Evidence of meeting #131 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 chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Chair, with all due respect to my colleague Mr. van Koeverden, I would like to remind you that, once the vote was over, I immediately asked to have the floor and you recognized me.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I recognize that's how it happened. I had my hand up and I spoke into my microphone. I'm not in the room, so I'm at a disadvantage.
However, at the outset of this meeting, Mr. Deltell and I both expressed interest in speaking, and when the vote concluded, I did again.
Liberal
Liberal
Shafqat Ali Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
I'm online as well, so I could see Mr. van Koeverden. He raised his hand before Mr. Leslie. I just wanted to bring that to your attention.
Bloc
Louis-Philippe Sauvé Bloc LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
Mr. Chair, I'd like to speak on the same point of order.
I believe the committee elected you, so I trust you implicitly about the speaking order. You had recognized the member for Louis‑Saint‑Laurent. In any case, I could not propose an amendment to a motion that had not been moved. My intention was to move an amendment.
I think that, to ensure that the committee runs smoothly, it would be preferable to simply let the member for Louis‑Saint‑Laurent finish reading his motion. Then we can talk about the substance of the motion.
I don't think it's in the interest of our fellow citizens to waste endless time on procedural considerations.
The committee trusts you entirely to conduct the debate properly.
Liberal
Leah Taylor Roy Liberal Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
I have a point of order as well, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
Leah Taylor Roy Liberal Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
I had put my hand up clearly, and I know it was before Mr. Leslie. I put it up immediately after, and I also was looking at the screen, so I'm not sure how his name came up before mine on the speaking list.
I understand that there's only one person in the room, but I think someone needs to be helping you, perhaps to look at when people's hands go up so that they can be recorded as they go up.
On the point of wasting time, I might suggest that this emergency debate is not in fact an emergency and could have been dealt with at a regular time, saving the House a great deal of money.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Dan Mazier
That's not a point of order.
We'll have Mr. Deltell finish his motion, as he hasn't even finished it yet, and then we have Mr. Sauvé, Mr. Leslie and Mr. van Koeverden. Then we'll have Ms. Collins, and then Ms. Taylor Roy. That is what we have right now.
Away we go, Mr. Deltell.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To ensure that it is clear to everyone, I will reread the motion we are debating today from the beginning.
Given that Canada’s Commissioner of the Environment released an audit that revealed: 1) The government is not on track to meet Canada’s 2030 targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 2) Canada has the worst record in the G7 for emissions reductions. 3) The government is using “unreliable emissions reduction estimates” and is lacking “transparency on emissions reductions and projections”. The committee hold a minimum of three meetings to investigate the Liberal government’s emission reduction policies; invite (a) Commissioner DeMarco for a two hour meeting, (b) the Minister of Environment & Climate Change along with departmental officials for a two hour meeting, (c) Canada's Climate Change Ambassador for one hour, and (d) witnesses submitted by recognized parties for the remaining hour; the meetings take place only after the completion of witness testimony on the committee’s study on climate impacts related to the Canadian financial system; and that these meetings be completed by December 13, 2024.
We will have the opportunity to get into detail during the debate, but I want to emphasize that we each have our own view of how to reduce emissions and meet Canada's targets for reducing emissions and pollution. The paths we advocate are different. That's what Parliament and democracy are for.
We wanted the committee to hold a meeting today to make sure that we were going to debate the substance of the issues of climate change, the policies put forward by the government and the proposals from the other opposition parties. The commissioner of the environment concluded that we were not on the right track. This is not a political party, a think tank or a lobby group saying the government is getting it right or not; it's the commissioner. He is sounding the alarm about the effectiveness, and even the transparency and truthfulness of the facts cited by the government.
He says, among other things, that the government is not on track to meet our targets and that Canada has the worst record in the G7. That is reminiscent of Canada's sorry record over the past nine years. It ranked 62nd out of 64. According to scientists around the world, Canada is one of the laggards when it comes to effectively reducing emissions. The Liberal government has lectured everyone non-stop in the nine years it has been in power. The audit also mentions that the government uses estimates that can be very subjective. It makes numbers say what it wants them to say.
Given that it is the commissioner of the environment issuing these very harsh warnings to the government, we believe that a debate must be held as soon as possible on a highly sensitive topic that resonates with all Canadians, namely climate change and finding solutions to address it.
Bloc
Louis-Philippe Sauvé Bloc LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC
Mr. Chair, I move an amendment to the motion.
I propose replacing the period after “2024” with “, provided that the Committee has considered and adopted the draft report on the Committee's study of the climate impacts of the Canadian financial system before that date, failing which the meetings on this study shall be completed after the holiday season.”
Basically, it is so we can continue our work. I think everyone here is concerned about efficiency and wants to continue the studies we've started. I think this study is particularly important to my colleague, the member for Repentigny, and I'm sure all parliamentarians want to find solutions. We need to use finance and the financial system to help ensure that we live in a healthy environment and are able to fight climate change.
NDP
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
I would also like to be on the list for the amendment, if that takes precedence over the current debate.
November 15th, 2024 / 12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Dan Mazier
We have Ms. Collins, Mr. Deltell, Mr. van Koeverden and then Ms. Taylor Roy.
Ms. Collins.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I first want to ask the analysts about the feasibility of drafting the report and getting it to us. Can we just get a little bit of information from the analysts about the timelines and about what's possible between now and what the amendment proposed?
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Dan Mazier
What we're hearing is that the report will take well into the new year to get completed.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
If the analysts could map out for us.... If we wrap up witness testimony by, say, November 25, when would be the earliest we could get a first draft of the report?