SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 270 - Jan/29/24

Jan/29/24 7:49:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is true that both municipalities and provincial governments do bear responsibility. Actually, part of the report's critical recommendations was to look at ways the federal government could look at provincial partners in particular, but there were some municipal examples, for big cities in particular. Members may recall that there was a national emergency facing us during the same time as we were hearing this. That was the dramatic infrastructure devastation we saw in British Columbia brought on by floods as a result of climate change. Floods, of course, produce extreme changes, not only in the existing water table that is present in British Columbia but also in the output costs of very good products we make there, like wine products and other agricultural goods in British Columbia. That is an example in which we see a solution in asking for a framework to work with provinces so that at a time of an emergency like that, we open up corridors of transport. That is one of the recommendations I agree with, to ensure that we actually get goods from one province to the other. If members can bear with me, I will add this. It is a true fact that at the time of the huge floods in British Columbia, which I know many families are still bearing grief for, it was actually companies that came forward to redirect the supply of goods from the northern corridor that supplied access to Alberta. My home province would have been cut off without such goodwill from CN and the people who allowed us to do that. We need to go further than that. We cannot just wait and bet on the goodwill of our neighbours and those actors in our country. We need to be more proactive. The solution found in this report is to look at our framework, to recommend to the provinces and the federal government that we come together on such a strategy, because it is true: We do not bear all of the jurisdictional powers at the federal level that would make possible the emergency levers to relieve a situation like a supply chain crunch.

361 words

Mr. Richard Lehoux (Beauce, CPC)

