House of Commons Hansard #15 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was museums.

Topics

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Mylène Freeman NDP Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that was really terrible about the way the former minister of heritage went about that answer was he said that all these artifacts would be available to my local museums.

What he does not realize is there is actually 10,000 artifacts at Musée régional d'Argenteuil.

There are so many artifacts that they do not have enough room to display them all. That is incredible for a small museum in Carillon, in the Argenteuil region. Not many people live there, but the museum brings people to the area. Those 10,000 artifacts are all properly protected in the museum's attic.

It really is too bad that these museums are being ignored by the Department of Canadian Heritage. It makes local heritage seem unimportant. Although I may want the Canadian Museum of Civilization to remain a major attraction forever, it will no longer bring people to this region, to the local museums. They all work in tandem.

The government wants to reorganize how the region's tourism works, but it is not going about it in the most inclusive manner, unfortunately.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

NDP

Mathieu Ravignat NDP Pontiac, QC

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not want to admit it, but it is rather clear to the majority of Canadians that the Conservatives have realized that a museum can be used as a propaganda tool for the state.

Basically, the Conservatives want to impose their vision of Canada and its history on Canadians. I am from the Pontiac, an area not far from the Canadian Museum of Civilization. In my region, everyone knows there is no problem. The reality is that Canada's history is diverse and marked by several civilizations.

Thanks to the professionalism of its archaeologists and historians, this museum does excellent work. It is not the government's role to interfere with the work of professionals to rewrite the history of this great country in which we live.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague, who gave a wonderful and very interesting speech, what she thinks of this government's interference, which basically amounts to Conservative propaganda.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

NDP

Mylène Freeman NDP Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my hon. colleague and neighbour from Pontiac.

This is interference, pure and simple. I mentioned this interference in my speech, as well as how clueless the Conservatives seem to be in terms of the importance of this issue for our region.

That is what is so unfortunate. They are laying off archeologists, archivists and librarians, then they claim to know what they are doing. It is clear that their actions are purely political and that they have no real interest in history.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, it saddens me to be the last member to speak to Bill C-7, An Act to amend the Museums Act in order to establish the Canadian Museum of History and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. Once again we are subject to time allocation.

I am certain that many others, not just official opposition members but also Conservative members, would have much to say about this subject.

We are talking about the Canadian Museum of Civilization. I am probably the only person in the House who watched it being built. I was a young law student working for the firm Beaudry Bertrand located at 25 Laurier Street. The Canadian Museum of Civilization was being built right in front of our office as a result of promises made by various governments in the early 1980s. The promises had to do with my lovely Outaouais region, which is just on the other side of the river. There was a huge imbalance between the number of Canadian public servants located on the Ontario side and the number located on the Quebec side.

One of the many promises made by the Conservatives and the Liberals over the years was that they would build a museum on the Quebec side. That is how the great Canadian Museum of Civilization came to be built. At the time, it was called the Museum of Man. The name was changed because it was discriminatory in the face of gender equality. It therefore became the great Canadian Museum of Civilization.

Why do we object so strongly? I was stunned when I saw this bill introduced. The former Canadian heritage minister is upset because we have the audacity to question his brilliant idea to change the nature of the museum, but it functions quite well. Museums inspire people to become more cultured and are an extremely powerful tool for developing tourism and the economy. The Canadian Museum of Civilization works very well in the Outaouais region, so well in fact that it is probably the top-performing museum, according to statistics. However, the government wants to change the nature of the museum.

The Conservative government—through its mouthpiece, the minister at the time—told us there had been consultations, but they were meaningless consultations. Real consultations would include asking the opinion of the public and partners, like Outaouais Tourism, for example. Does a certain museum need renovations, a different mandate or a new name? Those are the questions that consultations should endeavour to answer.

That is not at all the kind of consultation that took place. An announcement was made. At one point, the government said that it would provide $25 million to change a given room, and then it dangled that money in front of the City of Gatineau, asking if it agreed with the changes. Who would spit on $25 million? I do not know many people who would—

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh! Oh!

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

Order, please. The hon. member for Gatineau has the floor for another four minutes.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is funny to hear the Conservatives yelling because we are talking about the economy and tourism development, which is so important. They are putting a dark cloud over a region by changing something that was working very well. This is so unbelievable, it just boggles my mind.

I find it especially appalling that they continue to claim that meaningful consultation took place. Every time I heard any of the debates in the House on the previous Bill C-49, which has become Bill C-7, I heard the minister say he had the support of the City of Gatineau and its mayor. The Conservatives are playing with words and doing some fancy footwork with those kinds of comments. They are putting words in people's mouths, words those people never said. In that sense, I feel as though many Canadians are being misled. The Conservatives want to give the impression that they are changing something for the better.

