SoVote

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson (Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Lib.)

Dec/4/23 4:13:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would say, just listening to what my hon. colleague said, that she clearly has not read what the bill says. Perhaps that is because— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

33 words

Read

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Dec/4/23 4:14:07 p.m.
Watch

Members will not interrupt the hon. minister, as we want to hear the minister answer the question.

17 words

Interrupt

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:14:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, perhaps that is because the Conservative Party has been filibustering the committee for 11 different meetings, with six weeks of filibuster, not allowing discussion and not allowing witnesses to have a conversation, which is what committees are supposed to do. It is a shameful waste of taxpayers' resources and the Conservatives should be ashamed of themselves.

58 words

Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)

Dec/4/23 4:14:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we have had over 133 witnesses and 120 hours of hearings on the issue of the energy transition. The Conservatives had nothing to say to any energy worker. When we brought the Canadian Labour Congress, the Conservatives shut them down. When the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers came, the Conservatives shut them down. When the carpenters union came to speak, they shut them down. When the International Trade Union Confederation came, they shut them down. When the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs came, they shut them down. It was New Democrats who brought representatives from the coal transition. The Conservatives had no interest at all in hearing from workers. This legislation is about workers having a seat at the table, and the Conservatives have turned to gong-show gibberish politics to stop workers from having a seat at the table. I want to ask my hon. colleague why he thinks the Conservatives have fallen down the rabbit hole of conspiracy in their attempts to stop workers from having a seat in a discussion about their future.

179 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:15:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is also shameful that they have looked to exclude workers across the country from a conversation that is very much about the future of their jobs and the future of their industries. It is about building a strong economy for the future, one that will create jobs and economic prosperity in every part of the country. It is shameful that the Conservatives have worked very actively to ensure that workers have no voice in this conversation.

79 words

Mr. Greg McLean (Calgary Centre, CPC)

Dec/4/23 4:16:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this has been on the floor of the House of Commons and in front of committee, but there has been a moving target on this, particularly with the Supreme Court's reading on the Impact Assessment Act, which has reopened whether there is any validity to this law whatsoever or if we are going to just end up putting the country into another couple of years of legal morass where nothing gets done. Nothing will get done for any workers in Canada. Nothing will get done for any projects in Canada. Nothing will get done for any provinces in Canada. Nothing will get done in Canada. The government is happy with that. The government is used to that. The government has created that atmosphere across this country. That is what needs to stop in this country. The fact is we need to get things done here again. This is one more laden bill that basically says that we do not want anything to happen in Canada, but not to worry, workers, they are on their side, even though workers will not have any jobs at the end of their agenda. It is a ridiculous scenario. We need to have it examined clearly in the House of Commons, particularly with the interpretations from the Supreme Court of Canada, to see if this is legitimate legislation in the first place. Could the minister stand up and tell us if he has anything resembling an advanced ruling on this?

248 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:17:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, once again, my hon. colleague has clearly not read the bill. The bill is a transparency mechanism that would establish a partnership council of labour, industry, indigenous peoples and youth to provide advice to the government on how we work together to build an economy that is going to create jobs and economic prosperity. There is nothing across jurisdictions in the bill, and I would invite my hon. colleague to read it. I would also say, “The Sustainable Jobs Act represents an important opportunity for Canada: to shape our future and create jobs by providing the resources the world needs—including energy, food, and minerals.” That is from the president of the Business Council of Alberta.

121 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Dec/4/23 4:18:19 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-50

Madam Speaker, I will take this opportunity to ask the minister a question. I agree with him that what we have seen in recent weeks on the Standing Committee on Natural Resources is rather disgraceful. However, one thing still has to be looked at. In Bill C‑50, the government unfortunately did not take into account the fact that there is a labour agreement between Quebec and Ottawa. I think that needs to be corrected. I would like the minister to tell me whether he agrees with me that we must consider the workforce training agreements Quebec and Ottawa have previously signed.