Jan/29/24 7:51:18 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to say that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Lambton—Kent—Middlesex. I am very honoured to rise today in the House to represent the people of my riding, Beauce, and also, more importantly, on the issue of Canada's food security and sovereignty. After studying the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, all of my thoughts on the matter have unfortunately been confirmed. I will take a brief moment to read the conclusion of the report: ...there was no national emergency preparedness and response plan for Canada's food system and food security, despite the government having identified food as a critical infrastructure sector long before the COVID-19 pandemic began. And although AAFC had two emergency plans in place, it acknowledged that they were insufficient to deal with a crisis of this magnitude. When I read the recommendations in this report, I see that these are watered down recommendations to mask the current government's failures. In every recommendation, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts asks the departments concerned for status reports. However, in my opinion, it does not really go far enough. As Conservatives, we have been defending farmers and families from the beginning. We understand that food security starts on the farm and that our government needs to be there to support those who put food on our tables. Under this Liberal government, the price of food has skyrocketed because of the carbon tax. Farmers are finding it harder and harder to make ends meet. Canadians, too, are finding it harder and harder to put food on the table, as we have seen from the record use of food banks in our communities. We have also seen a decline in our relationships with many countries, since the government has failed many times in the negotiation of trade agreements. Some countries do not even want to reopen negotiations with us because of the government's incompetence. That is why it is so important to have a national food system that works and that we can depend on today and in the future. It is very simple. With grocery prices the highest they have ever been in our country, it is up to this government to find a way to reduce the cost of food. The easiest place to start is on the farm. A great way to start would be to pass the original Bill C-234 as soon as possible so as to exempt farmers from the carbon tax on propane and natural gas used to heat livestock buildings and dry grain. I am appalled that the Prime Minister and his senators gutted this important bill in the Senate. The bill had the unanimous support of all parties in the House but one, the Liberal Party of Canada. This legislation also had the backing of every ag sector stakeholder I talked to across the country. These farmers need relief from this crippling tax that is destroying their businesses and driving food prices sky-high. I talked to lots of farmers in my riding, and every one of them endorsed this bill. Winter is here, and they are very worried about how they are going to heat their henhouses and hog barns all winter long. As the official opposition agriculture critic and as a member of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, I have personally attended every meeting since I was elected. We hear the same stories year after year. Over the holidays, I volunteered at Moisson Beauce, a food bank in my riding. While preparing Christmas hampers for struggling families, about 2,500 in a single day, I learned that Moisson Beauce is now experiencing record usage and no longer receives enough donations to meet demand. That is not the Canada I remember. We are at a point where it is cheaper to import food than to produce it locally. One comment I hear all too often from the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois is that the carbon tax does not apply in Quebec. That is absolutely false. The carbon tax applies in Quebec directly and indirectly. I can show countless receipts from farmers for propane, for example, that include the federal price on pollution. As I was saying, the carbon tax is also paid indirectly when we import goods from other provinces. Quebec is not self-sufficient; we import a lot of products from provinces that pay the entire carbon tax and that tax is passed on to us, the consumers, either through inflated prices or the cost of transportation. Agriculture Carbon Alliance wrote to every federal member to express their full support for this bill. The alliance is 17 national agricultural groups representing more than 190,000 farms in Canada. Canadian farmers are stewards of the land. They are very concerned about their animals and the environment. They work so hard to feed our families and support our economy. The lack of support from the Liberal government is incredible. I must mention the rural members of the Liberal caucus. I cannot believe that only three Liberals voted in favour of this legislation. I suppose that only three of them want to keep their seat in the next election. The polls speak for themselves. Who could forget what the Minister of Rural Economic Development said? She said that, if Canadians want relief, they should elect more Liberal members. If those rural Liberal members think they will ever get the farm vote back, they are sorely mistaken. Another looming problem that will impact Canada's food security and food sovereignty is the Liberal plan to outlaw single-use plastics, a plan that the courts recently struck down but that the government plans to appeal at taxpayers' expense. A study by the Canadian Produce Marketing Association makes it clear that if this ban goes through, fruit and vegetable prices will rise by up to 34%. The report also indicates that the availability of Canadian products could be reduced by half. We will also see a 50% increase in food waste. Conservatives will always stand up for farmers and, most importantly, for common sense. Canadians are suffering. Many of them are on the verge of bankruptcy. How can the government turn its back on them when all they want is to feed their families affordably? If the government does not take action, our farm families will keep disappearing, our country will become even more dependent on food imports, and our food system will be even more vulnerable. Right now, a vegetable grown in Mexico costs less at the grocery store than one grown locally. Does that make sense? It is contrary to their entire climate change ideology. Canadians can count on the Conservatives to change that situation, which makes no sense. Canadians do not need departmental progress reports. They need real action to avert a disaster in our national food system. With out-of-control inflation and interest rates that are still very high, Canadians will continue to experience financial difficulties. This report sheds light on the situation and shows that it is extremely important that we learn from the pandemic and take the appropriate action. The Prime Minister has increased the size of the public service by 40% since he has been in office, so how is it that these departments cannot manage to do their work properly? That is incompetence. At the end of her speech, my colleague from Lambton—Kent—Middlesex will move a motion to get our national food system back on track in order to guarantee our food security and food sovereignty in the future. I sincerely hope that my colleagues will take this issue seriously and that we can come together to do the right thing for all Canadians by voting in favour of this motion.

1319 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:01:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I enjoy working with my colleague on the agriculture committee as Conservatives continue to stand up for our agriculture sector. My colleague is from Quebec, which is also another big area for growing produce. He talked in his speech about a plastics ban that the Liberal government has proposed. I am wondering whether my colleague could elaborate on how the single-use plastics ban would affect consumers at the grocery store if the ban were to go through on plastics for produce and meat in grocery stores.

89 words

All Topics

Mr. Richard Lehoux

Jan/29/24 8:01:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this new regulation on single-use plastics will indeed have a very significant and negative impact on Quebec consumers. We know that our produce growers need these products to preserve their produce, and God knows that our produce growers were very hard hit by flooding in the regions in 2023. It is very important that we think about this issue, because right now, we do not have a solution to protect produce while still putting high-quality products on grocery shelves. We also owe that to consumers.

