SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Sep/19/23 10:46:36 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, Bill C-49 is welcome. The Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board and the Canada-Newfoundland & Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board have long had embedded within the legislation aspects of the Atlantic accord that make it a duty of these offshore boards to increase offshore petroleum production. I do not see those sections being removed. It is certainly welcome to see a focus that allows the offshore petroleum boards to actually promote and regulate offshore wind energy production, which is truly green. Meanwhile, we still see subsidies pouring into fossil fuels. We still see that the government is intent on completing a pipeline, the Trans Mountain pipeline, which we own, and it is a horror and a scandal to waste $31 billion on a project intended to produce more greenhouse gases out of the oil sands. We still are putting money into the proven failure of carbon capture and storage, which is yet another disguised subsidy to fossil fuels. Would the government be open to amending Bill C-49 when it gets to committee to ensure that it takes away the embedded preference of petroleum over renewables?

189 words

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Mr. Mario Simard

Sep/19/23 11:46:17 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, in discussions about the oil and gas sector and the fact that we have to reduce our fossil fuel consumption, I always get a laugh out of Conservative members who talk about clean energy sources that rely on petroleum products. I just want to point out that oil sands oil is the dirtiest oil in the world. When we invest energy and money in those resources, which are used by Albertans and all Canadians, we cannot invest those resources in renewable energy. We have to stop clinging to the illusion of clean oil and liberate ourselves from oil and gas. That is what every country wants to do. We have to stop talking about things that are not backed up by science and making up facts such as, say, there is a carbon tax in Quebec. That is not true; it is a lie. Politicians who say things like that discredit themselves.

154 words

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Ms. Lena Metlege Diab

Sep/19/23 1:49:52 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Mr. Speaker, this is what I know. When the bill was announced, I was in the foyer and partook in the announcement. I also know that the minister from Nova Scotia was at the announcement and represented Nova Scotia's interests. I know Nova Scotia is on board with this. I have also had the opportunity to speak to chiefs from my province from the indigenous communities, and they are on board with this. I know the petroleum board itself is on board with this. This is a partnership between the federal government, the province, indigenous people, Nova Scotians and Newfoundland and Labradorians. This is a good thing. If there are issues with it, let us get them worked out at committee and move this along.

126 words

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Sep/19/23 3:34:42 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, to the hon. colleague for Tobique—Mactaquac, I cannot move to my question without personally thanking him for his really kind email this summer sending prayers after my stroke. I am so grateful. In the debate all day today I have heard Conservatives say that they do not like C-49. I have been specific about the thing I would like to see changed, which is to go back to the original Canada-Nova Scotia and Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador offshore petroleum board acts and remove the conflict of interest that exists that promotes petroleum. However, I do not know, and I have not yet heard from my Conservative colleagues what it is that they want changed in C-49, because it is good legislation and we need to move it forward.

136 words

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)

Sep/19/23 3:51:04 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, the minister spoke about the importance of petroleum drilling projects like Hibernia and White Rose to his province. I am sure he is aware that within the NDP-Liberal government, there are those who continually war on oil and gas and want to shut it down. Is he not concerned that Bill C-49 contains measures that would give cabinet the power to decide on a whim to shut down important projects like Hibernia and White Rose without provincial input or necessary indigenous consultation?

86 words

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

Sep/19/23 4:55:03 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, the member says that he was listening to the debate all day, but it seems like he has not heard what the Conservatives have said. On the point about the carbon tax, I think the reason the member was raising it is because the Atlantic premiers said they did not want the carbon tax. They have also asked for a suspension of the clean fuel regulations. They also, by the end of Bill C-69 leaving the Senate, opposed Bill C-69. The government ignored all of them. I think that is why this is being brought up. Since the member wants to know what issues the Conservatives are raising in the actual bill, if he were to read it, I will tell him. It is because this bill would not only allow for the potential arbitrary decision-making to end both existing and future offshore petroleum drilling, but that would also impact renewable energy offshore development according to this bill. This bill is an attack to end offshore petroleum drilling, as is the government's track record, and it will also hold up the development of renewables too. This bill actually triples the timeline for final ministerial decisions on renewable offshore energy development. In section 28 and 137, it gives the ability for cabinet to arbitrarily prohibit development in areas. It imports—

226 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 220 - Sep/19/23

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

Sep/19/23 4:57:07 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, at first glance, Bill C‑49 does not seem to do away with the annual process for the auction and sale of exploratory drilling permits. Why then was the word “petroleum” removed from the names of the two boards if their mission still involves offshore oil and gas development? Is this more smoke and mirrors from the Liberals when it comes to the environment?

69 words