44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 22, 2023 02:00PM
- Nov/22/23 7:17:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to speak on behalf of the great residents of Dufferin—Caledon.
I am going to focus my remarks today on two of the recommendations in this report. It is incredibly timely that we are having this concurrence debate with respect to this report from the committee. I want to start with recommendation 12, which is, “That the Government of Canada not grant a sanctions waiver to Siemens Energy Canada Limited for Nord Stream 1 pipeline turbines as long as sanctions remain in effect.” I am going to go into why that is significant.
First of all, it granted that waiver in contravention of what the committee recommended, which included Liberal members of that committee. It is relevant because that went to a pipeline that aided Vladimir Putin. It aided his ability to export oil. He funds his illegal war in Ukraine with the energy exports and the money he gets from energy exports.
As we debated the free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine, Conservatives took a principled position to vote against that free trade agreement not only for what is in it, but because the Liberals are trying to export the misery of the carbon tax. I know trade agreements are about imports and exports, but what we should not export is the misery of a carbon tax on Ukrainians in the middle of a war. That is one export I bet Ukrainians do not want.
Why is that so relevant? It is relevant because Conservatives took a principled position to vote against it due to that and many other aspects of this trade deal. It is a bad deal. We voted against it. We are His Majesty's loyal opposition. Opposition is an act of loyalty. Therefore, when we vote against a piece of legislation in our capacity as the official opposition, we are doing it as an act of loyalty. To have Liberal members accuse us of aiding Vladimir Putin as a result of that is beneath contempt. It is despicable.
We should consider that the committee had six Liberal members who put a recommendation forward not to grant a waiver to give a turbine to a Russian pipeline that would pump Russian oil, and they went ahead and did it. Then they have the audacity to stand in this chamber and say Conservatives are aiding Vladimir Putin, the ones who invited a Nazi into the chamber when the President of Ukraine was here. The Liberals say we are aiding Vladimir Putin. It is unconscionable for them to go there.
They granted the waiver for that permit, which enables Vladimir Putin to pump more oil. That puts more money into the Russian war machine. They say our act of loyalty as the opposition is aiding Vladimir Putin. This is disgraceful, even by the standards of the disgraceful conduct of the Liberal Party routinely all across this country and, in particular, in this chamber.
Now I will turn to recommendation 14, which is, “That the Government of Canada continue to provide significant military, financial and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine so long as Ukraine must defend itself from Russian aggression.” That is what the committee recommended, including six Liberal members, it should do. Yesterday, at the international trade committee, which is studying this free trade agreement, I put forward a motion to expand the scope of what could be included in the review of this legislation. I did that because Conservatives wanted to include increased munitions exports to Ukraine. This would be real help. We wanted to include Canadian industry helping Ukraine increase its domestic capacity for munitions manufacturing.
It is relevant because, right now, Canada only sends to Ukraine 3,000 rounds of munitions per month. Does that sound great? Maybe, but Ukraine goes through 3,000 rounds of munitions in one morning, every morning, and the ratio of soldiers being able to survive a war with the ratio of the number of munitions that can be used is directly correlated.
By not doing what they should do, which is increase munitions production and help Ukraine increase more munitions, it will cost the lives of Ukrainian soldiers and aid Vladimir Putin in his vicious, illegal war in Ukraine.
Now, let us go back. The Liberals are actually doing things that are harmful to Ukraine. They are exporting a turbine that is used to increase Russian revenue from oil and gas. I do not know what the definition of helping Vladimir Putin is, but if I wrote the dictionary, that would be in there.
On munitions, how did the Liberals vote on my motion at the committee to expand the scope of the review to include munitions? Let us guess. The Liberal member for Richmond Centre voted no. The Liberal member for Brampton East voted no. The Liberal member for Brampton South voted no. The Liberal member for Ottawa—Vanier voted no. The Liberal member for Nepean voted no. However, they have the audacity to say that Conservatives voting against them trying to export their most disastrous policy in Canada, the policy of deep misery, of two million Canadians going to a food bank, of seven million Canadians eating less healthy food—
877 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/22/23 7:24:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I can take the heckling. They are heckling because they are losing and they do not like what I am saying.