89 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood (Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:02:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the report from the public accounts committee entitled “Protecting Canada's Food System During the COVID-19 Pandemic”. In this report, we learn that the NDP-Liberal government spent $515 million, more than half a billion dollars, in various funding envelopes “increased risk of food insecurity”. This is the key question: How much food security did Canadians get for more than half a billion dollars? Well, the short answer is that Canadians got less, not more, food security. They are getting less, thanks to policies of the NDP-Liberal government, which continue to increase food production costs, food transportation costs, food spoilage and food prices and reduce food supply, food variety, food freshness and food security. First, I ask members to cast their mind back to the pandemic. During the NDP-Liberal COVID lockdowns, despite Conservatives sending a warning, along with Canadian producers, processors and suppliers, the NDP-Liberal government failed miserably to plan ahead. It had no plan for getting temporary foreign workers nor seasonal agriculture workers in and out of Canada when and where they were needed. There was no plan for bringing workers into Canada for greenhouse producers starting in January 2021 nor for field producers throughout their planting and harvesting seasons. At the end of the season, some farmers were even faced with the challenges of workers who were not able to return to their home country, for example, Trinidad and Tobago, and there was little or no diplomatic help available for those Canadian producers. That was an epic fail thanks to the NDP-Liberal governing party. Sadly, it does not end there. For the past two years or more, food prices have increased by 8%, 9% or more year over year. Vegetables are seeing the biggest price increases. As a result, Canadian families are cutting back on purchases of vegetables and other healthy foods for their children, and about 20% of Canadians are reporting skipping a meal each day. Food banks across the country are seeing record numbers of visits by Canadians to the tune of over two million families. This is the very definition of food insecurity. The costly coalition of NDP-Liberals has been sleeping at the wheel as Canadian families pay more and more for the necessities of life. With the carbon tax one and carbon tax two combined by April Fool's Day 2030, the Prime Minister and his NDP-Liberal government want to charge Canadian farmers and truckers 61¢ for every litre of fuel they put in their farm implements and trucks in carbon tax. It is not rocket science. It is basic math that the NDP-Liberals just do not seem to get. If it costs more to grow food and it costs more to ship food, it is going to cost Canadian families more to buy food. The Governor of the Bank of Canada, Tiff Macklem, said that the carbon tax announcements that have it going up, that increases inflation each year. The lead author of Canada's Food Price Report 2023, Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, has pointed out that the carbon tax has made business expenses go up. Up and down the food chain, Dr. Charlebois points to a “compounding effect” as the supply chain is exposed to increased costs from the carbon tax. Again, if it costs the farmer more to grow food and truckers more to ship food, it is going to cost Canadians more to buy food. How do we solve the problem of rising food prices and this Prime Minister's costly coalition? Well, first things first, we need to axe the carbon tax. The leader of the opposition and those of us on this side of the House want to offer Canadian families relief from the carbon tax. We want to put an end to possibly the most out-of-touch-with-reality, regressive, punitive and unfair tax Canadians have been asked to pay. However, there is more. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change has added plastic to the list of toxic substances. Yes, members heard that right. Plastic is a toxic substance according to the environment minister. Although the courts recently struck down the NDP-Liberal government's single-use plastics ban, the environment minister has another evil trick up his sleeve. Last August 1, the environment minister issued a notice for his proposed ban on primary plastic packaging, meaning the packaging for produce and meats that we see in the grocery stores. At meetings of the agriculture committee on December 7 and 11, 2023, I asked the chief executive officers of Walmart Canada, Loblaw and Metro what the impact would be for them and their customers if this ban were to be implemented. The CEOs of both Loblaw and Metro said that, if the NDP-Liberal government proceeded with a ban on primary food packaging, it would increase food costs by approximately $6 billion a year, severely impair competition, threaten the availability of food and increase spoilage, meaning more food waste. Primary plastic packaging serves as a hygienic barrier to contaminants; it delays spoilage, extends best before dates, reduces waste and optimizes perishables' nutritional value. Plastic packaging is lightweight, and it reduces the amount of fuel used in transport compared with other alternatives. What most consumers do not realize is that the job that plastic does for fresh fruit and vegetables is done long before it ever hits the grocery store shelves. According to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, on average, Canadians spend about $1 billion per month on fruit and vegetables. Only about 12.5% of the fruits and vegetables Canadians consume are produced in Canada. Canadians consume seven times as much imported fruit and vegetables as domestically produced fruit and vegetables. I am sure part of that is because of our weather patterns here. Imported produce can take weeks to reach us by ship. Plastic packaging plays a crucial role in keeping food from overripening and spoiling before it gets to Canada. At this time, there is no cost-effective alternative solution to plastic packaging that is available on a global scale. If the NDP-Liberal government were really and truly concerned about food costs and food security, one might think that it would conduct a regulatory impact analysis. However, one would be wrong. At the agriculture committee on November 30, 2023, I asked the deputy agriculture minister if a regulatory impact analysis on a primary plastic packaging ban for produce had been done. She testified that it had not. This is irresponsible. The Canadian Produce Marketing Association, or CPMA, did a regulatory impact analysis of the proposed primary plastic packaging ban. It found that the NDP-Liberal environment minister's ban on primary plastic packaging could increase the cost of fresh produce by 34%. It could also reduce the availability of fresh produce for Canadians by more than 50%, including the near total elimination of all value-added products, reducing market value by approximately $5.6 billion. The ban could increase fresh produce waste by more than 50%. Furthermore, it could increase the production and release of greenhouse gases from the produce supply chain by more than 50%. The environment minister should take note. Another finding from the CPMA impact analysis suggests that increased fresh produce costs will lead to reduced availability and reduced consumption, therefore increasing health costs by over $1 billion each year. Furthermore, the ban will have a disproportionate impact on the cost and availability of fresh produce in rural and remote regions of Canada. When presented with the consequences of the NDP-Liberal environment minister's ban, almost two-thirds of Canadian consumers expressed concern. Finally, the Canadian Produce Marketing Association's regulatory impact analysis reported that the proposed regulations will lead to an increased risk of food safety incidents and food-borne illnesses. In short, the NDP-Liberal environment minister is painting a target on the back of every single Canadian with the threat posed to their health and well-being by his ill-advised, non-evidence-based, irresponsible ban on primary plastic packaging. As I conclude, I want to move: That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented on Tuesday, May 17, 2022, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for further consideration, with a view to recommend that the agriculture sector be exempt from any federal carbon tax in order to maintain food-security and preparedness for future emergencies.” It is always an honour to rise here on behalf of the people I represent in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex and the farmers and producers who produce the great-quality food that we feed Canadians. I want to thank them for what they do.

