SoVote

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Dec/4/23 6:19:16 p.m.
Watch

Someone's microphone is on. I would like to remind those participating virtually to make sure their microphone is off. The microphone has been turned off. The hon. member for Jonquière.

33 words

Microphone

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 6:19:40 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-50

Madam Speaker, it is a conspiracy to silence me. When he was leader, Erin O'Toole believed in carbon pricing. Unfortunately, no one in the Conservative Party believes in it any more and that is why we find ourselves in a situation where the Conservatives are going to try just about anything to kill a bill that goes against the interests of the oil and gas sector. That is their approach to Bill C‑50. Let us quickly talk about Bill C‑50. The Bloc Québécois and I, personally, voted against Bill C‑50 since it had some major flaws. That said, I was open to discussing the bill. One of the major flaws had to do with workforce training. Canada and Quebec came to an agreement in 1995, that wonderful year in my life, the year of the referendum. In 1995, Quebec and Canada reached an agreement to promote workforce development and training. Since that time, workforce training falls under the jurisdiction of Quebec. We know that Bill C‑50 will probably have an impact on workforce training. A just transition means giving employees new skills in new sectors. Acquiring new skills requires training. This is a problem in Bill C‑50 that the minister could fix. Members of the Bloc Québécois might be tempted to vote in favour of the bill if the workforce training issue is addressed to ensure that Quebec's jurisdiction in this area is respected. Another, although possibly not insurmountable, problem exists. If we lack the courage to call a spade a spade, we may lack the courage to achieve our goals. We refuse to talk about a just transition even though most countries are talking about a just transition. We prefer to talk about sustainable jobs. I sense that the reason is because we lack courage. The problem is not insurmountable, however, as long as the bill is written the right way. If the ultimate aim is to change the Canadian economy, as my colleague, the minister, was saying earlier, into a low-carbon economy, we have no objection to that. If the government really wants to do some soul-searching and stop providing endless funding to the oil and gas sector, we have no objection to that. If this is truly a step in the direction of an energy transition in Canada, the Bloc Québécois will not object to it as long as jurisdictions are respected. Still, I do have my doubts. We learned in recent weeks and months that $30 billion is still on the table to pay for a pipeline. This is public money that will be used to support the gluttonous oil and gas sector, which made $200 billion in 2022. I would like to hear my Conservative colleagues admit that when they talk about the cost of living and how people are struggling to pay their mortgage and put food on the table. I would like to hear them admit that, all the while, the oil and gas sector is making record profits. Shell made $42 billion. Chevron made $35 billion. Exxon Mobil made $55 billion. TotalEnergies made $20 billion. All those folks managed to make record profits thanks to ever-increasing profit margins. Why are my Conservative colleagues not outraged by that? I would like them to elaborate on that. In closing, I would say that Bill C‑50 is not perfect. Perhaps it can be amended so that we can at least support it. One thing is certain. It proves that both the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party are bogged down in a shared philosophy of giving everything to oil.

630 words

Hon. Ya'ara Saks

Dec/4/23 6:23:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am tabling the government's responses to Questions Nos. 1824 to 1837, 1839 and 1841 to 1847.

27 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Dec/4/23 6:24:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague can amplify the concerns that have been raised about the standing committee having had numerous hours of filibuster. The Conservatives are saying that they would like to hear presentations, yet they prevented presentations from the different stakeholders by conducting themselves in a very destructive manner during the standing committee. Ultimately, without the motion, this legislation would likely never really pass because the Conservative Party is dead against the legislation itself.

78 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 6:25:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in all honesty, the Standing Committee on Natural Resources has been a circus for over a month now. I do not consider myself an influencer; I am a legislator. I have seen that there are some people at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources who are choosing chaos and making videos that they put on social media to show how they are defending the interests of the people in their ridings. That is highly debatable. I do not think that is the image we want to project as a parliamentarian. As parliamentarians, we want to project an image of responsible people, people who want to move government issues forward. That is not what we saw last month at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. Now it is all out in the open. I encourage people, if they want to get an idea of the attitude of certain Conservative Party elected officials, to go and watch these videos. They will be able to judge those actions for themselves.

169 words

Legislator

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

Dec/4/23 6:26:07 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-50

Madam Speaker, I respect the MP greatly even though we do come at the issue of the future of oil and gas development in Canada from diametrically opposed positions, which are probably in part ideological and probably in part because of who we represent. I wonder if the member might comment on the fact that Bill C-50 actually does not use the words “fair” or “just transition” in this bill, which is what it is really all about, and it is a heavy focus of international global conferences and efforts around the world. It is a concept that has been developed globally and pushed globally for many years. I wonder if the member has anything to say about that, or the fact that this bill actually, as he mentioned, does not include anything about jobs training or skills training. Also, if he could comment on the fact that it does deal with ending primary production in natural resources, which of course is provincial jurisdiction. I wonder if he has any comments about the NDP-Liberals being all over the map on those three things.

189 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 6:27:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my esteemed colleague from Lakeland is absolutely right. This bill is based on a concept that is used by the Conference of the Parties, or COP, by the United Nations, by all western countries and by labour movements that go far beyond unions in Canada and Quebec. Everyone uses the concept of a just transition, which refers to what is now a global reality. Why can Canada not apply the concept of a just transition? Why do we need to talk about sustainable jobs? It is up to the government to respond, but in my opinion, the answer is very clear. The government is doing that because it lacks courage. As I was saying earlier, if the government cannot call a spade a spade, then I do not see how we will be able to implement the difficult measures needed to achieve a low-carbon economy.

