Government Operations Committee on March 28th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Kusmierczyk, please get to your point of order.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

—the questions that I have. That's it. Thank you.

Let's continue on with the questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'll go to Mr. Lawrence and then Mr. Savard-Tremblay, please.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

It's clear what the Liberals are doing. They've raised a number of non-points of order. It's time to hear from Premier Higgs. As he said, he's not interested in a partisan dispute or argument, and neither am I. I'm interested in hearing the representative of New Brunswick. Others may laugh at that, but I want to hear what he has to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Savard-Tremblay, you have the floor.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Chair, I'm not going to join in the mudslinging, especially since I don't want to get my new jacket dirty.

Nevertheless, my question is pretty simple. Could you please confirm that the committee is not meeting next week? I'd also like to know who our witnesses will be when we get back from the break.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

There will be no meeting next week. Our next meetings are on April 8 and April 10. You may correct me on the order, but I believe that the first meeting is on Canada Post and the second meeting is on the red tape reduction study. It may be red tape reduction on April 8 and then Canada Post on April 10, but I believe Canada Post is first.

Premier Higgs, we'll go back to you, sir.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Sir, I have one more point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Sorry, Premier.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Sorry, Premier.

I was just reflecting on the words the clerk was saying in response to my point of order. I heard him say that it is up to the committee members to determine the interpretation of the motion passed—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

It's the chair or the committee members.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I think he said both chair and committee members—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Yup.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

—because with all due respect to you, sir, the chair does not act in isolation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

What's the point of order, please, sir?

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

The point of order is that there was a clear intention on the part of the committee members when they passed the motion yesterday that it would apply to all witnesses retrospectively as well, so they—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

This is debate. It's been cleared up.

Mr. Naqvi, we appreciate that. I have stated very clearly that there's nothing that the motion said was retroactive. If it did, it would be killing the NDP study next week and the Liberal study on the red tape.

Premier Higgs, go ahead, please.

[Blaine Higgs]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

As I said, I don't want to make this a political discussion. I want to make it about.... We all don't like the carbon tax. I think we can all agree in part that we don't like the carbon tax. However, we all have the same focus: How do we reduce emissions? How do we make a major impact on climate change for the better? That's the goal that we are aligned on.

The point I'm reacting to here is mostly in relation to the Prime Minister's comments here just recently about giving them a solution and that they're open to solutions. What we're seeing as an opportunity here in New Brunswick is exactly what's happening in the west in relation to the development of LNG, the shipment of LNG worldwide and the shutdown of coal plants.

The Prime Minister stated that there's no business case in New Brunswick. That's absolutely not true. The situation is that we have a business case, but we don't currently have a gas supply, and that is the issue: the gas supply.

Is it economical to bring it from the west or to bring it from the U.S.? No, it hasn't proven to be, based on the cost of transportation. However, it is economical to develop our very own resource here in New Brunswick. It's economical because we have 77 trillion standard cubic feet here in our province. With a consolidated effort from the federal government and the first nations, we can have an impact around the world by shutting down coal plants—coal plants that are built at record numbers in China at 80 to 100 per year, the 174 coal plants or so that exist in Europe and the coal plants even in Atlantic Canada that are running. There are four of them in Atlantic Canada that could be shut down, and there'd be a 50% reduction if we did that.

My plea here is across party lines. Let's think bigger. Let's look at Canada as a solution with a world environmental impact that changes the reductions—

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

I have a point of order, Chair.

[Blaine Higgs]

—as opposed to—

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

A point of order.

[Blaine Higgs]

—being exactly focused on our internal affordability and the costs every day of living in our province—

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

A point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I apologize, Premier Higgs. There's a point of order.

Mr. Long, please make it brief.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, Chair.

Again, Chair, I'm confused on relevance. Again—