1494 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Jan/29/24 8:13:36 p.m.
Watch

The amendment is in order. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Milton. I also want to wish the member a happy birthday today.

24 words

All Topics

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

Jan/29/24 8:14:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, thank you for wishing me a happy birthday as I stand for the first time in the House in 2024. I know my hon. colleague and friend on the other side has spent many years of her life feeding Canadians, so on behalf of Canadians who enjoy potatoes, I would like to say thanks. My family is from a similar region. The Dutch side of my family settled in southwestern Ontario and farmed apples, among other things. As we have discussed, farming is close to my heart as well. It is important as well to talk about some of the quotes that the member used. I am a bit concerned, occasionally, about the selective use of facts, but I think everybody in this House is guilty of reading the things we agree with more commonly than the things we disagree with. However, Sylvain Charlebois is somebody I am familiar with. I follow him and I read what he writes, and in the most recent “Food Price Report”, he was actually a bit more ambiguous with respect to carbon pricing than the member let on. His exact quote was actually “Suggesting that carbon pricing has a direct, linear effect on retail food prices would be misleading.” He also went on say that there are many factors, like climate change, that have a much larger impact on the price of food. I would like to ask the hon. member, as a potato farmer, what impact climate change events like extreme weather, drought, floods and erratic precipitation are having on potato yields, because last year Canada's wheat yields were at an all-time low due to those climate change factors.

