“Willing partners” seems like an interesting point. There's some discussion among the provinces regarding a pipeline to the Pacific coast right now and very specific, purposeful language in the discussion document, which I assume is intentional, as part of spurring that discussion. It's something I think we should be aware of. I hope people will be giving comments on that, particularly those in B.C. I want to see a pipeline going through there, but the federal government creating this could be problematic. I'm curious about whether you could report back, over time, on what that turns into through the consultation.
Madam Chair, I would like to move the motion I tabled verbally on Tuesday, regarding a request to the Prime Minister's Office on the letter discussed in the media by CBC/Radio-Canada in which 14 Liberal MPs sent their concerns about the government's environmental policy direction to the Prime Minister.
This is a group of elected members of Parliament raising concerns with their Prime Minister about environmental policies. If those concerns are serious enough to put in writing to the Prime Minister—and I assume, to be leaked by one or more members of that group—then I believe they are serious enough for the members of this committee to see, because members of Parliament have a duty to be open and honest with the Canadians who sent us here.
I'm very open and honest about my criticisms and concerns with government environmental policies. Each and every day, I get the pleasure of sitting around this table and in the House of Commons. If Liberal MPs are privately warning the Prime Minister that his government is backsliding on the environment, then Canadians deserve to know exactly what those concerns are, especially given that they are coming from members of the Liberal caucus.
The environment committee exists to examine these very issues. We can't do our jobs properly if relevant concerns from members of the governing caucus—those who should know the most about what policies are being undertaken behind the scenes—are kept secret simply because they are politically inconvenient for the government of the day.
This is about accountability. Liberal MPs can't say one thing privately to the Prime Minister and another thing publicly to their constituents. In my view, Canadians deserve to know where their elected representatives stand, especially on questions as consequential as pipelines, major projects, economic development and the future of Canada's entire regulatory system.
Madam Chair, sunlight matters, and if these concerns are legitimate, as I assume they are, they should be aired publicly. If the government disagrees with them, it can explain exactly why. Keeping them secret, though, serves only one purpose—to protect the government from political embarrassment. I assume that is why this letter was leaked by one of the signatories, and it is not good enough simply to protect yourselves politically. Canadians have a right to know what concerns are being raised inside the government about its own environmental agenda. Given that we are in the environment committee, perhaps there are signatories within this room.
I hope that we take this opportunity to pass this motion, bring this issue to light and see what specific concerns the 14 signatories have regarding this letter sent to the Prime Minister.
Thank you, Madam Chair.