Environment Committee on Feb. 15th, 2024

[George McGraw]

That's quite right. My only guess is that water, for so long, has been an issue that countries like the U.S. and Canada can ignore, because water is perceived as being so abundant, but now we know, from our recent experience and from learning from generations of folks who have lived without it, how deeply inequitable water access is across these places where we assumed it was abundant. We assumed that everyone who lived in Canada achieved a universal standard of access to the basic necessities of life, and now we know that's not the case.

I'm not sure why Canada hasn't taken action in the last few years to do this at a federal level, but we're behind. We need not only recognition of this right but some criteria around enforceability to give it some teeth and allow people to advocate for themselves. There's really no time like the present. Our neighbours are suffering tremendously.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much.

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have about 30 seconds left.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

In that case, I will go back to Lorra Hines and talk about the involvement of young people in finding sustainable solutions for the future of water.

Can you give us some examples of countries that include young people in their reflections on water?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Lorra Hines, please be brief.

[Emily Lorra Hines]

Absolutely. The Netherlands has a water youth network. You can look at One water out of the U.K. and the University of Oxford. I would say that Europe is doing quite well with this and, arguably, America as well. We also have the North American Youth Parliament for Water, whose focus is on the Columbia basin, and they can definitely get more help in Waterlution in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thanks very much.

We're going to have to truncate the second round a bit because there's a vote later, and we don't have the leeway to go over time.

We'll do a three-minute round, Mr. Mazier.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Phare, the International Joint Commission sent a letter to the federal government on September 14, 2020, regarding a water agency and you signed that letter. Do you mind submitting that letter to the committee so we can use it in our study?

[Merrell-Ann Phare]

Absolutely, we'll submit it.

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

The letter stated, “Constitutionally, the [Canada Water Agency] cannot take oversight for all water management in Canada”.

Can you provide in writing the analysis that led to this statement and any constitutional limitations of water management in Canada?

[Merrell-Ann Phare]

We can certainly undertake to get you something on that, yes.

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

The letter also stated the commission:

...endeavours to consider and balance a wide range of interests in formulating its advice, including municipal water and wastewater, commercial shipping, hydroelectric power, agriculture and aquaculture, industry, recreational users, and the needs of shoreline property owners.

Could you provide in writing a list of interests and concerns these specific entities have raised to the commission on the topic of fresh water, so the committee is aware?

[Merrell-Ann Phare]

Yes, we can.

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

The letter also—

[Merrell-Ann Phare]

To be clear, that's mostly in the context of the Great Lakes, but we'll provide you what we have, yes.

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

The letter also mentioned there are ecological challenges associated with managing watersheds in Canada and the U.S. Could you provide in writing a list of the ecological challenges the letter is referring to?

[Merrell-Ann Phare]

Yes, we can.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, I would like to—

[Merrell-Ann Phare]

Some of it might be in the form of reports we've written in the past as well, or new information, so there could be an amount of info.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, I would like to give notice of the following motion—

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to speak to that motion.

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

I move:

Given that:

Justin Trudeau’s Minister of Environment has publicly stated, “Our government has made the decision to stop investing in new road infrastructure”;

Trudeau’s Minister of Environment has also stated that funding new roads and highways is not needed because public transit and current road infrastructure is good enough—while Canadians in large urban centres like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal spend hours in traffic each week, and rural Canadians do not have access to public transit;

Canadians living in rural and remote areas also rely on new roads and highways to raise their families;

rural Canadians don’t have the luxury of being able to walk to work or to a doctor’s office;

rural Canadians cannot rely on a subway to get to the nearest city, because there are no subway stations in rural communities;

many municipal and provincial governments across Canada were rightfully outraged when Minister Guilbeault announced the Liberal government will stop funding new road infrastructure;

Justin Trudeau’s Minister of Environment is also plowing ahead with his plan to ban all gas-powered, passenger vehicles, preventing millions of Canadians from using a vehicle;

many Canadians, especially rural, northern and indigenous Canadians, are worried they won’t be able to live or work because Minister Guilbeault’s policies will directly deprive them of owning a vehicle;

no material purchase provides Canadians with more freedom to live and work than the purchase of a personal vehicle, especially in a nation as large as Canada;

the recent announcement from Minister Guilbeault to stop funding new roads and highways comes at a time when Justin Trudeau is deliberately increasing the price of fuel on Canadians;

the Liberal government plans to increase their failed-carbon tax on April 1 by 23%;

the Minister of Environment also stated earlier this month that “the government does not measure the annual amount of emissions that are directly—

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I have a point of order.

Mr. Chair, is this a speech or a motion? We have witnesses I'm dying to ask questions, so could we have the motion, please?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I understand.

Mr. Mazier has the floor and he's giving notice of a motion, so he can do that.

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

Thank you.

I'll start that part again:

the Minister of Environment also stated earlier this month that “the government does not measure the annual amount of emissions that are directly reduced by federal carbon pricing”;

Canadians are sick and tired of this Liberal government’s ideological crusade against vehicle ownership in Canada; and

Canadians are also sick and tired of this government’s constant and undemocratic tactics of always shutting down debate on issues that they expect addressed;

the committee urge Minister Guilbeault to publicly testify before the committee for no less than two hours to explain his radical plan to stop funding roads and highways across Canada; and report to the House of Commons that Minister Guilbeault’s plan to stop funding new roads and ban gas-powered vehicles is not an environmental policy; it is government-imposed deprivation.

Thank you.