284 words

All Topics

Ms. Lianne Rood

Jan/29/24 8:16:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will take the opportunity to wish my colleague a happy birthday as well. As my colleague said, yes, I have spent years of my life in food production. In fact, we heard from one of my colleagues on this side of the House today and from many farmers in my area this year that they have actually had a bumper crop. They have had higher yields than they have seen in years with some of their crops. Yes, the carbon tax does affect the cost of food. As my colleague pointed out, we may agree to disagree with some of the references we hear, but on an overall scale, as a producer, I know first-hand that my input costs have gone up. If my input costs are going up, if the fuel is going up and everything is going up, I have to increase the price of the produce that I am selling to wholesalers. My costs increase, and therefore I have to pass those costs on to those who buy from me. As wholesalers, they have to make a profit as well, so they have to pass those costs on to the retailers that they sell their product to, and of course the retailers, because they are paying more now for the product, have to increase their prices to consumers. Therefore, I disagree with the premise that the carbon tax does not have an effect on the cost of food, because first-hand knowledge tells me that it absolutely does.

255 words

All Topics

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Jan/29/24 8:17:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat the question that was just asked, because I did not hear an answer. The question asked about the impact of the climate crisis on farmers, on the cost of food and on families.

40 words

Ms. Lianne Rood

Jan/29/24 8:17:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, again, this year we have seen record yields. I can say that in our harvest in the last crop year, I have seen record yields. In the 50 years that my father farmed, and my grandparents before my father, and in my 45 years of life, I have been through years when we have had droughts, when we have had floods, when we have had record crops and when we have had not so good crops. Farmers are the biggest risk-takers I have ever met in my life. It is a gamble every year. They put something in the ground and pray and hope that Mother Nature is going to bring good weather so they can have an abundant harvest to make a good living. Unfortunately, all the costs that we see, including the carbon tax, are not making farmers profitable, and if farmers are not profitable, they are not going to stay in business. That is going to mean for Canadians that food security is going to be in jeopardy, and not just food security, but food sovereignty. The Liberal government and my colleague with the NDP need to stop propping up the Liberal government and actually support farmers and support axing the carbon tax for our agricultural producers.

213 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:19:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the carbon tax is driving inflation. The carbon tax hits the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who transports the food, the grocer who sells the food and the family who buys the food. The member across the way gets it, because he has heard it so many times. He is chuckling and throwing it across the floor, but if the member for Kingston and the Islands knows so well that the carbon tax is hitting the farmer, the trucker, the grocer and the family, then why will he not change his position and vote with us to relieve struggling Canadian families and axe the tax?

109 words

Ms. Lianne Rood

Jan/29/24 8:20:11 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-234

Mr. Speaker, I will say to Canadians that Conservatives on this side of the House will vote to axe the tax. We are calling on the House right now to send Bill C-234 back to the Senate in its original form so we can give producers and farmers a break on the carbon tax so their input costs go down and Canadian families can pay less at the grocery store.

71 words

All Topics

The Deputy Speaker

Jan/29/24 8:20:34 p.m.
Watch

There being no further members rising, pursuant to order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion are deemed put and recorded divisions are deemed requested. Pursuant to Standing Order 66, the recorded divisions stand deferred until Wednesday, January 31, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