I do not know how the government is going to react. The region is already struggling in terms of the public service breakdown, unless the government would have us believe that the job cuts made in Ottawa will achieve the famous 75:25 ratio that has always been promised to the Outaouais. Cutting jobs in Ottawa does not mean greater balance. That is not job creation.

This is exactly what is happening with this museum. It is a major concern for the economic players in my region and also for Outaouais Tourism. Obviously, when a minister shows up with a cheque for $25 million, people may be a bit embarrassed to speak up about certain topics. What I can say is that this has caused a wave of concern throughout the region.

I encourage people on the other side to do something other than just attend self-congratulatory events. They should go to the museum on a day when tourists are visiting so they can see what brings people to the Canadian Museum of Civilization. I am not saying that a museum of Canadian history is not important or necessary, or that Canadians would not all be better off learning more about our history, but why change the mandate of a great museum? As my colleague from Pontiac was saying, is this being done simply to turn it into a state propaganda tool? This creates rather serious problems to be sure.

Obviously, the Conservatives were ordered to vote a certain way. This is unfortunate. I have seen this museum grow and flourish. The Conservatives may laugh, but I can tell them that our region is close enough to Parliament to hear them laugh. People will remember. The members on the other side found it very funny to see that they could change a winning formula. We will see whether the new approach works. Meanwhile, as they say, if this causes some tourism and economic problems in a certain region, who cares? What was it that the Prime Minister said? He said, “I couldn't care less.” This is the message the Conservatives are sending out. In 2015, the people of the Outaouais will vote to tell the government: “We couldn't care less.”

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

It being 6:10 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the third reading stage of the bill now before the House.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

All those opposed will please say nay.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Third readingCanadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

In my opinion, the yeas have it.

(And five or more members having risen:)

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #9

Canadian Museum of History ActGovernment Orders

6:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I declare the motion carried.

(Bill read the third time and passed)

The House resumed from November 5 consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion — Instruction to Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and EthicsBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

6:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of the member for Wascana relating to the business of supply.

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Vote #10

Business of SupplyGovernment Orders

7 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I declare the motion defeated.

I wish to inform the House that because of the delay, there will be no private members' business today.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

November 6th, 2013 / 7 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin this evening's adjournment proceedings a little unusually. As I look across the way, I see that when I finish my four minutes on the subject of my question about Monday, relating to the upcoming climate negotiations in Warsaw, we will be hearing from my friend, the member of Parliament for Oshawa. I wish to congratulate him on recently becoming the parliamentary secretary on the environment. I enjoyed working with him enormously when he was the parliamentary secretary for health.

The issue before us is critical. There is no point in minimizing it. Tonight we are talking about the single greatest threat to our children having a livable world and to us having a future.

The talks that will begin on Monday, November 11, in Warsaw, Poland, is the 19th time that parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change will have met to try to advance the agenda. No one can claim, at this point, that we have even come close to addressing the severity of the crisis. It grows year to year.

Canada was once a country that contributed to the forward progress of the community of nations when assembled in these negotiations. We contributed enormously back in the late eighties and early nineties. In 1992, Canada was the first industrialized country, in fact the first country in the world, to both sign and ratify the convention that still gathers nations of the world together, as we will see next week in Warsaw, Poland.

The advice from the scientific community has largely been ignored throughout the world. Those countries that have taken on targets have largely met them. I point to the European Union, which has largely met its Kyoto targets.

We know from the advice of scientists that we are running perilously close to something that can only be called a point of no return. It is a place where greenhouse gases build to such a level in the atmosphere that we will be unable as a human society, as a civilization, to arrest the threat of what scientists refer to now as runaway global warming, with the heating of the planet releasing, on its own, new sources of heating of the planet, and so on, in what are called positive feedback loops.

On Monday I put it to the Minister of the Environment that I will be attending the COP 19 negotiations in Poland. As far as I know, I am the only member of Parliament attending, other than the Minister of the Environment. There certainly is no longer the traditional practice of Canada engaging and involving opposition members of Parliament in government delegations. However, that is a minor point compared to the threat.

The Prime Minister of this country attended the Conference of the Parties that took place in Copenhagen in 2009 at COP 15 and took on extremely weak targets. I think it must be said that collectively the targets taken on in the Copenhagen accord are not sufficient to avoid part of that accord, which is to avoid a two-degree global average temperature increase against the levels that existed before the industrialized revolution.