104 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:19:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the purpose of the bill is to better position the government to take more effective measures in areas of federal jurisdiction. It will not interfere in areas under provincial jurisdiction. We will continue to work in partnership with the provinces and territories and that, of course, includes Quebec.

51 words

Ms. Julie Dabrusin (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Lib.)

Dec/4/23 4:19:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, throughout the time we have been in committee, and we are, in fact, still on the same meeting that began on October 30, we have heard all sorts of conversations about strawberry milkshakes being drunk through straws and about muscle cars, but we have not had an opportunity to hear from workers about what their perspectives are on the sustainable jobs act. I was wondering if perhaps the minister could help us to have a better perspective, from his conversations with organized labour over the past six weeks, about how they are feeling with the delays we have been seeing in committee and what they are hoping to see.

111 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:20:12 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, labour and workers across the country are incredibly frustrated with the circus-type antics of the Conservative Party, which are holding up discussion and debate and preventing witnesses from appearing before the committee. The president of the Canadian Labour Congress recently said, “By holding up this bill continuously, the Conservatives are not speaking for workers on this issue. They are not making sure workers have a choice or ability to have robust debate as they are holding up this bill. It is incredibly frustrating, it is disrespectful to workers who are worried about their futures and it is disrespectful to communities. We need it to stop.”

110 words

Mrs. Laila Goodridge (Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, CPC)

Dec/4/23 4:20:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is absolutely disrespectful that the government has decided, instead of actually taking the time to have a conversation, it is just going to ram this bill through. This is not a just transition, but it has just decided to repurpose and change the names around. I represent thousands of energy workers in this strong province, and I often say that, when Fort McMurray works, Alberta works, and when Alberta works, Canada works. This piece of legislation would severely impact this ability. For the government to now try to ram this piece of legislation through without having a fulsome conversation and debate is absolutely disrespectful to the thousands of energy workers I represent and the thousands of energy workers throughout Canada. I wonder why the minister is so afraid to have this conversation go forward. We could actually have some conversation and debate, so why are they deciding to instead ram closure through and shut down any form of debate on the bill?

165 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:22:05 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-50 Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, there is a lot of revisionist history in there. The committee has been blocked by the Conservative filibuster for six weeks, which is 11 meetings and about 25 hours. The committee has been stuck on the same meeting since October 30. The committee could have heard from witnesses on both bills, Bill C-49 and Bill C-50, which were in front of the committee, but the Conservatives blocked it. In terms of the work that we are doing to ensure that there is a prosperous future for every province and territory in this country, I would point the hon. member to the announcement of the $11.5-billion plant with Dow Chemicals in Fort Saskatchewan, where we worked collaboratively with the Government of Alberta; the Air Products hydrogen facility near Edmonton, where we worked collaboratively with the Government of Alberta; and the CCUS tax credit, where we have worked collaboratively with the Government of Alberta, which will create thousands of jobs going forward in that member's riding.

171 words

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

Dec/4/23 4:23:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there are two bloc parties in the House of Commons, the Bloc Québécois and the “block everything” party. The Conservatives have blocked every piece of legislation. Last Friday, they blocked the Canada-Ukraine trade deal. We now see them blocking investments that would make a real difference in clean energy and in providing workers with more of a voice. We have seen them block, as well, dental care. We saw them block the grocery rebate. Everything that helps Canadians, Conservatives are there to block. It is simply untenable that, over a six-week period, Conservatives were blocking workers' representatives from testifying, refusing to let them speak, refusing to let them have that conversation about the bill. Now, with obviously not a single Conservative even having read the bill, we get all these outlandish conspiracy theories rather than any sort of criticism about the bill itself. Why do the Conservatives block everything that comes before the House? Why have they gone rogue? Why have they become so extremist under the member for Carleton?