54 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Jan/29/24 8:21:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the NDP and the NDP leader have consistently betrayed workers. They came in here promising to stand up for Canadian workers and sold them down the river simply to please their Liberal coalition partners. I am rising today to follow up on a question I asked about the disclosure of details on massive government subsidies relating to electric car battery subsidies. The government is spending $40 billion on these subsidies. We are talking about roughly $3,000 per Canadian family. Every single Canadian family is on the hook for thousands of dollars for these subsidies. We have found out that a series of subsidies that were promised as creating opportunities for Canadian workers will actually be subsidizing foreign replacement workers. Foreign replacement workers will be brought in to work on these subsidized projects. Therefore, the $40 billion in subsidies from Canadian taxpayers, roughly $3,000 from every single Canadian family, to create jobs for Canadians are actually going to subsidize corporations paying foreign replacement workers. After this information came to light, Conservatives had a modest proposal, which is that Canadians deserve to see the contracts that the NDP-Liberal government signed when offering these subsidies. Did it seek to include in those contracts protections for Canadian workers? Did it seek to guarantee a certain number of Canadian jobs? Did it seek to prevent foreign replacement workers from being brought in as part of these projects or did the contracts it negotiated allow for this kind of foreign replacement worker activity on these projects? Whether one is for or against these subsidies, or for or against allowing foreign replacement workers, it seems reasonable to me that the people who actually paid for these projects, the taxpayers, should be able to see the contracts and know whether the government did an effective or ineffective job in negotiating for workers. We have an indication that it did not do an effective job because we know foreign replacement workers are being brought in as part of these heavily subsidized projects. Either way, Canadians should be able to see what is in these contracts. We brought this issue to committee. Initially, the New Democrats said they sided with us. In fact, I think the leader of the NDP asked a question in the House requesting the release of these contracts. Then, after a mere two or three meetings of Liberal MP filibustering, the New Democrats flipped. They folded. They buckled under the Liberal pressure to continue a long line of situations of the NDP facilitating Liberal cover-ups. We would expect in a minority Parliament that we would be able to get the information we need, yet that has not happened. The NDP bailed on workers and chose its corrupt coalition cousins instead. My question for the Liberals is this: What did they offer the NDP leader to get the NDP to betray workers once again and instead vote to hide these contracts? What did the Liberals offer the NDP, and why are they choosing secrecy over the protection of workers?

508 words

All Topics

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

Jan/29/24 8:25:31 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to be in the House this evening. I first would like to point out that it is great to see Conservatives stand up in the House, every once in a while, for workers' rights. It is rare, but on occasion it happens and it is wonderful. Over the last 30 years, Conservatives have been a bit of a thorn in the side of the labour movement in Canada, so to see Conservatives stand in the House and hear them advocate for labour rights in this country is movement in the right direction, we will call it. I am very proud to be part of a government and a party that are the first to table legislation in this country to ban replacement workers, so when the member opposite suggests that we are doing something to the contrary, I would just point out that is not accurate whatsoever. I am very happy to respond to comments made by the member tonight, which were also made by the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, regarding the government's contracts with NextStar Energy to indeed expand our country's EV battery production capacity. I am a proud driver of an electric car and have been for almost two years. It is a fantastic vehicle, and I know that a more local production of that technology and innovations is going to spur on more electric vehicle use in our country and will lower our emissions, which is fantastic. It is exactly what we need in order to fight climate change. Canada has taken the critical first steps to develop our EV battery supply chain, and that will stand to bring opportunities for other Canadian industries such as mining, EV assembly and car production. We must remember that the sector remains in its infancy here in Canada and around the world, and it is indeed a commonly used practice for firms to bring in experts when new equipment is to be purchased and installed, as is the case with NextStar. Given the size and complexity of the plant, as well as the fact that it is Canada's first plant of its kind, most of the specialized equipment is coming from overseas and must be installed by the suppliers. With respect to experts, we have heard the leader of the Conservative Party and his disdain for expertise. He thinks it is crazy that there are people who are specialized; he thinks it should be done by just any old person, but that is not possible. We need to hire experts in order to do this, and this must happen before Canadians who are hired to run the equipment can be trained to use the equipment. I cannot emphasize that enough. All foreign specialists coming to Canada are coming for short-term, temporary assignments in order to install specialized equipment. No Canadian jobs are being displaced. Not only is this standard practice, but it can also be seen to continue to promote Canada as a destination of choice. Restricting foreign workers would limit Canada's ability to attract strategic foreign investment, which is something that is at an all-time high in this country thanks to the fact that the government and our party invest in workers and Canadian innovation. Let us not forget that NextStar is committed to hiring 2,300 Canadians during the construction and equipment installation phases of the project, with another 2,500 permanent jobs for Canadians once the facility is operational. This is a great-news story, but the Conservatives want to turn the dial down and say it is not so great and they could have done better, when, in fact, they would never have invested in this industry in the first place. Batteries represent a significant percentage of the value of an EV, and these plants will be the foundation of Canada's automotive industry moving forward. Failing to compete with other jurisdictions would not only risk the jobs associated with this facility but would also challenge Canada's ability to attract vehicle mandates as auto makers switch over the EV assembly. Ultimately, that would risk the success of our automotive industry in this country. For NextStar's battery manufacturing facility that will supply EV batteries to vehicles produced by Stellantis in Windsor, this is a good-news story. Battery investments are closely tied to current and future EV assembly investments and jobs, and electrification is the future of the automotive sector. Therefore, for the Conservatives to stand in the House and suggest that we are doing less for jobs and less for workers is absolutely the opposite of the truth. It is a good-news story for Windsor and a good-news story for St. Thomas, and it is a great-news story for the EV sector in Canada.

