Environment Committee on Nov. 6th, 2024

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

It's because in my mind.... Maybe some members can disagree, but I think people who are watching us today understand it, because the subamendment is just to change the channel, to put our eyes elsewhere while you have in hand a document that has been tabled not by the Conservative Party of Canada, not by a group of interests and not by an oil and gas sector; it's coming from the commissioner of the environment, the most objective guy in this country to evaluate the performance of Canada. Are we on the right track right now? Are we achieving the goal that we have fixed many years ago? The truth is not there.

The people tuning in today can see that this subamendment clearly shows how desperate government members feel when faced with reality. Nine years ago, Canada was promised a comeback. However, it isn't back. It's at the end of the line. We aren't the ones saying this. The commissioner of the environment and sustainable development studied the effectiveness of government measures. He concluded that, despite all the talk, rhetoric and taxes imposed on Canadians to reduce emissions, the targets aren't being met.

The government boasts about its lofty principles and figures. It says that we're on track to meet the targets. However, the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development is quite critical about this. He says that these emission reduction estimates remain unreliable. The Conservative member of Parliament isn't saying this, and neither are representatives of the oil industry. Canada's commissioner of the environment and sustainable development objectively states that the emission reduction estimates remain unreliable and that the emission reductions and projections lack transparency—

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, but I have a point of order once again, because this does not seem to be focused on the subamendment at all, unless you can tell me how it is.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

It looks like another filibuster to me, Mr. Chair.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I don't think that I can receive any lesson from the government about filibusters today. That's my point.

This is what debate is all about. The debate is based on the facts, and the facts are coming not from the Conservative Party members of Parliament, but from the commissioner—

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Excuse me, Mr. Chair.

I didn't hear a ruling on my point of order. I was wondering if you could rule on whether this current debate is on the subamendment or whether it is on the main motion.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

It's not a point of order.

The debate is on the subamendment.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

My question is about the relevance to the debate. It is relevance to the debate on the motion at hand, and the motion at hand is the subamendment.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

It is.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I don't believe this subamendment—which you could perhaps read out, as you've read out the whole motion several times—has anything to do with the subamendment I made.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

If I may, Mr. Chair, the point is that the subamendment of the Liberal Party members talks about the oil and gas industry. I'm sorry, folks, but it is not the oil and gas industry that has not achieved the target; it is the federal government, after nine years, that has failed to achieve the goal.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

On a point of clarification, Mr. Chair, the subamendment is not about the oil and gas industry. The subamendment is asking that this study be focused on the very issues Mr. Deltell is talking about, which is how we can meet our targets. That is the emergency.

In Mr. Deltell's preamble, he stated that he wanted to hear opposition parties' ideas on how we could do that. In fact, the oil and gas industry is the only sector that has increased—

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Chair, this seems like debate.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Agreed. It's debate.

Mr. Deltell, you still have the floor.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Chair, at the risk of repeating myself, I'll conclude with the following remarks.

The current attitude of government members is unfortunate. However, it shows how much the government is out of touch with people's reality. The government feels so desperate that it's angry about the environment commissioner's report, which unfortunately contains some stark facts. The report finds that rhetoric doesn't help to achieve objectives. Above all, the Liberals make the figures say what they want. As the environment commissioner pointed out, emission reduction estimates remain unreliable and emission reductions and projections lack transparency.

After nine years of lecturing everyone, the Liberals have this to show for their record on the environment.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Thank you, Mr. Deltell.

I have Ms. Taylor Roy, and then Mr. Leslie after her.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Hang on. I'm just reading the order. We have Ms. Taylor Roy, Mr. Leslie, Ms. Collins, Mr. Longfield and Mr. Sauvé.

Go ahead on the point of order.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

There are two points of order, Mr. Chair.

One, I would like clarity [Technical difficulty—Editor] I believe we all agreed on November 20.

Also, my friend and colleague seems confused. He keeps implying that the emissions are from the government. They are actually from the oil and gas sector, not [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Someone at bigger play.... Half of it was cut out. You may want to check on your connection, Mr. van Koeverden, if it comes down to a vote.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Would you like me to try again on my point of order, Mr. Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

No. That's good. You brought up two points.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

I'd like to make sure that my points of order were on the record.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Neither was a point of order, by the way.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

The first one was indeed a point of order. I asked for clarity on the November 20 meeting.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

That didn't come through at all.