Evidence of meeting #121 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was taxonomy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
He's not moving a motion. He's giving notice. I have a question, though, for the clerk. This is within the three minutes. At three minutes, do we stop or does Mr. Mazier get to continue to speak to give a notice of motion?
I think, to be honest, since we're not debating the motion....
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
No, you didn't have a minute. There was about 30 seconds left.
Conservative
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
It's not that long; it's only five points. It's half done.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Mr. Chair, I'd like to question why we're doing this at the end of the meeting when a notice of motion can be done electronically.
If it's just for a clip, that's fine. There are, you know, three video cameras here, which is very handy.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Chair, the motion is very clear about why we are doing it. If you'll let me finish the motion, it will be very clear.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
The problem, Mr. Mazier, is that this is not to debate a motion, which would open up unlimited time for debate. This is to present a notice of motion, which you can do electronically instead of eating into the committee's time.
Therefore, I would—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I think you made some of the points you wanted to make.
I'd like to go on to Ms. Taylor Roy now, and you can send me—
Conservative
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
If Mr. Mazier has 30 seconds of time, is he not allowed to use that time how he wishes and continue?
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I don't know if he used it since we started the point of order. We wasted more time having this conversation.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
When he started speaking, there was 20 seconds left in Mr. Leslie's time. I think we're well over the 20 seconds.
You made your point, Mr. Mazier, in the time I allowed you, but we now have to go on to Ms. Taylor Roy and wrap this up.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Are we done that point of order, my colleague's point of order?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I don't even know if that was a point of order.
Is it a point of order that Ms. Collins raised? I guess it was, because it was about the rules, I suppose, in a way.
Do you have a point of order, Mr. Leslie?
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
I was going to continue on hers.
I will raise one to ask the clerk whether we could look at this precedent, so we know for next time whether or not the member should be allowed to finish his statement once he begins it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
When he's not moving a motion....
Okay. Let's find out. When you're not moving a motion, can you speak forever? Let's ask the question.
We're going now to Ms. Taylor Roy.
Liberal
Leah Taylor Roy Liberal Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you again to the witnesses.
There are so many questions I could ask, but I'd like to turn to Gareth Gransaull. I'm interested in Re-generation representing 23 different groups of young people or youth.
I've been listening to the conversation today. What would you say would be the response of young people across Canada to some of the arguments that have been put forward today as to why we should not regulate oil and gas companies or financial institutions when it comes to climate change?
Co-Executive Director, re•generation
I'd say there would be numerous responses.
One is that the idea that everything we are asking for is a violation of fiduciary duty is false. There are many legal experts across the country who have issued opinions that the responsibility of corporate directors to understand and mitigate climate risk is a necessary part of fiduciary duty in Canada.
I would add that, in Canada, fiduciary duty is defined as a duty of care for the interests of the corporation, which can include a large variety of concerns, including long-term concerns. Also, we must understand there are companies that have already failed as a result of climate change. Pacific Gas and Electric in California had a $30-billion bankruptcy that their corporate directors were not able to foresee as a result of climate change. Now the company doesn't exist.
In terms of fiscal discipline—
Liberal
Leah Taylor Roy Liberal Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Can I intervene? I have one other thing to ask about.
We've been told many times that our problem is that we do not understand capital markets, and that's why we're going down this route. I want to say that I am someone who helped raise over $500 million on Wall Street for a company in the energy sector. Some of us who understand capital markets may still find that what you're saying is not correct. I find that kind of condescending tone regarding our understanding of capital markets offensive.
I want to ask, Mr. Gransaull, whether you feel the problem here is that people don't understand what's going on. Do you believe that, perhaps, people have a different opinion as to what the fiduciary responsibility of these companies should be?