812 words

All Topics

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Jan/29/24 8:29:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot I could say in response to that comment, just about the disastrous economic management of the government, about the pain Canadians are experiencing, about the higher costs we are seeing, about the challenges in terms of job growth and opportunity and about the lack of homes being built, but the core point here is that the question was not answered. The question was about whether the public could actually see the contracts. The parliamentary secretary says they are doing great work; it is incredible. He says they got a great deal here; everything is standard procedure and everything is sunlight and roses. Let them show us their work, then. If the member is so confident in what the government has done, then the contracts should be made public. The fact is that the Liberals were filibustering at committee to try to hide the contracts from the public. The NDP leader joined in and betrayed workers who want to see what is in the contracts, and the coalition stood together to try to bury the contracts. What is the government trying to hide?

188 words

All Topics

Mr. Adam van Koeverden

Jan/29/24 8:30:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, Canadian workers and the labour movement in Canada know they cannot trust Conservatives. They know that Conservatives have never had their backs and they are proud of this government, with our NDP colleagues, for producing Canada's first-ever replacement worker ban. We are banning scabs. It is going to be impossible to replace, which is so important for the labour movement's ability to organize collectively and bargain collectively. These investments with NextStar are no different. They will have long-lasting, widespread and positive economic impacts, and they will help to ensure the high-value manufacturing activities, namely battery production in southwestern Ontario, will continue to occur in Canada. These are investments that workers in the labour movement in Canada know would be impossible with a Conservative Party at the helm and that is why they are so grateful for these innovations and investments.

147 words

All Topics

Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP)

Jan/29/24 8:31:34 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by wishing the parliamentary secretary a very happy birthday. In the past few years, Canadians have witnessed record-breaking temperatures, extreme weather events, forest fires and flooding. People have been evacuated from their homes and whole towns have been wiped out, yet under the Liberal government, big oil and gas are polluting more than ever. A recent report shows how these oil giants are significantly under-reporting their emissions. In fact, emissions from the oil sands are potentially 6,300% higher than what is reported by the industry. Scientists have confirmed what indigenous communities from northern Alberta have been saying for decades. These massive corporations are threatening their health, threatening their livelihoods and poisoning their land. This is making people sick. Oil and gas companies are pumping out carbon emissions at shockingly high rates, and the government can and should make these companies use some of their record-breaking profits to clean up their mess. Oil and gas CEOs are giving themselves raises, being rewarded with obscene bonuses, and making millions of dollars a year, while Canadians are struggling just to get by. They are worried about how they are going to pay rent and worried about how they are going to make their mortgage payments. At the same time, Canadians are facing record-breaking temperatures, the worst wildfire season on record and devastating weather events. We are in a climate emergency, so why does the Liberal government refuse to hold oil and gas giants accountable? After dragging their feet and having to be pushed to finally deliver a cap on emissions for the oil and gas sector, the Liberals announced a watered-down cap, full of loopholes, that had oil and gas lobbyists' fingerprints all over it. The oil and gas sector makes up the biggest portion of Canada’s emissions, and environmental experts have said that Canada must have a hard cap on oil and gas emissions if we have any hope of meeting our climate targets. The Liberals have set a target of reducing Canada’s overall emissions by 42%, but they are giving their friends in oil and gas a break. Not only did they give oil and gas a lower target, but they have included the option for companies to buy offsets and essentially buy their way out of the cap. They admit their plan will only reduce oil and gas emission by about 20%. This means every other sector and everyday Canadians will have to pick up the slack. The Liberals are making life harder for people, workers and families. Can the member explain to me why they are making life easier for oil and gas CEOs?

