Bill C-50 (Historical)

Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act

An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economy

This enactment establishes an accountability, transparency and engagement framework to facilitate and promote economic growth, the creation of sustainable jobs and support for workers and communities in Canada in the shift to a net-zero economy. Accordingly, the enactment
(a) provides that the Governor in Council may designate a Minister for the purposes of the Act as well as specified Ministers;
(b) establishes a Sustainable Jobs Partnership Council to provide the Minister and the specified Ministers, through a process of social dialogue, with independent advice with respect to measures to foster the creation of sustainable jobs, measures to support workers, communities and regions in the shift to a net-zero economy and matters referred to it by the Minister;
(c) requires the tabling of a Sustainable Jobs Action Plan in each House of Parliament no later than 2026 and by the end of each subsequent period of five years;
(d) provides for the establishment of a Sustainable Jobs Secretariat to support the implementation of the Act; and
(e) provides for a review of the Act within ten years of its coming into force and by the end of each subsequent period of ten years.

Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry, but the hon. member's time is up.

Questions and comments, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, in my hon. colleague's speech, she spoke about how the Conservatives view tackling climate change through technology, yet they oppose the Atlantic accord, which would allow for technology development in Atlantic Canada. The member also spoke about the cost of energy in Atlantic Canada. However, once again, by blocking the Atlantic accord, Conservatives block economic development in Atlantic Canada, the ability to reduce energy prices in Atlantic Canada and good jobs for Atlantic Canadians.

Do the Conservatives even believe climate change is real? How do they plan to address it if they continue to block technological advancements? Why will they not allow Atlantic Canadians to have the good, clean jobs of the future?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, I really appreciate that question because it gives me the ability to address the reality of Bill C-49 rather than the Liberals' false claims.

Here is the truth about Bill C-49. It imports a number of clauses from Bill C-69 and includes a number of clauses from another bill, Bill C-55. The consequences of both of those bills embedded in Bill C-49 are exactly what has unfolded and what Conservatives warned about in previous debates. Bill C-49 would hold up, delay, road block and gatekeep alternative and renewable offshore development, just as it is also a simultaneous attack on petroleum offshore development.

I am not sure if Liberals do not read bills, do not know what they are talking about or are just reading what someone says, but these issues are grave. They are serious for the underpinning of our economy and our standard of living. We oppose Bill C-49 because it is an attack on energy to end petroleum offshore opportunities, and it would hold up, road block, delay and gatekeep renewable and alternative offshore energy development. Conservatives are going to accelerate approvals, make sure projects can get built, cut timelines and make both traditional and alternative energy sources available at affordable—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Repentigny.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to come back to the subject of the debate, which is Bill C‑50 and not Bill C‑49.

First, I want to say that what I just heard made my skin crawl and it proves that the Conservatives are speaking for the private oil sector, which is made up of billionaires. A recent poll revealed that two-thirds of Albertans polled on the moratorium on solar and wind development disagree with their premier.

Do the Conservatives know that there are other sources of energy other than oil, gas and coal?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's question because it allows me to put some reality and facts on the table. Again, I am not sure if the Bloc knows the facts either, but here they are.

I hate to be a homer all the time, but Alberta for decades has led this country in renewable and alternative energy development. We have the largest and oldest commercial wind farms in this country, to the point that they are already being decommissioned. Maybe people want to point out that it is still only 2% of our grid, which should be a lesson, but this is the thing: We are also the leader in Alberta on the development of alternative and renewable energy technologies and the fuels of the future right now.

The provincial government is setting certain conditions and giving certainty and clarity to private sector proponents and all Albertans to have confidence in the regulatory regime. We have always led the country on renewable and alternative energy because that is our energy companies' expertise. We do not have a history of putting that on governments, ratepayers and taxpayers. We do it through free enterprise policies. That is the opportunity that awaits all of Canada. What concerns me is that these guys do not seem to know that it is oil and gas companies doing all that work.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague said she wanted to base her speech on facts, but there is apparently some alternate world out there about facts.

