Mr. Speaker, at the end of my speech earlier, I had the feeling something I said had raised your eyebrows, but I did not want to panic anybody about nuclear energy.
I wanted to make people aware of the fact that, at present, nuclear energy is not clean. It produces waste which cannot be really disposed of for now.
However, I would like to get back to the speech by my colleague from Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière which I found excellent. Of course, he praised my area, and that made me happy. This does not happen very often. So I should enjoy it.
He mentioned, among other things, shipyards. If only we had had a program to invest in clean energy. One must understand that the future of wind energy is not only on land.
In the future, we will have platforms out to sea, on which windmills would be installed. This has already started in other parts of the world. If such platforms are set up at sea, shipyards such as Verreault Navigation, at les Méchins, and the one in Lévis could benefit from it. Not only could the Lévis shipyard benefit from it, but it could be its future because this technology could be exported across the world, across the whole planet, to replace nuclear energy, which we will never be able to properly master and which will continue to produce a lot of waste.
I would simply like to quote what the Minister of Natural Resources wrote recently. I am doing it with regard to the proposed amendment. I believe this will help us understand something. This is what the minister said, talking about the backers of companies that finance nuclear energy. I will read slowly so that everybody understands properly.
Lenders were faced with unknown financial obligations that may exceed by far their commercial interest. The consequence has been to discourage private sector interest in lending to the nuclear industry.
If lenders are faced with unknown financial obligation, how about the public? What does it mean for the public? I quote the minister, who said that lenders were faced with unknown risks. So is the public.