For Canada, that means we must reduce our emissions to 607 megatonnes by 2020. The most recent report from Environment Canada states that we are farther from the target in 2013 than we were in 2012, and instead of 607 megatonnes we will be at 734 megatonnes. That is a clear failure of leadership and of programs. It is a complete condemnation of the so-called sector by sector approach advanced by this administration.

At the same time in Copenhagen, the Prime Minister committed to advancing funds to a $100-billion-a-year fund for global climate assistance to developing countries to both reduce their emissions and to adapt.

As my time and the planet's time run out, will this administration and the Prime Minister keep their word and deliver greenhouse gas reductions and assistance to the developing world?

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

7:05 p.m.

Oshawa Ontario

Conservative

Colin Carrie ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the leader of the Green Party for her kind words. I am looking forward to working with her.

I want her to know that our government is committed to achieving Canada's targets, and our record speaks for itself. We will continue to take action with our sector-by-sector approach that has been achieving real results while fostering economic growth.

We are proceeding to systematically address all major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. So far our government has contributed to reducing Canada's emissions through stringent regulations for the transportation and the electricity sectors, two of the largest sources of emissions in Canada.

I would like to now take a moment to highlight some of the great achievements we have made so far.

First, Canada has strengthened its position as a world leader in clean energy production by becoming the first major coal user to ban future construction of traditional coal-fired electricity-generating units.

Second, and coming from Oshawa, I am proud to say that the 2025 passenger vehicles and light trucks will emit about half as many greenhouse gases as the 2008 models.

Third, greenhouse gas emissions from 2018 model year heavy-duty vehicles will be reduced by up to 23%.

Let me reiterate: our government's collective actions are achieving real results, and thanks to our actions, carbon emissions will go down close to 130 megatonnes from what they would have been under the Liberals.

This is a reduction equivalent to the elimination of 37 coal-fired electricity plants. We are accomplishing this without the NDP's carbon tax which, as members know, would raise the price of everything.

Between 2005 and 2011, greenhouse gas emissions have decreased by 4.8%. This is really important: emissions have decreased by 4.8%, while the economy has grown 8.4% and per capita emissions are at a historic low.

In addition to doing our part through the United Nations, we are also actively involved in forums such as the Arctic Council, the Montreal protocol, and the Climate and Clean Air Coalition to develop practical and collaborative initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and short-lived climate pollutants.

To address the second part of the member's question, I will point out that Canada has strong international commitments to support developing country mitigation and adaptation efforts. Our Conservative government, in partnership with other developed countries, has fully delivered on its first fast-start financing commitment, which provided $30 billion over the three-year period of 2010 to 2012. In fact, we exceeded the commitment by providing $33 billion.

As we can clearly see, the figures speak for themselves. Our government has committed to the largest-ever contribution to support international efforts to address climate change, a contribution that has supported mitigation and adaptation efforts in over 60 developing countries.

We remain committed to working with other countries to address climate change.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

7:10 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid the record does indeed speak for itself, and it speaks for itself very loudly that this country is failing the world and failing our children.

To correct a few of the things on the record, I think those in the House may have gotten the false impression that Canada had contributed $30 billion to the fast-start climate program. That is of course the contributions of all countries around the world.

Canada did put forward $1.2 billion, which is important, but it was only supposed to be a first step, not the whole commitment, and 74% of that was in loans, the largest level of loans of any country in the world. Others put forward real dollars, new and additional.

The only reason emissions have gone down in Canada at all is a combination of the recession of 2008 and Ontario's committing to close down its coal plants. This administration's car regulations are great, but we only did them to stay in concert with U.S. action, and the coal regulations will not take effect until I am 99 years old. Frankly, 40 years from now is not good enough to have regulations take effect.

We need real action, and we need it now.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

7:10 p.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, of course I will disagree with some of those comments.

I want the member to know that our government remains committed to transparency. Last month, we released the third Canada's Emissions Trends report. The report clearly shows that our sector-by-sector approach is getting real results.

Canadians should be proud of this incredible accomplishment. Our government will continue to make progress towards our targets.

Upcoming federal policies will contribute to additional emissions reductions, including in particular—and this is very important—oil and gas sector regulations, as was indicated in last month's Speech from the Throne.

Likewise, our government supports the efforts of the provinces and territories as well as consumers and businesses to lower their respective emissions.

I would like to address the matter of the Canadian delegation this year. As has been the case for the past several years, it will consist of government officials who take part in the government-to-government negotiations that are at the heart of the Conference of the Parties. Our Minister of the Environment looks forward to meeting with her international counterparts in Warsaw to continue addressing climate change.

If the member opposite would like to help Canada, then she should start by voting in favour of all the stuff we are doing, all our great initiatives.