Evidence of meeting #93 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you, Mr. Bachrach.
Before I turn the floor over to Mr. Strahl, I want to inform members that we, unfortunately, only have resources until 6 p.m. Because of the virtual translation, we would then have to switch from virtual to a crew who would have to come in, so we will have to end the meeting at 6 p.m. today.
I'll turn it over to you, Mr. Strahl, and then, if we have time, we'll go to Ms. Murray.
Mr. Strahl.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I, perhaps, am not as trusting of the government as Mr. Bachrach is, understandably. I do think he's heard a possible scenario, but these workers have also been told that 2030 is when this transition will be done by. I recognize that “done by” means it could be earlier, but I am not convinced that this is something that we should leave up to a cumbersome regulatory process in order to give those workers the opportunity to have the government live up to its promises.
Yes, the regulatory process takes time. With regard to the amendment, which I apologize for moving early—I misunderstood that—I want to be very clear that we are not talking about giving a free pass to thermal coal. We are simply talking about giving the workers the time they were promised for an orderly phase-out, as has been indicated.
That would be my question. This is not in, by the way, the Minister of Transport's mandate letter, as far as I'm aware. This is in the Minister of Environment's mandate letter.
Quite frankly, to tack this on to Bill C-33 without consulting with the ILWU and with the workers in Hinton, Alberta, is outrageous. We would never consider that this would be something that was appropriate.
I guess this would be a question I would ask the officials: Has Transport Canada entered into discussions with the ILWU or with workers at the Vista mine in Hinton, Alberta, to discuss the timeline for a phase-out on thermal coal exports?
5:55 p.m.
Director General, Marine Policy, Department of Transport
It has not, to the best of my knowledge. I think our colleagues at ECCC would be better positioned regarding the conversations in respect of the phase-out of coal.
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC
That's right, because they are actually having those conversations right now at Environment and Climate Change Canada. Perhaps Minister Guilbeault asked that we short-circuit all that and just tack it onto a transport bill, and the workers be damned.
I think this, again, is not the place this is intended to be done. A thermal coal phase-out is coming. Everyone knows it. No one's even fighting it, but they are fighting the idea that they would lose years off the transition timeline because they're already losing billions of dollars because of the timeline that there is. For companies, that's a risk they take with investment, I guess, in this Liberal government's investment climate. They take the risk that their projects will be cancelled because of the environment minister's mandate letter, which is neither here nor there.
I'm sorry, but it's not alarmist to alert the workers that their jobs are being dangled, and, quite frankly, we're told we aren't supposed to care about that. There's a process that is under way, that the government has under way, so it's either undermining its own negotiations or undermining its own promises to workers by supporting this sort of amendment, which will, by the admission of the witnesses, short-circuit, by years, the period workers were promised for transition.
We won't apologize for standing up for those workers, even though they're in an industry that the government doesn't like. We've done it before with the oil sands. We've done it before with mining. We've done it before with forestry. We will continue to stand up for workers when their jobs are threatened by the actions of government.
That's what we're doing here today. We're saying to protect the negotiations that are under way. Protect the timeline you already agreed to with those workers, and stop messing with their livelihoods and threatening their livelihoods by years.
I just think that is something we will always do. We will always stand up for those workers when their jobs are threatened and say that it should be done in an appropriate way. You're phasing out thermal coal, but this is not the way you do it, by tacking on something that we never heard from witnesses and that we never heard from the minister. This was not part of this bill until this amendment. This is outside the scope of everything we've heard. I think it's entirely appropriate for us to stand up for those workers.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you very much, Mr. Strahl.
Before I adjourn, I just want to read something in. There was a quick correction that needed to be made, which was shared with me by our legislative clerk, with regard to subamendment NDP-15.1. It's a small correction.
We had voted on the following text, “In the case of a port authority specified in subsection 37.3(a)”. That doesn't actually exist, so I need unanimous consent to change it to, “In the case of a port authority specified in paragraph 37(3)(a)”.
It's a very small change, but it's important for the legislative clerk and the team to be able do their work.
Do I have unanimous consent to do that?
6 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.