SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 318 - May/27/24

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, BQ)

May/27/24 8:03:59 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, Bill C‑49 has passed the committee stage. We now see that the government has chosen not to implement a real environmental assessment process for future energy projects. These offshore projects ought to undergo robust, effective, transparent environmental impact assessments to ensure that they are part of proper marine spatial planning to identify and prevent adverse cumulative effects and contribute to sustainability. Does my colleague believe that the government should adopt such a measure? Why was it not done in Bill C‑49?

88 words

Context: House Hansard - 318 - May/27/24

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

May/27/24 8:04:47 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is very important that it be done as part of this legislation in an effective and transparent manner. I do not agree in terms of the impact of the assessment that is mandated within this piece of legislation. It does take into account, from my understanding in reading over it, and I did sit on the Natural Resources Committee for a period of time, the assessment on marine life and on the fishing industry, working in collaboration with fishing the industry.

85 words

Context: House Hansard - 318 - May/27/24

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

May/27/24 9:29:37 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Madam Speaker, my understanding, and I would have asked my colleague to avail himself of the opportunity to look through the committee evidence from those meetings, is that this concern did come up. I also want to say to him that this is all fresh. This is actually what debate should be about in the House of Commons. The government's tabling of its amendments to respond to the Supreme Court ruling did not come out until the budget implementation act was tabled, which we are all in the middle of reviewing. I am not even sure. I am looking at my colleagues from the finance committee. I do not think they are in the middle of that yet. The fact is that at finance committee, the BIA amendments on the Impact Assessment Act have not been debated yet, so when the member is saying he is sure that other provincial governments would have raised this, how would they have? This is super fresh, and I am not sure because the government has not made a statement. I do not think it has thought of this. I do not think that its members have said how the Impact Assessment Act could harmonize with the relevant sections of Bill C-49. My colleague is right. It is not every part of Bill C-49 that is impacted by this, but there are material sections that are, so because the amendment is tight in scope to those relevant sections, he should be able to support it.

254 words

Context: House Hansard - 318 - May/27/24

Mr. Rick Perkins (South Shore—St. Margarets, CPC)

May/27/24 9:34:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, not to be outdone by my colleague, I would say that given the numbers on the other side, the member for Calgary Nose Hill who might be tilting at windmills in terms of having members listen. This bill would bring, as the member pointed out, four sections from the Impact Assessment Act into it. I wonder if the member could comment on how effective those have been at getting capital projects done in western Canada, because it would bring that same speed, I expect, and same diligence to getting things done to Atlantic energy projects.

97 words

Context: House Hansard - 318 - May/27/24

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

May/27/24 10:04:31 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was saying that the Bloc Québécois studied this bill in good faith. The same can be said for a lot of Canadians and organizations that made serious, carefully-considered and reasonable recommendations. Unfortunately, the Liberals rejected all of the improvements proposed by environmental groups, energy experts and lawyers specializing in environmental governance. At the end of the day, the government decided against implementing any real environmental assessment process for future energy projects. I know that New Democrats want to do more to fight climate change. They want the energy transition to move in the right direction. Does my colleague agree that new projects should not be subject to any environmental assessments?

118 words

Context: House Hansard - 318 - May/27/24

Mr. Taylor Bachrach

May/27/24 10:05:31 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, if I understand correctly, listening to the interpretation, it is: do I believe that no environmental assessments should be carried out for new projects? I am missing the question a little bit, but I think that the member and I share a desire to have a strong and effective environmental impact assessment process. If good-faith amendments were brought forward at committee that led in that direction, and they were not carried as part of the bill, then that is certainly disappointing. However, when it comes to the overall thrust of this legislation, I think it is to get the renewable energy industry off the ground in the maritime provinces and, overall, that is something that is heading in the right direction. Now, the details, of course, are always what matter. When it comes to the impact on the environment, there is a lot of talk about streamlining, cutting red tape and all of these things, but that cannot come at the cost of the integrity of the review process.

172 words