Evidence of meeting #91 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 debate.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I have to sort this out. We will have another little break here.
I'm sorry, but apparently it's a new motion. It's not resuming debate.
I apologize, Mr. van Koeverden. There was a bit of misunderstanding.
Mr. Leslie.
December 12th, 2023 / 11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
As a point of clarification, when can you ask for the floor to be at the top of the speakers list? Does it matter if it's during a vote or not?
What do the Standing Orders say on when you can request to be at the top of the speakers list?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Are you saying that Mr. van Koeverden doesn't have a right to speak on this? Why?
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
He asked you to be on the speakers list right after we voted. In the middle of the vote being called by the clerk, he asked to be on the speakers list.
My question is whether that is allowed in the Standing Orders, or does it need to be at the conclusion of the vote before you can add yourself to the speakers list?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
That's a good question. I don't have the answer. We will take another pause.
It doesn't really matter when the person wants to put their hand up to get on the list. I don't see that as an issue. It doesn't matter who raises their hand and when; I'm going to put them on the list.
I have Longfield, Taylor Roy, Chatel, and Madame Pauzé is before all of you.
Is there anyone else?
Mr. van Koeverden, you can continue.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Just a moment, Mr. van Koeverden. We have a point of order from Mr. Leslie.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
This is just another point of clarification.
Is this the same motion that was raised?
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Is it a different motion? I noted that the member said he was going to “re-raise” the motion, so I'm confused as to whether it's the same text or it's different.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
It was a notice of motion, which is different from raising it.
I made a notice of motion and circulated it so that I could bring it up today.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
It's a different one. It's not the same one that we had adjourned debate on.
He doesn't need to give notice. He did give notice, but he doesn't need to give notice, because it's future business—which, by the way, is not in camera.
Go ahead, Mr. van Koeverden.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
In the context of COP28 coming to a conclusion in the coming hours, I think it's important that we discuss some of the resolutions and some of the progress we have made as a country and as an international community.
I know the Conservatives are eager to discuss their—
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
I don't know when we're going to flip to the witnesses. Is this going to cut into the witness time?
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We have until 1:30 today. I'd like to give the witnesses an hour. I think we can go until 12:30 and then have the witnesses until 1:30. It depends on how quickly we get through all of this business.
Go ahead, Mr. van Koeverden.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In the context of the Conservatives' only plan to address affordability, I did want to raise, once again, that the economic analysis of Canada's backstop carbon pricing system indicates that if the carbon tax were removed immediately, it would cost all lower-income and middle-income families $300 in 2024.
This affordability plan that the Conservatives are peddling, and have been for the last couple of years, would cost Canadians hundreds of dollars a year. It's no affordability plan. I would urge the Conservatives to bring forward some legitimate evidence that their “axe the tax” strategy would actually help Canadians, because every economist in Canada is telling them, clearly, that it would cost them hundreds of dollars a year.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Mr. Chair, can we have a copy of this motion?
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
It was sent around on the seventh, but we can send it around again.
Ms. Pauzé, go ahead.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
With regard to Mr. van Koeverden's motion, I would like to propose a friendly amendment to point a). After the word “that”, I suggest adding “, with the expected scientific advances,”. The sentence would then read as follows:
a) The federal government is making monumental investments in technologies that, with the expected scientific advances, will reduce emissions in the oil and gas sector;
Here is the reason I am proposing this amendment. From everything I've been able to read on carbon capture and storage, no one—except, perhaps, the oil companies—and no scientists are saying that this method will be effective, that it is a clear solution, that it is imminent. There is indeed a lot of investment in these technologies, but we do not yet know whether this method will be effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But that's why—
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Yes, of course.
The motion would read as follows: a) The federal government is making monumental investments in technologies that, with the expected scientific advances, will reduce emissions in the oil and gas sector;
I am moving this amendment because we are really not sure that this technology will be used.