exacerbated by climate warming. In 2022, the cost of the damage caused by climate change around the world was pegged at $275 billion. I am not just talking about fires, but about all extreme events related to climate change. This can include floods and ice storms, which are more and more frequent. Moreover, the cost of insurance directly affects ordinary citizens. Insurance companies are not charitable organizations. I assume that my colleagues have shopped for insurance at one time or another. I am sure that they feel the same way I do: that we often pay a lot for what we get. These companies assess a risk. Unfortunately, that risk is growing. That means that costs are going to go up and up until the insurance companies are no longer prepared to take the risk of insuring us. Eventually, they are going to tell us that they will no longer insure us, because the risk is too high. Who will the responsibility fall on then? It will fall on us and the government. That is why it is important to act quickly. The Bloc Québécois has made constructive suggestions. We introduced a bill on climate change accountability, which would have made major changes. After COVID-19, we had the good sense to consult the people on the ground and propose a recovery plan based on a change of direction for government measures aimed at fighting climate change. We wanted to make something good out of this bad situation. There are two ways to handle difficult situations: we can either wring our hands, or we can figure out how to turn the situation to our advantage. We were willing to make major investments. Unfortunately, the government did not follow our recommendations. Right now we are proposing solutions that promote green finance to force the financial industry to stop investing in fossil fuels. I do not know if anyone here has ever tried keeping fossil fuels out of their RRSP or other investment portfolio, but it is not easy. Investors need to be careful and read all the fine print. I think I succeeded, but it was not easy. What we are telling the government today is the same thing the IPCC and everyone else is saying. Earlier, I said that we could have invested after the COVID-19 pandemic, but that we missed the boat. COVID-19 showed us that governments are capable of stopping everything at once, making investments and taking extraordinary measures. Just look at what is happening in Quebec and Canada right now. It is time we realized how urgent it is to act. The government is the strongest tool we can collectively use to make major changes, so let us use it. Right now, the government is saying things that seem to be positive, but there is nothing concrete. They are announcing either amounts that have already been announced or amounts that are available for the oil and gas industry to help it hang on a little longer. That is not acceptable anymore. Every scientist in the world is telling us that the first step in a just, fair and equitable green transition is to stop investing in oil and gas. That is the first step. Today, the Bloc Québécois's motion acknowledges the situation, expresses our solidarity with the people who are suffering, and tells the government that it is time to take action, take that first step and finally end all fossil fuel subsidies.

1327 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate), Lib.)

Jun/8/23 10:40:49 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I know that the last clause of the motion specifically speaks to incentivizing renewable energies, and Quebec has an incredible track record in terms of its renewable energy program. Some initiatives that have come out of Quebec relate to using government tools and resources to properly incentivize the renewable energy sector. Could the member comment on initiatives from Quebec that the rest of the country can benefit from?

70 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Jun/8/23 10:41:23 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his question and, in particular, for announcing his support for today's motion. That is very important. I am pleased that he brought up the issue of resource allocation, because that will allow me to wrap up my point. At present, we are seeing how resources are being wasted at federal level. Money is being given to the biggest global warming offenders. My colleague asked me to give examples from Quebec. I am very proud to be able to point out today that Quebec is the first government in North America to have announced it was ending oil exploration. It is a significant gesture, and I invite Canada to do the same. It is all well and good to announce investments in clean energy. There is a certain nuance in that wording. When Quebec talks about clean energy, we are not talking about oil that is less dirty. We want to turn to something other than oil. We want to turn to wind power and solar power, for example, which are renewable.

181 words

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Jun/8/23 10:42:32 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Berthier-Maskinongé for his very good speech. He talked about subsidies. We spend billions of dollars on fossil fuel subsidies. We know full well that other countries are in the process of making investments and building networks for clean energy such as electricity grids. I am thinking in particular of the grid that links Scandinavian countries to Germany. This Nordic grid allows the export of clean energy. In the United States market, for example, states and cities are increasingly demanding that they be supplied only with clean energy. The market is incredible and the potential is there. Does my colleague agree that we really need to make investments to create an electricity grid that allows us to export energy throughout North America?

130 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Jun/8/23 10:43:31 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, electric power is definitely an energy of the future. Still, investments need to come from the right level of government. There has to be fairness in federal investments. We must not forget that. I could talk about past injustices. As for the importance of investing in the right energies, I would say that, according to experts around the world today, for every dollar invested in oil, $1.7 is invested in renewable energies. However, that is not what is happening in Canada. This year, investments could reach $40 billion. That is 11% more than before COVID-19. Production in Canada is expected to increase until 2040. We are going off course. We need to steer the ship in the right direction, towards a real energy transition and renewable energies.

131 words

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Jun/8/23 10:44:30 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, our colleague did a good job of explaining that, although forest fires have certainly always existed, climate change is making conditions worse and far more conducive to these types of fires and many other disasters that will keep making headlines. Over the past few days, the air in Ottawa was absolutely impossible to breathe and the sky was totally grey. It was terrible here, even though the fires are raging in Abitibi and on the north shore. I wonder why people have a hard time understanding this. The government always makes big announcements about money it is spending to fight climate change, but it is also spending billions of dollars on the oil industry, which completely undermines those efforts. Sooner or later, expenditures from this line will have to be put on that line. Why do people not understand that?

142 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 209