180 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:24:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think it is true that, under the current leader of the Conservative Party, it has become a party of tearing everything down. There is not one constructive suggestion coming forward from the Conservative Party of Canada. Certainly, Conservatives have worked to ensure that there is no conversation about this bill. They have done the same thing with respect to the development of offshore wind. They would cancel the development of offshore wind in Atlantic Canada, which will creates thousands and thousands of jobs and economic prosperity. They would cancel the Darlington small modular reactor project with the Government of Ontario. They would actually cancel the Volkswagen battery plant, which will create thousands of jobs. They would cancel many of the investment tax credits, so they would be cancelling Dow and Air Products and a whole range of other things. At the end of the day, they need to find a pathway to having a constructive conversation about the environment and the economy, not simply complaining with no constructive suggestions whatsoever.

173 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 4:25:13 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, earlier I heard my colleague say that there are two bloc parties here: the Bloc Québécois and the “block everything” party. I am not prepared to credit this claim, because I see two very well-defined camps in this Parliament. On the one side, we have the Bloc Québécois. On the other, we have three parties that are staunchly defending the oil companies. I say this because this bill was originally supposed to be about a just transition, but that term appears to have been little too difficult for the government. It opted for “sustainable jobs” instead. Canada is the only western country that will be using the term “sustainable jobs” rather than “just transition”. Why? It is because Canada is afraid of how Alberta will react, and I think that if it is afraid of how Alberta will react, it will not be bold enough to do what needs to be done to fight climate change.

175 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:26:15 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is very important that we have a conversation about the future, about an active and prosperous economy in a low-carbon world. This conversation about sustainable jobs is very important everywhere in Canada, and we are working with the provinces and territories to build a strong and prosperous economy for the future.

55 words

Hon. Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Lib.)

Dec/4/23 4:26:53 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is indeed an honour and a privilege to rise in this place to speak on behalf of the constituents of the riding of Waterloo. Just today, I was meeting with Faith Climate Justice, a group that is really concerned about the future of the environment and the earth, as well as the economy. Its members often ask about the work that we do in this place, and I shared with them that I was at the natural resources committee. Rather than debating and discussing important topics, including the future of Canadians, where they will work and how we will take care of our environment, we got to see a show of Conservative after Conservative filibustering. Today, we are hearing that they want to talk about it. Why are we having to use closure to get this legislation passed so we can actually debate it? What does this legislation mean for the future of the environment, as well as the economy, for Canadians?

165 words

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson

Dec/4/23 4:27:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we are having to move closure because the committee has been blocked by a Conservative filibuster, behaviour that Parliament has never seen. For six weeks, 11 meetings, the committee has been stuck on the same meeting. It has been since October 30. Multiple witnesses could have been called to have a robust conversation about this bill. The committee could have focused on trying to ensure it was understanding the bill and looking for ways to strengthen it, but instead, the committee ends up not being able to have a conversation. This is a really important bill. Yes, it is important for us to take climate change seriously and not deny the science of climate change, which some of my hon. colleagues in the House seem to do, but at the end of the day, it is critically important for us to move forward to build an economy that will be prosperous and create thousands of good jobs in every province and territory in Canada.

166 words

Filibuster

Mr. Clifford Small (Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, CPC)

Dec/4/23 4:28:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, oil and gas workers such as Luke and Steve in Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame put their faith in me in the last election. Luke and Steve are two of the 5,500 who have been displaced in Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore oil and gas industry since the Liberal government turned on it and destroyed it. Now this piece of legislation is more of the same to destroy the livelihoods of these people in my province, and I am not going to take it. I am here to represent them. Guys like Luke and Steve would have testified at committee and given their points of view. After 20-odd years in the oil and gas industry, they would have spoken up for their peers and let the minister know exactly what this piece of legislation would do to them and of the suffering they have endured after becoming rotational workers and having to leave their families. It is unbelievable. Now they are facing more uncertainty. Will the minister have the guts to let this piece of legislation go before committee so stakeholders like Luke and Steve can give their points of view heard?

199 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 261