Environment Committee on Sept. 21st, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

When we discussed your motion, it was all under committee business.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Okay. I was just clarifying where we were in terms of—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Technically we can debate it now, yes.

Mr. van Koeverden, go ahead

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, you have the floor.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

This is not the only motion we've received since Tuesday, so here's what I'm wondering: Is it the committee's job to send congratulations for things that are going well and censure for things that aren't? If so, that would be never-ending.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

If I understand correctly, we can do what we want.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Really? Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Just a second. I have Mr. van Koeverden and....

It's Mr. Mazier and Mr. Kram. I'm sorry about that. I was looking at the wrong list.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I think I'll just reiterate. I'll read the motion again just so we're all clear on it.

That the committee express its disappointment with the regulatory environment created by this government that has led to tidal power projects pulling out of Canada and acknowledges that one of the primary factors contributing to the departure of these capital investments has been recent changes that have created an intricate regulatory landscape.

I would like to make an amendment to add to the end of the motion “and that the committee report to the House”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay. Do we understand that's the amendment—“and that the committee report to the House?” I don't think we need that in writing.

I have Mr. Kram, and I have Mr. van Koeverden.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

We're now on the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, right.

Are you speaking to the amendment, Mr. Perkins?

Does anyone else want to speak to the amendment? It's pretty straightforward.

Go ahead.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank Mr. Mazier for the amendment. I think it's a great idea not just to express the disappointment of the committee amongst ourselves but to actually do it in a way that reports it to the House. I think it's important that all 338 members of Parliament understand the disappointment of the environment committee at the cancellation of these tidal projects in the Bay of Fundy.

I don't think there is perhaps as great an awareness as there might be among some of us in Nova Scotia about the importance of these projects and what has happened in recent months with regard to the regulatory changes and interventions by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans into tidal power projects. I think it would be helpful, because obviously tabling a motion in the House—as much as I'm sure there are many people online right now, through ParlVu, watching the great work of this committee—might provide for a slightly larger audience, as happens when things get tabled and reported back to the House, than we get here. I would appreciate the consideration by all the members here of taking that extra step in supporting this motion to also make sure that all of our colleagues and the general public in Canada are aware of the disappointment that we've had in the government's actual cancellation of renewable energy projects, especially the first energy project to ever produce electricity to power homes and generate revenue from Nova Scotia Power back to that private sector company.

Isn't that what we want?

We want to be able to harness the power not only of the tides but also of private sector capital to do these kinds of works, rather than just having them all funded by the taxpayer. Private sector capital actually found a way to successfully harness the power of the Bay of Fundy through a phenomenal new invention and a phenomenal new creation. Unfortunately, we're losing that great technology with the decision. I think the broader House needs to understand that in the context of the importance of this and in the context of trying to get to net zero in our grid in Nova Scotia. The government doesn't seem to want to help. They are putting road blocks in the way of Nova Scotia getting to it. When Tim Houston, the premier, legitimately says, “How come you're coming into Nova Scotia on July 1 and picking the pockets of our taxpayers on the carbon tax?” and will not actually—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Excuse me. We have a point of order, Mr. Perkins.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

If the member is interested in repeating himself for the rest of the meeting that's his prerogative. However, if there is an opportunity for other members to engage, I find it irrelevant for him to continually repeat himself.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay.

We have Mr. Mazier.

On the amendment, I have only Mr. Mazier so far.

Mr. Mazier, go ahead.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to follow up on what my colleague Mr. Perkins was saying about the importance of reporting back to the House.

Really, if you look at the notice of motion again, it's really about how terrible the atmosphere to create these kinds of projects in Canada is now. This government has successfully scared away billions and billions and billions of dollars of capital and scared away not only the capital but also the innovation. It's taken away a whole bunch of innovation and innovative people who really wanted to make a change. This government keeps on penalizing. Every time a province wants to stand up and say, “Here, I want to try this. I want to do this,” Bill C-69 zips in there and just absolutely creams them.

I know. I experienced this back in Manitoba. Back in 2016, when the government first brought in Bill C-69, I believe, and this whole carbon tax regime, we thought it was a really good idea to engage. I was a farmer at the time. I thought we would try to elongate with it.

I think it's really important that we get this motion passed and get on with the vote.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Here's what I propose.

Wait—I have Mr. Deltell.

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

I call the question, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Actually, that's what I was going to suggest.

[An hon. member]

I'm still on the list to talk about this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That was for the main motion, but we're on the amendment now. We're on the amendment to report back to the House. You're on the list for the main motion. So are Madam Pauzé, Mr. Bachrach, Mr. van Koeverden and Mr. Kram.

Right now we're just voting on whether we should report to the House if ever we adopt this motion.

If we can go to a vote, then, because it's one o'clock, I would suggest that we continue this discussion on Tuesday.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We'll continue the debate on the main motion on Tuesday. I assume we're okay with adjourning.