451 words

Mr. Adam van Koeverden (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity, Lib.)

Jan/29/24 8:34:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague and friend for the well wishes on my birthday and for standing up for climate action at this time. I cannot say enough or emphasize strongly enough how nice it is to stand up in the House of Commons and talk about how we fight climate change, not whether we fight climate change. With the Conservatives, day after day, asking the majority of the questions in this House, it is a challenge occasionally. The vast majority of Canadians I talk to, the vast majority of Canadians, full stop, demand climate action. They want to help lower our emissions. They want our government to take strong action, and one of those strong actions was indeed our oil and gas emissions cap. It was just in December that our government, with the Minister of Environment and Climate Change at COP, announced a very ambitious plan to lower our emissions with an oil and gas emissions cap. It is the first of its kind in the world. We are the fourth-largest producer of oil and gas in the world, and we are the first-ever country to produce a cap on emissions from oil and gas production. It is going to lead the way on lowering emissions from this sector as we reduce our reliance on fossil fuels going forward. Like I said, as the world's fourth-largest producer, it is a strong signal that we are sending internationally to the sector and to our colleagues in the G7 and G20. We are taking a leadership role in the energy transition. We are aiming to achieve net-zero emissions from the oil and gas sector by 2050, and the emissions cap will ensure that we get there. The challenge, of course, is to reduce emissions while building a stronger, more resilient economy of the 21st century. That is why we are not doing this alone. It requires consultation with the sector to ensure that we are protecting jobs and recognizing that oil and gas still have a role to play in our economy and our society. Last December, we published a proposed regulatory framework, and we look forward to hearing from stakeholders on the approach in this document in the months ahead. On a more personal note, I am a member of the environment committee, and I am looking forward to working more closely with my colleague from Victoria on the environment committee. We had the CEO of Imperial Oil at committee, late in the last session. I had the opportunity to question that CEO, who earns, as the member mentioned, about $17 million a year. He earns that money for taking something from the planet and leaving it in a worse place. The oil and gas sector and the oil sands, as the member rightly pointed out, are responsible for the largest proportion of Canada's emissions, but it is also the most carbon-intensive fuel in the world. It has been shown just recently, in an article that I think we both read, that it is up to 6,500% higher than reported. For some of those compounds, which are called organic compounds, the rate at which they are going into the atmosphere is upwards of 6,000% higher than had been indicated, which is absolutely atrocious. The question I had for that CEO was about the Kearl spill with respect to effluent from tailings ponds. They insist that those tailings releases, as they call them, into a tailings pond have no effect on the environment and no effect on people's health, which is absolutely untrue. It is absolutely not accurate to suggest that there is no effect. It is having an impact on water quality. It is having an impact on cancer rates. It is having a deleterious impact on the environment and the health of first nations around the Athabasca watershed. It is an absolute travesty. I could not agree with my colleague more that we need to do more to ensure that we are protecting the environment from the oil and gas sector, and the oil and gas emissions cap is one way that we are doing that.

703 words

Ms. Laurel Collins

Jan/29/24 8:38:37 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I believe the member is genuinely sincere in his desire to do more, and I agree that the Conservatives' climate denial is beyond disheartening, but Canadians do not want to have to choose between denial and delay. They do not want to have to choose between bad and worse. The reality is we are in a climate emergency. We do not have time for Liberal excuses. We do not have time for Liberal broken promises. We definitely do not have time for a government that caters to oil and gas interests. Our planet is burning. When will the government stop disappointing Canadians, stop giving breaks to its rich friends and stop listening to oil and gas CEOs who are raking in record profits and unreal bonuses while polluting our planet, and instead start treating this like the emergency that it is, close the loopholes and bring in a hard cap on emissions?

154 words