House of Commons Hansard #126 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was project.

Topics

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

moved that the second report of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, presented on Thursday, November 28, 2013, be concurred in.

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Is the House ready for the question?

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

An hon. member

On division.

Natural ResourcesCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I declare the motion carried.

(Motion agreed to)

Impaired DrivingPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by citizens of Canada who want to see tougher laws and the implementation of new mandatory minimum sentencing for those persons convicted of impaired driving causing death.

They also want the Criminal Code of Canada to be changed to redefine the offence of impaired driving causing death as vehicular manslaughter.

The EnvironmentPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to present a petition from over 1,600 residents of the riding of Saanich—Gulf Islands. The petitioners are calling upon the government to ensure that Saanich Inlet be designated as an area in which boaters and any other vessels are not permitted to discharge raw sewage. They are calling on the House of Commons to work with the Province of British Columbia to protect Saanich Inlet by immediately adding it to the list of designated zones where such discharge is not allowed.

Mandatory Labelling of ProductsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have a second petition from residents of Saanich—Gulf Islands who are concerned about their right to know what is in the products they buy. They are calling on the House of Commons to put in force mandatory labelling of products containing genetically modified materials.

ProstitutionPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I have close to 2,000 signatures that continue to come in to ask Parliament to decriminalize the selling of sexual services and criminalize the purchasing of sexual services. This is from all provinces across Canada.

Falun GongPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, I have another petition calling on Parliament to pass a resolution to establish measures to stop the Chinese Communist regime's crime of systematically murdering Falun Gong practitioners for their organs and to amend Canadian legislation to combat forced organ harvesting.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 646, 647, and 648.

Question No. 646Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC

With regard to government funding, for each fiscal year since 2007-2008 inclusive: (a) what are the details of all grants, contributions, and loans to any organization, body, or group in the province of Prince Edward Island, providing for each (i) the name of the recipient, (ii) the location of the recipient, indicating the municipality and the federal electoral district, (iii) the date, (iv) the amount, (v) the department or agency providing it, (vi) the program under which the grant, contribution, or loan was made, (vii) the nature or purpose; and (b) for each grant, contribution and loan identified in (a), was a press release issued to announce it and, if so, what is the (i) date, (ii) headline, (iii) file number of the press release?

Question No. 646Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, owing to the large volume of information involved, the government’s long-standing practice with regard to questions relating to total grants and contributions is to provide an answer for one federal electoral district per question. The government invites the member to specify for which individual riding she would like the requested information and to ask the corresponding question.

Question No. 647Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC

With regard to government funding, for each fiscal year since 2007-2008 inclusive: (a) what are the details of all grants, contributions, and loans to any organization, body, or group in the province of Manitoba, providing for each (i) the name of the recipient, (ii) the location of the recipient, indicating the municipality and the federal electoral district, (iii) the date, (iv) the amount, (v) the department or agency providing it, (vi) the program under which the grant, contribution, or loan was made, (vii) the nature or purpose; and (b) for each grant, contribution and loan identified in (a), was a press release issued to announce it and, if so, what is the (i) date, (ii) headline, (iii) file number of the press release?

Question No. 647Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, owing to the large volume of information involved, the government’s long-standing practice with regard to questions relating to total grants and contributions is to provide an answer for one federal electoral district per question. The government invites the member to specify for which individual riding she would like the requested information and to ask the corresponding question.

Question No. 648Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON

With regard to government funding, for each fiscal year since 2007-2008 inclusive: (a) what are the details of all grants, contributions, and loans to any organization, body, or group in the province of Saskatchewan, providing for each (i) the name of the recipient, (ii) the location of the recipient, indicating the municipality and the federal electoral district, (iii) the date, (iv) the amount, (v) the department or agency providing it, (vi) the program under which the grant, contribution, or loan was made, (vii) the nature or purpose; and (b) for each grant, contribution and loan identified in (a), was a press release issued to announce it and, if so, what is the (i) date, (ii) headline, (iii) file number of the press release?

Question No. 648Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, owing to the large volume of information involved, the government’s long-standing practice with regard to questions relating to total grants and contributions is to provide an answer for one federal electoral district per question. The government invites the member to specify for which individual riding he would like the requested information and to ask the corresponding question.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Gros-Cacouna Oil TerminalBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

October 9th, 2014 / 10:05 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, the proposed Port of Gros-Cacouna oil terminal, which will be used for the sole purpose of exporting unprocessed Canadian oil, will have a negative impact on the Canadian economy through the loss of well-paid jobs, will constitute an unacceptable environmental threat to the St. Lawrence ecosystem, including the beluga whale population, and therefore, is not consistent with the principle of sustainable development, and must be rejected.

Mr. Speaker, to begin, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, who will be giving an excellent speech once I have finished.

