Evidence of meeting #110 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was project.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
You just said we're not talking about the bill, that we're talking about the pan-Canadian framework on climate change. Now you're back to saying we're talking about the bill.
May 3rd, 2018 / 11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Well, you said something else just a couple of seconds ago, and I'm talking about the bill as well.
I have referenced the section of the bill that says every single project is going to have to be evaluated in terms of the impact the project will have on the climate change targets that Canada has committed to, and the degree to which a project will move forward will be driven by the fact that the tools that are being used are either successful or not. One of the foundational tools within that plan is a carbon tax.
Madam Chair, if you're going to shut me down when this is completely relevant to the pan-Canadian framework on climate change and the legislation that we have before us, and impacts the likelihood of whether a project will proceed or not, then this cover-up is getting worse than Canadians imagine.
We've asked question after question of this government about what impact the carbon tax will have on emissions in Canada and how much it will cost Canadians. Now you're telling me that you cannot allow me to have questions—
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Madam Chair, on a point of order, can we just allow the minister to please answer the question? Thank you.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
My question is that in regard to the section I referenced, which requires every project to be evaluated in terms of the impact it will have on our climate change plan, if your carbon tax is not as successful as you suggest it is, would you agree that it may be less likely that projects in the future will not be approved because the rest of the tools in your plan are not achieving their desired goal?
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
Obviously, your question isn't directly on point to Bill C-69. However, I want to then commend—
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
—your party for supporting action on climate change and our international obligations. Therefore, you should support the fact that we need to look at this legislation and we need to look at projects in the context of our international commitments, which you support.
There will be an opportunity for Canadians to weigh in on the strategic assessment of climate change. We've committed to doing a strategic assessment. It's an opportunity to provide clarity to proponents, to stakeholders, and to the agencies as to how climate change will be considered in project assessments. Once again, given that—
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON
—the Conservative Party has supported our international commitments, I'm very pleased—
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Once again, can you please allow the minister to answer the question? Thank you.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Chair, the time that's allocated to me, which I believe is—
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
This is my time. I allow the minister to answer the questions, but when she's running out the time I have available to ask her my questions, then I will be objecting and interrupting.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
On a point of order, Chair. Can we please allow the minister to answer the question? Thank you.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Just hold on a minute, if you don't mind. I am the chair. I was generous, but I also want the questions to be specific to Bill C-69, and I made that point clear at the beginning of the meeting.
I was asked by a colleague to give the minister a chance to answer it. I'm actually still ruling it out of order because it is not specific to Bill C-69. It's specific to the pan-Canadian framework, and that's not what we're discussing here today.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative