44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 19, 2023 10:00AM
- Oct/19/23 4:49:04 p.m.
- Watch
We have a point of order from the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I certainly will not speak to the NPD leader's ethical violation as it relates to a gift he received. I want to know what the relevance is to the bill we are debating.
36 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I urge people to have a look at the Speaker's ruling from yesterday. Again, page 8 reads, “This includes coming up with fake titles for members in order to mock them or making comments that question their courage, honesty or commitment to their country.”
There is a lot of that in debates lately, so let us try to bring that debate further up. I know the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay is really wanting to talk to the bill at hand.
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think I am getting so much interference because I am getting to the punchline. Then, I will move on, but I think it would be unfair to intimidate me and have my ability to speak circumscribed, because it is about what our priorities are. Our priority, as New Democrats, has been workers, and particularly people from the natural resources industry, like where I come from. I live in a mining town that is looking for the clean energy future, and nobody in my town would be given a $719 bottle of wine. What was in that wine?
I am coming to the conclusion. At the end of this night with these four Conservatives, paid for apparently by my cousin Dan McTeague over in the U.K., meeting somebody we do not know, they had a bottle of champagne for $1,791 Canadian. That is obviously not sparkling Baby Duck. I do not know who bought that for them.
I ask that, because what we are talking about is the insecurity of workers at a time of transition. Do we wish there was a transition? No, we do not. We are used to living the way we have lived. I have lived through transitions, and it is not pretty. Cobalt is where we lost every single silver mining job in one summer. When our iron ore mines shut down, there was no future there. We know the word “transition”, and we know it is not pretty. This was something we heard from workers in Alberta and other regions. They asked what is “just” about a transition and how we could make it so they have some place to go. This was the New Democratic plan from the beginning, which we negotiated with the Liberals.
The Liberals initially said that they were going to put a jobs centre as their solution. We said that a jobs centre sends a message that we are turning out the lights and leaving. Where are we going to put those jobs centres? Are we going to put them in Fort McMurray or Saint John's? We needed something broader and something bigger, so we pushed for the sustainable jobs legislation that would serve as the framework. This is the important thing: We need a framework around how these tax credits would be implemented. We know that if we do not have a plan, it will be just a gong show of friends, pals and lobbyists who are going to be sucking up this money, as unfortunately happens all too often in Canada.
We need to compete the way the United States has. They brought an all-of-government approach to make sure they were making a truly transformative revolution.
I will say another thing they talked to us about when we were in Germany. The Germans were very concerned about the IRA, because of the competitiveness. Over in Europe, 3,000 or 4,000 kilometres away, they were concerned about how they were going to compete against Joe Biden and the massive amount of investment that is moving out of Europe and moving to the United States. We are right on the American border, so when $33 billion gets sucked out of Alberta, it goes stateside.
In my region, talking to miners and mining companies, the first thing they said to me was, “Did you see the tax credits Joe Biden put in? They are really interesting to us.” We have to be able to say that we are here too, we will compete and we will make sure that the investment stays here.
Again, I am dealing with the Liberal government. We are trying to make this work. We are saying, for example, that there are a lot of things missing in this plan. What is the sustainable jobs secretariat? Is that just going to be some desk in some minister's office, or is it going to have a true mandate? What is the partnership council? Are we actually looking at something credible here?
What we are going to be insisting on, while the Conservatives try to filibuster that committee and that legislation, is checks and balances to make sure that regional representation is there. We want to make sure that labour is there with enough voices representing enough regions of the country, because they are the ones who are going to be dealing with the implementation of that, not us. We want to make sure that indigenous rights are fully respected and implemented, and part of that is in the tax credit incentives. They are going to be different in different areas, and they are certainly going to be different in the opportunities for indigenous people. We need to make sure they are front and centre.
The other thing we really want to know is that we have a youth voice on the stewardship council, because we want to make sure that those who are being most affected by the climate disaster that is unfolding have their future interests at stake. We need to make sure that the tax credits work, we need to make sure that they are being implemented and we need to have better data collection. What the Liberals are offering us on data collection is insufficient. There would not be a job left in Canada by the time they report back.
There need to be mechanisms that come back to Parliament to tell us if this is working. If it does not work, it is is going to affect our environment, number one, but it is going to affect working-class families from one end of the country to the other.