This debate and this motion are very important. They will showcase the foundation of the NDP's sustainable development plan when it forms the government in 2015. It is very important that we get back to basics and define sustainable development. It is built on three pillars. The first is economic. Of course, development is first economic. We need to determine how a project can benefit the Canadian economy. The Port of Gros-Cacouna project is not economically beneficial. In fact, the economy in this region already relies on ecotourism, fishing and marine resources. An oil spill would be catastrophic for all of those jobs. In addition, this project focuses solely on exporting. There is no opportunity to process the raw material; therefore, there is no possibility to add value or create jobs. That is why this project makes no sense economically.

The second pillar is environmental. The beluga whale, a symbol of Quebec, lives there. The beluga is a symbol not just of Quebec, but of Canada. The beluga is also a threatened species. In 2010, there were about 1,000 belugas, but the latest figures show that in 2012, there were only 880. Protecting the ecosystem and the environment is a very important aspect of sustainable development, but that protection will be impossible in this case.

The third pillar is social acceptance. I will explain why later, but I travelled around the Lower St. Lawrence and across Quebec twice, and there is no social acceptance.

The Conservatives have made a real mess of this file, and my colleagues who have been working on it can talk about that later on. For one thing, the Maurice Lamontagne Institute is in the region, and in 2012, the Conservatives made draconian cuts there. Some two-thirds of the scientists who worked at the institute, in fields such as ecotoxicology, lost their jobs. Environmental science was absolutely eviscerated there.

In addition, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act has been completely watered down. It has been hacked to bits. Right now, this act is a problem because environmental assessments and public consultations are no longer reliable.

That is what prompted my colleagues and me to move motions in committee. We have been concerned about belugas for a long time. As I said, belugas are a threatened species. They fall under the federal government's Species at Risk Act. That means the federal government is required, under its own act, to protect this species and come up with a recovery strategy, but that has not happened. The species is not recovering. On the contrary, from 2010 to 2012, the number of belugas dropped. As we approach 2015, the species is probably even more threatened. In the past few years, many young belugas have washed up on the beach and died. Protecting young belugas is critically important to the recovery of this species.

That is why, in June, I moved a motion in the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, and my colleague from Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup moved a motion in the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. We were very concerned about the work that was going on then and we wanted to know if the seismic survey and exploratory drilling work was happening with no regard for species like the beluga and the ecosystem in general off the coast of Cacouna.

We moved this motion in our respective committees. Unfortunately, the Conservatives decided to proceed in camera. I therefore cannot tell you what was discussed during those in camera meetings, but I can tell you that the motions are no longer on the order paper. Members can figure out what happened.

Then, there was a request to conduct exploratory drilling. I went to the Quebec Superior Court to hear the injunction application filed by the Centre québécois du droit de l'environnement and other environmentalists who are very concerned about the environment in that area. I listened to the arguments made by the lawyers for the Centre québécois de droit de l'environnement. The Conservatives' actions on this issue are truly shameful.

First, the Government of Quebec asked for clarification so that it could respond to the concerns about the protection of the ecosystem raised in response to TransCanada's request for authorization to conduct exploratory drilling off the coast of Gros-Cacouna. The Conservatives did not bother to respond through Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Then, rather than answering the questions they were asked, they said that they would send a letter. They did not send a scientific opinion. In the letter, they said that everything was going well, that people should trust them and that the project could go forward. We know what happened next: the Quebec Superior Court granted the injunction. Right now, no exploratory drilling can be done because of the injunction. TransCanada can no longer move forward with that request.

The Liberal leader visited the Lower St. Lawrence region and said that drilling and seismic testing could be done and that he supported the oil port project in Gros-Cacouna, without knowing what was happening and that the project was not backed by scientific evidence.

Opposition Motion—Gros-Cacouna Oil TerminalBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:10 a.m.

An hon. member

He did not know that?

Opposition Motion—Gros-Cacouna Oil TerminalBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:10 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

No, he did not. It is truly shameful.

The member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville even told him that he was disappointed that the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans was refusing to share scientific information. That came from the September 29, 2014, Hansard. The Liberals do not seem to be on the same page. In fact, it seems that the Liberal leader is not familiar with the basic principles of sustainable development. The member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville had to set him straight.

I hope that the Liberals will set the Liberal leader straight, explain the basic principles of sustainable development to him and vote in favour of our motion since it is based on those basic principles, namely, environmentally sustainable economic development and the social acceptance of the surrounding community.

We moved this motion for all of these reasons, and we are asking the Conservatives to stand with us. They need to understand that they cannot build an oil port in that location without going against their own species at risk legislation, and the project is not good for the economy either.

I hope the government will one day realize that the words “environment” and “economic development” are not mutually exclusive.

This proves that the Conservatives do not take environmental protection seriously. They do not understand what sustainable development is.

When the NDP forms the government, we will ensure that Canada has not only a sustainable development strategy but also legislation in this area. In fact, my hon. colleague from Brome—Missisquoi has introduced a bill on sustainable development, and we will continue in that direction.

The principle of protecting sustainable development—in other words, the right to clean air, clean water and clean soil—will be written into the charter. We will fulfill these promises once the NDP forms the government.

I would also like to draw attention to what the Liberals are doing in this area. The NDP is the only party that has a clear position on sustainable development and the Port of Gros-Cacouna.