She mentioned that the fossil fuel sector has just less than 200,000 employees in Canada. The clean energy sector already has 430 employees, and it is expected to grow by more than 200,000 over the next 10 years. That is where her constituents and workers across Canada are looking.

I will close by saying she should read John Vaillant's book Fire Weather, which is about her province, about the world, about climate change and about the industry that she is such a fierce protector of.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, what I am a fierce protector of is the livelihoods, the cost of living and the standard of living of the people I represent and every single vulnerable community and citizen across this country.

While I appreciated working with that hon. member on the natural resources committee in my first term, he should probably get into the coalition cabinet and ask them about why they have not done the interties and have set unrealistic targets that are impossible, about which they will answer no single concrete question regarding who is going to pay for them and how we are going to get there.

People may not want to take my word for it, which I understand because I am a politician. So that Canadians understand, this is not just about a war on oil and gas, which it absolutely is. How do we know it is about economic restructuring? We know that because the Prime Minister and the natural resources minister have said that.

I would note that there are only parliamentary secretaries here, so it seems like this is a real priority. Last week, in the House of Commons the minister talked on this issue and referred to economic restructuring. During COVID, the Prime Minister said it was an opportunity to reset and restructure the economy. That is what this is about.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member will have three and a half minutes after question period to answer questions and comments.

I also want to remind her that she is not to say indirectly or directly who may be in the House and who is not in the House.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economy, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Madam Speaker, in all this debate about the sustainable jobs act, what I have not heard is an explanation from the Liberal-NDP government of a credible plan to replace over 25% of Canada's exports. Petroleum and petroleum products account for over $100 billion, over 25% of Canada's annual exports. These exports are absolutely necessary for the protection of the value of the Canada dollar.

If the sustainable jobs act achieves what it intends to achieve, it would cripple our exports and cripple the Canadian dollar, which would lead to a massive increase in inflation, which we are already dealing with. This massive increase in inflation would necessarily be countered by further radical interest rate hikes from the Bank of Canada. Therefore, can my hon. colleague explain the deep economic consequences of this policy that the government simply does not have a credible plan to deal with?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, I touched on this in my remarks earlier, but the hon. member is exactly right, and that is exactly why Canadians can see countries around the world that are 40 years ahead of us on this agenda now rolling back all of those measures. They are doing the very things Conservatives here at home have been asking the current government to do to protect our citizens' cost of living, future opportunities, standard of living and jobs. We have been asking it to control and bring down the cost of living crisis that the government's anti-private-sector, anti-energy, anti-resource-development command-and-control policies have created.

The member touches on a thing that I really find the most important about this debate. It is that the NDP-Liberal government owes these answers to Canadians about how it is going to achieve the targets it set on these timelines. So far, it is causing all economic pain and no environmental gain. That is why Conservatives and Canadians are asking whether it is worth the cost. That is the government's job to answer.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I understand that the member cares deeply for the oil and gas sector. She talks about it quite a bit, and I appreciate her prerogative on that. Even if one does not think there is a future in clean tech and that there is opportunity here, this still gives the opportunity to unlock the potential of new jobs in a clean sector. All one has to do is open their eyes and look around throughout the world. This industry is really in a growth stage right now. Even if one does not necessarily agree that it is the future, why would they not still take a very easy risk on betting that it will be a positive outcome for the Canadian economy?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, we do agree it is the future, which we have said multiple times. We just recognize that the reality that the oil and gas sector in Canada still remains the most abundant, available, affordable source of energy for most Canadians throughout this country and is also the biggest investor in clean tech and alternative energies. What the government wants to do is kill the very sector that leads to the innovation and technology.

The Liberals should answer more questions about how on earth they are going to meet their targets in 2035, when they cannot get critical minerals out of the ground, when they are holding back the ring of fire, when interties do not exist and when there is no grid capacity and no end-user distribution system for Canadians on the back end.

Conservatives are saying, “Answer the questions.” How is this going to get done? When, why and in what way will it get done? Who is paying for it? Then, maybe people could have confidence in their plan. However, we all know they are not—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Repentigny.