148 words

Ms. Lisa Marie Barron (Nanaimo—Ladysmith, NDP)

Dec/4/23 6:28:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I had the privilege of attending the Standing Committee on Natural Resources meeting today. I was quite eager to participate in that committee and to hear from witnesses about the important work on how we can best move forward to have an energy transition. I was quite frankly surprised to see there is nothing happening in that committee. The Conservatives are doing all they can to block any work from moving forward and to hear from those who need to come forward in order to move ahead with a clear energy transition. What are the member's thoughts as to the importance of us moving together to ensure workers are getting the supports they need as we move forward in this transition?

124 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 6:29:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I understand that we do not have the same political vision, that we do not think the same way. I understand that sometimes one might use parliamentary strategies to hold up a debate. However, there is also the manner in which things are done. That manner over the past few months has been not only questionable, but also sad and shocking. Again today, a Conservative MP said at the beginning of the sitting that the chair of the committee misled them because he told them that when the discussions were cacophonous, that was hazardous to the health of the interpreters. What the member was saying is that they should be left to heckle in peace and not be bothered with matters of official languages. Then I remarked that I had been denied one of my privileges. When all the Conservative members shout in their microphones at the same time, there is no interpretation possible for a francophone member. That is one of the examples of the bad faith that we have seen over the past few months.

179 words

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Dec/4/23 6:30:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech, which was very pertinent, as usual. It is important to understand that making a just transition takes time, but it can generate money, growth, pay increases and development. It is not about impoverishment, it is about diversification. It is about enrichment. As my colleague said, it has to come with workforce training. Last week, I met with people from the FTQ, who were talking to me about exactly that. They were telling me that workers should also benefit, not just the big companies. I would like my colleague to tell me whether, according to the analysis of the bill that was done, there are plans to send the money for workforce training back to Quebec. In this Conservative reality show that the Standing Committee on Natural Resources has become, has anyone among the Liberal, Conservative and NDP members called for the workforce training agreements between Quebec and Canada to be upheld?

166 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 6:31:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a great question. I know that the minister received a lot of letters from all the major unions in Quebec asking him to respect the Commission des partenaires du marché du travail, established in Quebec. This Quebec labour market partners table is doing exactly what the minister hopes to do. It is consulting unions and employers to come up with training strategies. That already exists in Quebec. I think the department made a mistake to disregard that. We mentioned it to the minister and I believe he gave a good answer. He said that he was open to changing some aspects of the bill. Now, it is very clear. I think that the consensus among all Quebec unions and employers is that this agreement must be upheld.

132 words

Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)

Dec/4/23 6:32:23 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I sit on the natural resources committee with my colleague. I would like to ask him for his reflections on the importance of this legislation, assuming we can get it through committee and back to the House, to workers not only in Quebec, but also across Canada, including in my riding of Cloverdale—Langley City. We did a study for a number of months where we heard from workers, when they were not being interrupted and filibustered by Conservatives, and I think some really good testimony came in during that study. Therefore, I would appreciate my colleague's thoughtful reflections on the importance of this bill and why we need to get it done and turned into legislation.

121 words

Mr. Mario Simard

Dec/4/23 6:33:05 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I was saying earlier, nothing is perfect. Yes, I think it is important. I think that it is very important, because we should not be lying to people. I am sure that Albertans want us to tell them the truth. Unfortunately, the truth is that, in the long term, there is no future in the oil and gas industry. If we know there is no future in the oil and gas industry in the long term, then we need to find a way to make sure that the people who work in industries that are in decline or going to die out because we have to reduce our carbon footprint are able to maintain a good quality of life. I completely agree with my colleague that it is a good thing to have a well-thought-out bill that enables us to take bold action and make a just transition.

153 words

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

Dec/4/23 6:33:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am proud, as always, to rise on behalf of the people of Timmins—James Bay. I am not so proud that our Parliament has been forced to bring forward a motion of this nature, which is pretty much unprecedented in my years in Parliament. We are dealing with an issue of constant harassment and toxic behaviour at the natural resources committee that is preventing parliamentarians from doing their job and we need to focus this—

80 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Dec/4/23 6:34:23 p.m.
Watch

On a point of order, the hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands.

13 words

Mr. Jeremy Patzer

Dec/4/23 6:34:27 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the only member in committee who was engaged in toxic behaviour was that member. He was warned multiple times—

22 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Dec/4/23 6:34:33 p.m.
Watch

I am sorry, but this is becoming a point of debate. What is the point of order?

17 words

Point

Mr. Jeremy Patzer

Dec/4/23 6:34:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the point of order is that the only person who was engaging in toxic behaviour was that member right there. The fact that he has been subbed out of the committee for the last three meetings explains that he is the one who has been toxic. Last week, with the—

53 words

Toxic

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Dec/4/23 6:34:54 p.m.
Watch

I am sorry, but that is not a point of order. That is a point of debate. The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

25 words

Mr. Charlie Angus

Dec/4/23 6:34:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, tonight you are seeing a tactic being used by the Conservatives to carry on the toxic behaviour of the committee to try to shut me down, but I will speak, and I would like to make sure that, every time they interrupt me or try to stop my work as a parliamentarian, I am recognized and that my time is not being taken away from me. Right now we are dealing with a planet that is on fire. This summer, 200,000 Canadians were displaced from their homes because of an unprecedented climate catastrophe, which is unfolding in real time. Just last month, the world, for the first time, blew past the 2°C mark, which is a very dangerous zone to be in. The Conservatives would have members believe that it is some kind of conspiracy or that this is somehow being cooked up to make Conservatives in the oil and gas sector look bad. These are the facts that Canadians are living with.

168 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 261