Colin Carrie

[The Environment, November 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, where recommendations are made on how to improve the environmental assessment process, this government will listen.

We received the recent commissioner's report, and in response to it, I am pleased to say that additional information on project screening and designation will be made available on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency's website.

I will conclude by saying that Canada has a robust, transparent and comprehensive environmental assessment regime. If the member opposite believes that there are many projects under the federal jurisdiction that need an assessment but have failed to receive one, I would ask him to name a few.

[The Environment, November 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to respond to the question posed by the hon. member for Drummond regarding the commissioner's recommendations on the implementation of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act of 2012.

In keeping with the objectives of responsible resource development, the modernized federal environmental assessment process focuses on major projects under federal jurisdiction with the greatest potential to cause harm to the environment.

A key element of this environmental assessment regime is a regulation that enumerates the types of projects most likely to generate significant effects. However, projects not listed in the regulation can nevertheless be reviewed for environmental effects. Let me give members two examples.

First, the Minister of the Environment has the authority to require an environmental assessment of an otherwise non-designated project, taking into account the adverse effects or the public concerns about these effects. Second, if a proposed project is on federal land, the responsible authority must examine the project to determine the likelihood of a significant adverse environmental effect. I would also emphasize that all projects will continue to be subject to a wide range of federal and provincial environment-related regulatory and permitting requirements.

This government is focusing federal resources on the assessment of major projects that pose a risk to the environment, the public and aboriginal peoples.

In order to ensure that attention is focused on areas of greatest risk so that mitigation measures can be proposed, the environmental assessment regime outlined in the legislation includes a screening process. This applies only to proposed projects under the purview of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. The screening process does not apply to projects such as pipelines or nuclear facilities assessed by the National Energy Board or the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

A screening decision is made to determine if an environmental assessment is required. If there are no potential effects to areas of federal jurisdiction, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency may decide that the project does not require a federal environmental assessment. The screening decision is based upon comments from public and aboriginal groups, relevant scientific information provided by the proponent, and expert advice from federal departments.

Last, I would like to finish by saying that the federal environmental review process and how it is triggered is really very transparent. It is a process that we are proud to have established. We will consider all suggestions on how to improve the process, for the environment is of great importance to this government and for all Canadians.

[Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, October 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to thank my colleague for an excellent speech. I would like to see if he could comment on the importance of returning to a balanced budget. We see in the House every day, for example, the opposition and the NDP, which has $56 billion worth of unfunded promises.

Let us put that into perspective first. With 17 million Canadians working, that comes out to about $3,300 more in taxes per person under the NDP that Canadians and businesses would have to pay for.

Going to my colleagues over here in the Liberal Party, we have seen in Ontario a horrible record of balancing budgets. It is so bad in Ontario that its deficit this year, if we add all of the deficits of everyone else in Canada together, including the federal government, its deficit is going to be even greater. The green energy policy, for example, is killing new business.

Could my colleague comment on the importance of returning to a balanced budget, and what it means to Ontario and to creating new jobs?

[The Environment, October 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the National Pollutant Release Inventory represents over 20 years of reporting from industrial facilities across Canada.

As part of ongoing efforts to improve the completeness of the National Pollutant Release Inventory and achieve and maintain a high level of data quality, Environment Canada routinely contacts facilities across Canada to provide information about the requirements for reporting. These efforts help to ensure that companies are meeting their reporting obligations.

Information collected through this program is used to support the department's chemicals regulatory program and is made publicly available to Canadians each year.

[The Environment, October 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

This government is playing a leadership role when it comes to protecting our environment.

The National Pollutant Release Inventory is a key tool for the Government of Canada to identify and monitor sources of pollution in Canada and to provide information to Canadians on sources of pollution in their local communities. In place since 1993, it has resulted in mandatory annual reporting on pollutant releases and disposals to Environment Canada and publication of this information for all Canadians.

It is important to remember that it is not a list of all companies operating in Canada; rather, it is an inventory of pollutant releases and disposals reported by industrial facilities that meet specific reporting requirements as issued under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Quebec Stevedoring has not reported to the National Pollutant Release Inventory in the past; however, Environment Canada officials are following up with the company to provide additional information on the reporting requirements. If Environment Canada officials determine that Quebec Stevedoring meets the reporting requirements, then they will be required to submit an annual report to Environment Canada.

To determine whether they are required to report to the National Pollutant Release Inventory, companies must take into account the types of activities that take place at their facilities as well as the number of employees who work there. If the threshold is exceeded for one of the over 300 substances listed on the inventory, reporting is then required on releases and disposals of that substance.

The primary activity at the Quebec Stevedoring facility in the port of Quebec appears to be the transfer of bulk materials containing nickel, a substance listed on the National Pollutant Release Inventory and a potential concern in the environment.

If the facility is only unloading and loading this material and is not releasing dust into the air or spilling material into the port, then they would likely not meet the criteria for reporting to the inventory. lf, on the other hand, the total quantity of nickel released to the environment or disposed of by the facility is greater than 10 tonnes per year, a report would be required for nickel. Reporting could also be required for particulate matter, a key air pollutant, or other listed substances.