What we were really surprised by, again, with the all-of-government approach taken by the Biden administration, is that we have seen, in one year, a staggering turnaround in terms of projects getting off the ground, in terms of jobs, in terms of commitments.
That is where we are at as New Democrats. We believe that we have a huge opportunity right now. Is this bill perfect? It is far from perfect. What we can do in a minority Parliament is come in with good plans and good amendments to make it happen, unlike our Conservative colleagues, who want to go back to the 19th century.
It is not going to happen. I am sorry. That world is gone. What we need to do is to say that we have an opportunity and if we do not compete, we are going to be at the side of the road because the United States is moving ahead.
I will just conclude on this. Let us consider Texas. Texas, politically, is about as out there and as right wing as the Conservative backbench and yet 890,000 clean-tech jobs are in Texas right now. There is no other jurisdiction in the world right now that has invested as much in clean tech as Texas. Texas came through the most brutal heat wave, killer heat wave, able to turn on all of their air conditioners.
Meanwhile, Danielle Smith was going around saying, oh my God, if we have clean power, we are going to have to turn the power off. She was paying for these trucks to drive up and down Ottawa saying, my God, if one invests in Canada, we are going to run out of energy. What kind of premier goes around advertising, in an energy-rich province, that the lights are going to be turned off?
The reality is that if we get these clean energy projects off the ground, it is going to dramatically decrease costs for families. It is going to give the working class and middle class steady jobs and it is going to save our planet. We will go to these hearings and we will push for strong amendments.
1316 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the member from Timmins—James Bay today. There was that one exchange between him and the member for Sarnia—Lambton. She started to claim that she was not a climate denier, which I found very fascinating, because, only moments before that, when she was giving a speech in this House, she made some pretty wild claims, stuff that one sees from Russian bot memes on Facebook.
She said that only 7% of the population wants to have an electric car, yet in 2022, one out of every 10 vehicles was a plug-in vehicle in Canada.
She also said that no one wants to be trapped in a snowstorm at -30° because the batteries do not work. This is completely untrue. I have been driving electric vehicles here since I was elected in 2015. They work in the winter.
She also said, and this is the best one, because this is the meme that one always sees, “They catch fire”, as though we should be afraid of an electric car because the battery is going to catch fire.
The outrage and the misinformation that is being distributed by Conservatives is what gives them the reputation that they are climate deniers.
Would the member for Timmins—James Bay agree with that?
224 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is my deep tradition in Parliament to not cast aspersions on any but to only speak to facts, so I will only speak to facts.
The member for Sarnia—Lambton lives on Highway 401 and Highway 401 is the heart of Canada's auto belt. Canada's auto belt has gone all in on EV technology. Here is the simple thing. Those jobs could go to Ohio or they could stay in Canada.
We see the Conservatives do misinformation after misinformation about EV, about critical minerals, about battery technology, as if our workers cannot make proper cars.
I am sorry. Canadians can make the best cars on the planet. The Conservatives and the Conservative leader attack EV technology and the battery technology, but my region is dependent on those jobs. We are going to get the critical minerals out of the ground. We are going to work with the companies on Highway 401. We are going to make the cars in Canada and make them sustainably.
The Conservatives do not have to drive them. They want to go back to the days of the horse and buggy, so let them.
194 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I noticed that the hon. member spent a lot of time on sponsored travel, so I would like to ask him a question. In 2022, he took a trip to Berlin, Germany that cost $10,500. The trip was paid for by the FES, partnered with politicized NGOs, to attack Israel, SHAML, a radical anti-Israel NGO, and Mossawa, which is one of the main Israeli Arab NGOs involved in the political demonization of Israel.
He held a joint press conference with Hezbollah in 2004 and HDIP, which promotes international political attacks on Israel.
How could he justify that?
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, as we saw earlier today, the Conservatives attempted to use the horrific kidnappings by Hamas to promote the oil and gas agenda. I do not say these things are lies. I do not need to. I do not even need to respond to that kind of gutter talk.
The fact that the Conservatives would say that going to meet the German Chancellor and German parliamentarians about energy was somehow tied to the terror attacks in Israel shows how marginal they are and how deplorable the actions are of a party that will say anything, do anything and misrepresent anything at a time of such horror, tragedy and killings. I would tell the member shame on him.
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would like unanimous consent to table the member's sponsored travel.
Some hon. members: No.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I am already hearing a number of noes.
