Evidence of meeting #44 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fillmore.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Marie-Hélène Sauvé  Committee Researcher

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Along those same lines, at the October 20 meeting we heard from Mr. Dale Austin from Cameco Corporation, the uranium mining company. He was, I would say, one of the more supportive witnesses of the bill, and he was very clear that there is no way to get to net zero without nuclear energy. Therefore, I don't know how this bill could possibly proceed if this amendment proceeds.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Kram.

Mr. Masse is next.

November 17th, 2022 / 4:20 p.m.

NDP

Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the interventions.

I want to be clear that I will be supporting this amendment. The reason is that I've been actively opposed to the storage proposal of a DGR, a deep geological repository, in the Bruce-Huron area.

For members who are not aware, this is to build a nuclear storage facility within a kilometre of the Great Lakes. It would actually be the height of the CN Tower. There was actually a turning down of that proposal by Saugeen First Nation, and then the subsequent proposal just went next door to the Saugeen First Nation and has actually created quite a conflict.

To conclude, this is a policy that Canada promised never to do under then foreign affairs minister Joe Clark in the Brian Mulroney government. Therefore, until there's resolution to this situation, I will not be supporting the expansion at this point in time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

Over to you, Mr. Perkins.

4:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate Mr. Masse's position, but there is no way that we can get to net zero if in places other than the Prairies, we were to eliminate our nuclear energy, whether it was Ontario or in my part of the world, New Brunswick. The New Brunswick government, as part of their strategy to get off the Saudi Arabian oil that we're required to burn in Atlantic Canada, is looking to expand the small modular nuclear program and make that an important part of the net-zero carbon economy for the Atlantic region.

To lose the opportunity for that initiative and to lose that tool available to us for the Prairies in this bill would be going against the goal of getting our country to net zero.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Perkins.

It doesn't look like anyone else in the room or online has any comments.

Seeing as we don't have consensus on PV‑1, I will call for a recorded division.

(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

That brings us to G‑7.

Do we have a mover?

Go ahead, Mr. Fillmore.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Members may recall that during the previous discussion at the committee when we were discussing nuclear energy, it had been framed in the original drafting, I think, as a new form of energy, but there was an intervention that reminded us all that in fact there is a long history in Canada of nuclear energy. It's not a new energy source. This amendment amends the bill to reflect the fact that it's not a new energy source and simply would replace line 22 on page 2 with the following: “make use of all sources of energy, including nuclear”.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Fillmore.

Do we have any other comments on G‑7? It doesn't look like it.

Shall G‑7 carry?

(Amendment agreed to)

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Now we are on CPC‑ 6.

Do we have a mover?

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS

Yes, Mr. Chair.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS

The simplest way to support the purpose of this amendment, I'll say it's to try to moderate the top-down orders from Ottawa when there are already other vehicles available for this consultation. We would like to continue to push for this amendment and approach this part of the bill by modifying it by saying “supporting the continued development of”, as opposed to “integrating”, which was the original language.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Perkins. Are there any comments?

Go ahead, Mr. Lemire.

4:25 p.m.

Bloc

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

We oppose this amendment, so can it be adopted on division? Otherwise, I would like a recorded division, please.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

My understanding is that CPC‑6 can be adopted on division, if that is the wish of the committee.

(Amendment agreed to on division)

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

We are now G‑8.

Do we have a mover?

The floor is yours, Mr. Fillmore.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

This amendment is based on the testimony of a number of witnesses—for example, the Alberta Irrigation Districts Association and the Canadian Cattle Association—that large water projects, irrigation projects, should be included in the scope of this study. We are simply adding a phrase “including large water projects”.

It goes like this. We would replace line 32 on page 2 in clause 3 with the following:

(f) preparing infrastructure projects, including large water projects, that facilitate

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you.

Are there any comments on amendment G-8?

Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS

Just to clarify the interpretation, would adding “large water projects” to this bill mean that if this bill passes and there was a large water project on the Prairies, it would not be required to go through this Ottawa-driven consultation process?

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Go ahead, Mr. Fillmore.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If we look at the framing on page 2, we see that it starts as follows:

Content

(3) The framework must include measures that promote economic sustainability and growth and employment in the Prairie provinces by

Then we'll skip down to paragraph 3(3)(f), the subject of this amendment. If the proposed amendment is added to the paragraph, it would then say, “preparing infrastructure projects, including large water projects, that facilitate adaptation to climate change and mitigation of its adverse effects.”

This is really in direct response to, for example, the testimony from the Canadian Cattle Association:

I can say that the eastern part of the Prairies was impacted by pretty significant flooding this year as well. We're just seeing major shifts one way or the other. Critically, we need systems that make us all more resilient. To the degree that this bill would help with that, we're definitely supportive.

There's a similar quote from the Alberta Irrigation Districts Association that I could offer, if asked.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Fillmore.

Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS

I appreciate that, but I'm not sure why, in this paragraph of the bill, we'd be picking out just water projects. I believe they would already be covered. I know I asked the question in reverse the last time, so I'll ask it the opposite way this time.

Isn't it a sort of general clause now about preparing “infrastructure projects”? It doesn't eliminate any infrastructure project from being under this, so I'm not sure why we need to list just this one particular type.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Thank you, Mr. Perkins, for your comment.

I don't know, Mr. Fillmore, if you want to volunteer a comment. Otherwise, I see there is probably disagreement on this amendment.

Hearing no comment, I will call the vote. I will ask the clerk to proceed.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Amendment G-8 is defeated.

CPC-7 has been withdrawn.

Shall clause 3 as amended carry?

(Clause 3 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 4)