On an annual basis, Environment Canada publishes the information collected under the National Pollutant Release Inventory. Canadians access the information through a variety of mechanisms, including an online search of the data. For the latest reporting year, over 7,500 industrial facilities across Canada reported on over 300 substances.

I want to thank my colleague for bringing this to my attention.

[Nááts’ihch’oh National Park Reserve Act, October 23rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I particularly want to thank my colleague from the Yukon. It is appropriate today to take the opportunity to thank him for his public service. We all know in the House of his work with the RCMP and Correctional Service Canada.

I also want to thank my colleagues in the opposition who are working with us to make parks in Canada a wonderful priority.

As the member for the Yukon, the member knows first-hand that one of the greatest things about our country is our great outdoors. Our Conservative government's record is clear and unprecedented. We have protected land that is two times the size of Vancouver Island. We have created three national wildlife areas, three marine protected areas, two national parks, two national marine conservation areas, and one historic site.

Why it is so important to now establish the Nááts’ihch’oh national park reserve?

[Business of Supply, October 21st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech. I was listening carefully. One of the things we learned in the House, and members would remember H1N1, is the importance of communications and getting the messages out to Canadians.

Does the member opposite feel that the all-parliamentarian briefings, the numerous press conferences and daily question period appearances are insufficient to keep Canadians updated? I feel, from experience, that our public health officials should be working at their jobs during issues like this. They should be out there working to communicate with Canadians directly and with their international partners to work internationally to see if we can work together to solve these issues.

Therefore, why does he think that everything that is being done out there is not sufficient to keep Canadians updated?

[The Environment, October 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, beyond efforts to reduce emissions, our government is also taking steps to help Canadians adapt to a changing climate. Since 2006, we have invested $235 million in domestic adaptation initiatives in priority areas, such as human health, communities, and the economy. These initiatives aim to improve our understanding of climate change and to help Canadians plan for climate impacts, notably, in Canada's north.

My colleague brought up the Liberals, so I cannot help myself, I am going to comment. The Liberals, if members remember, signed on to something called the Kyoto accord. They signed on to this agreement with absolutely no plan to bring down any emissions. Under their watch, we saw greenhouse gases go up almost 130 megatonnes.

Our approach is working. We are seeing, for the first time ever, a decoupling of economic growth and greenhouse gases. This is historic. This is something that everyone in the House should be onboard with. Greenhouse gases have decreased, since 2006, 5.1%. We have seen our economy grow 10.6%.

This is working. This is something we all can be proud of, and I hope that everyone in the House really focuses on doing the best we can so that the economy continues to grow while greenhouse gases decrease.

[The Environment, October 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to tell the House that we have taken action. The facts are there. It is estimated that Canada's greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 will be 128 megatonnes less than they would have been without action since 2005. That is a fact.

Moreover, Canada's per capita emissions are also at their lowest point since tracking began in 1990. That is a fact.

In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, our government is implementing a sector-by-sector regulatory approach. It is working. We have already put in place regulations for the transportation sector and the electricity generating sectors.

In the transportation sector, with these regulations it is projected that the 2025 model year light-duty vehicles will consume up to 50% less fuel and produce about 50% less greenhouse gas emissions than 2008 vehicles. That is a fact.

Regulations for heavy-duty vehicles and engines will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the 2018 model year by up to 23% compared to vehicles manufactured prior to the regulatory period. That is a fact.

In the electricity generation sector, Canada already has one of the cleanest systems in the world, with over three-quarters of our electricity supply emitting no greenhouse gases. By introducing a tough new regulatory performance standard for coal-fired electricity generation, Canada became the first major coal user to ban construction of traditional coal-fired electricity generation units. That is a fact.

Moreover, we have also announced our government's intent to regulate hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, a group of greenhouse gases which can have warming potentials that are up to 1,000 to 3,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Canada will be aligning with regulations recently proposed by the United States and taking preemptive action to reduce and limit harmful HFC emissions before they increase. That is a fact.

Our government's regulatory approach is further enhanced by complementary measures that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the longer term. These measures include significant investments of over $10 billion in green infrastructure, energy efficiency, the development of clean energy technologies, and the production of cleaner energy and fossil fuels. That is a fact.

Moving forward, the Government of Canada will continue to look for opportunities to take action in a manner that reduces greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining job creation and economic growth. We will do that without the job-killing carbon tax that the opposition seems to be obsessed with implementing, which would raise the price of everything from groceries to anything to do with home heating or gasoline. That is something that Canadians do not want.

We will make sure that we decrease greenhouse gases while growing the economy.

[Ukraine, October 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Ukrainians settled in Canada and helped make this country great. Ukrainians settled in Oshawa and helped make our community great. Canada owes so much to Ukraine.

When I travelled to Ukraine this past spring with the Prime Minister, I had the opportunity to listen to Ukrainians. I was amazed at their courage and optimism during this difficult time.

Now Ukraine is in need of our help. Ukraine not only needs our funds but also Canadian expertise to rebuild their nation.

I am proud that this past Friday at the Lviv Hall, the Oshawa United for Ukraine fundraiser was held, and our community is doing its part to help our close friend and ally during this difficult time. Ukraine can be assured that Oshawa and Canada will vocally and unapologetically stand with them.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Oshawa-Durham region Ukrainian Canadian Congress, volunteers and all our special guests for making this event so successful.