We have a point of order from the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am more than willing to put out our sponsored travel. Are they willing? The member for Cumberland—Colchester had the $1,800 bottle of wine. Would they put the documents on the table and tell us who bought that wine?
44 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
We are getting into debate.
Questions and comments, the hon. members for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I have a simple question. Why are we talking about sustainable jobs and not a just transition?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay: Mr. Speaker, I cannot hear myself.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/19/23 5:01:57 p.m.
- Watch
Order.
The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. People can have conversations in our lovely lobbies. In fact, there are even cubicles just outside where people can have conversations without bothering everyone. They are very comfortable, so I invite members who are not interested in this debate to go there.
My question is very simple. I would like to know why the Liberals and the NDP are afraid of the words, “just transition”. Why are they talking about sustainable jobs instead?
That seems like a very “Canadian” choice of words to me, a well-rehearsed talking point. Why not talk about a just transition?
Why is that not the bill's title?
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, words do matter, and when we met with workers about what they wanted, they wanted to know there was a future. That was why the words “sustainable jobs” meant something. We heard that from workers.
In terms of international obligations, we need to ensure in the legislation that this is not just an island by itself. It must meet the international commitments we have made on issues like the just transition.
It is very important, when I am in Edmonton meeting with electrical workers who want to know what their future looks like, to say this is about jobs. This is about tomorrow. Once we have established trust with the working class, we will move further ahead because there is no energy transition without workers at the table. That is why the language matters.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I have been a member of Parliament for eight years. I have listened to a lot of speeches in this place. Rarely have I seen as many points of order during one speech as what I just witnessed. I think that demonstrates just how thin-skinned the Conservatives are on this issue.
What I was really interested in—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Mr. Alistair MacGregor: Mr. Speaker, they are heckling right now. They continue to show how thin-skinned they are.
My honourable friend was talking about oil and gas profits. He made a point about all the wealth companies are generating and asked what they are doing with it. They are not investing in workers. They are firing workers. They are doing stock buybacks. They are doing dividend payouts.
Can my hon. colleague talk about that? It seems to me that rather than standing on the side of workers, we are hearing Conservatives parrot what the CEOs of the oil and gas industry say. I am wondering if he could expand on that.
178 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is a very important question because we saw big oil racking up $200 billion in profits in the most catastrophic climate year on record.
Rich Kruger, Suncor's CEO, said there was a “sense of urgency” to make as much money as possible. I think of the 200,000 people who were displaced. I think of the buildings that were lost. I think of the terrifying situations we had and the obligation the CEOs have to deal with this.
The Conservatives live in a bubble of pretending that the world does not exist. Meanwhile, there are over 100 major lawsuits right now against Exxon and Suncor in jurisdictions like California and Colorado because they knew back in the 1960s and 1980s that they were burning the future of the planet. Shell, in 1988, warned that by the time issues became clear in the 2000s, it might be too late, but it took the time to raise its oil platforms six feet on the offshore rigs so that when the ice caps melted, it could still make money.
That is their responsibility and we will call that out.
192 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think of Bill C-49 and Bill C-50. Bill C-49 had phenomenal support, not only from the House of Commons but also from the premiers in Atlantic Canada. It was all about renewable energy and future clean, green jobs. There are literally hundreds of thousands of potential jobs from there to Bill C-50, and we recognize the future. There is a need to develop, promote and encourage those green jobs. However, the Conservatives, as they voted against Bill C-49, are now going to be voting against Bill C-50.
The member often makes reference to climate change deniers. Why does he feel the Conservatives are challenging these good, futuristic middle-class jobs that are going to be there today and tomorrow?
128 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, that is an excellent question. My grandfather was a coal miner and had to leave the coal mines because there was no future there. That is when he went to work in the gold mines and broke his back underground. My mother is a miner's daughter. This is what we grew up with.
When the jobs went out, I never heard the Conservatives say they cared. We lost jobs and the pensions of the workers at Kerr-Addison, Pamour miners were ripped off and Elliot Lake went down. We are in a situation of transition, and I think of the people in Atlantic Canada who have had to travel too often to find jobs.
Right now, we are competing with the United States offshore in the Atlantic, and it is investing hundreds of millions of dollars in offshore wind. We can either get in the game and provide sustainable jobs for the communities out there or sit on the sidelines and let the Americans take them. I am not willing to let the Americans take our opportunities.
180 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