They voted against expanding the scope of this trade agreement to include increasing munitions production, increasing Ukrainian capacity to build their own munitions. We can think about that for a second. All they had to do was expand the scope of what the committee could do. It was a simple vote, yet all those Liberals voted absolutely not. It is disgraceful. They then say that we are the ones who are not supporting Ukraine, but that would be real support for Ukraine.
What is not real support would be a carbon tax or carbon pricing, which has never been in a Canadian free trade deal ever. This is the first time. If this is the first time we put this into a trade agreement, we could put in other new things, could we not? They put a carbon tax in for first time, so new things can go in. Where is the section on energy security? Where is the section on LNG exports? Where is the section on seed bank co-operation for farmers? Where is the section on grain storage? They are not there. Why? It is because the Prime Minister is ideologically obsessed with the carbon tax and he wants to spread the misery all around the world.
I move:
That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after “That” and substituting the following:
“The 10th report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, presented on Wednesday, June 14, 2023, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development with instruction that it amend the same to recommend expanding the scope, either at committee or report stage, of Bill C-57, An Act to implement the 2023 Free Trade Agreement between Canada and Ukraine, in keeping with Recommendation 14 of the report, in order to support expanded munitions production in Canada and increasing munition exports to Ukraine and support the development of weapons and munitions manufacturing capabilities in Ukraine by Canadian Industry.”
It is time for them to put their money where their mouth is. The rubber has hit the road. Are they going to support this motion, yes or no?
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
401 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/22/23 7:50:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity this evening to follow up on a question that I asked in question period on October 20 regarding the Liberal government’s opposition to liquefied natural gas exports to Europe.
For context, shortly after Vladimir Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the leaders of western European countries started to take steps to end their dependence on oil and gas imports from Russia. This makes a great deal of sense, because buying oil and gas from Russia means funding Vladimir Putin’s war machine against Ukraine.
What exactly did the leaders of Europe do? In August of last year, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany visited Canada looking to buy more oil and gas from this country. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister told him that there has never been a strong business case for Canadian oil and gas exports to Europe.
What did the German chancellor do next? He flew to the Middle East to see if the dictators of the United Arab Emirates and Qatar felt that there was a strong business case for oil and gas exports to Europe. Those Middle Eastern dictators were happy to sign a multi-year memorandum of understanding that will guarantee steady oil and gas exports to Germany for years to come.
The story does not end there. Last month, France, the Netherlands and Italy all signed separate agreements to import LNG from Qatar for the next 27 years. This raises a question: Why is Canada not exporting LNG to Europe?
According to a report released by the Fraser Institute shortly after Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last year, “Unfortunately, despite being the world’s fifth-largest producer of natural gas, Canada has missed the opportunity to expand our supply of LNG to overseas markets due to a lack of export infrastructure, largely due to regulatory barriers and environmental activism.”
In fact, Canada does not have a single operational LNG export facility, and only one is under construction. This is the Coastal GasLink project in British Columbia.
That brings us to my question in question period last month, when I asked if the Liberal government still believes that there is no business case for Canadian LNG exports. What was the government's response? It was, “Mr. Speaker, it is really shameful that the Conservative Party would use this humanitarian situation to peddle conspiracy theories.”
There are some things I would really like to know. What conspiracy theories was the Liberal minister referring to? Were last year’s German LNG deals with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates all conspiracy theories? When Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Canada last year, was he part of the conspiracy? What about the three agreements that Qatar signed last month with France, the Netherlands and Italy? Are they in on the conspiracy as well? What about the 6,000 people who worked on the construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline? Does the Liberal minister think that they are part of the conspiracy too?
514 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is ironic to hear the Conservatives pretend to care about Canada's economic future when their campaign on climate denialism has prevented them from supporting even the most popular economic opportunities. The Conservatives are currently using shameful tactics in the natural resources committee to hold back Bill C-49.
Bill C-49 would play a key role in allowing for the development of offshore wind power, a key component for hydrogen and clean electricity. This is critical for improving global energy security and growing the number of good-paying jobs available across all Atlantic provinces.
We have already reached an agreement with the Germans and the Europeans on hydrogen exports. Both premiers support this bill, and the industry has been calling for it to be implemented. The only obstacle is the Conservative Party of Canada and its shameful campaign against all forms of climate action. However—
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
