Debates of Nov. 19th, 2014

Aboriginal Affairs

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question from October 10 deals with a matter that is now before the courts, so it would be inappropriate for me to touch on certain details. I can, however, use my allotted time to speak about the review process, the Site C clean energy project, and the potential benefits if the project proceeds.

Site C underwent a rigorous review by an independent panel that was jointly established with British Columbia. The environmental assessment met the requirements of both the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, and the B.C. Environmental Assessment Act. As Canadians expect, we avoided duplication and delivered on our goal of one project, one review.

Public hearings were held in the Fort St. John region of British Columbia. The process included extensive, meaningful, and respectful consultations with first nations. The process drew upon federal and provincial scientific and technical experts. The process provided an opportunity for experts outside government to weigh in and provide a variety of information both for and against the project. The panel explicitly recognized the effective engagement of the public and aboriginal groups. The result was a thorough and comprehensive report that has informed the positive environmental assessment decisions of both governments.

The federal government is committed to making environmental assessment decisions based on the best available scientific evidence and to balancing economic and environmental considerations. This is what we have done for Site C. Construction of Site C would translate into about 10,000 direct person years of employment until 2024, and when indirect and induced jobs are added in, that figure climbs to 29,000 person years of employment.

This project would benefit future generations. Site C would support jobs and economic growth through clean renewable and dependable energy over the next 100 years. Over the life of the project, Site C would help mitigate the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada by preventing the discharge of between 34 and 76 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent.

It is now up to the government of B.C. to make an investment decision. If the project does proceed, British Columbia Hydro will be obligated to fulfill specific conditions, including the implementation of mitigation measures identified by the Minister of the Environment. A failure to do so would be a violation of the federal law.

In closing, I want to remind the House that the legally binding nature of these federal conditions is a result of legislative changes passed by the House in 2012.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the joint environmental review, federal and provincial, of Site C was quite scathing in its findings of the lack of economics in BC Hydro's projections. It also was very clear that there was going to be massive environmental damage and loss of farmland. The report was anything but unequivocal: it clearly stated that there would be losses that were not capable of mitigation.

As to the claims that Site C is anything like renewable or green, large-scale hydro facilities of this type are specifically not included globally in terms that would be applicable to renewable energy. The State of California, for instance, in its definition of renewable, would not include a project of this size. This is a damaging non-renewable, non-green project.

On the other hand, a number of studies, such as by KPMG and a number of other economic think tanks, have looked at the alternatives in green technology and other renewable energy that could have been put forward instead. Clean Energy BC, as the Association of Independent Power Producers of BC, has made a compelling case that we do not need Site C.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, our government is protecting the environment while supporting economic growth. This project would provide thousands of direct and indirect jobs and provide clean renewable energy for the next 100 years. Of all the possible ways to generate energy, this project would have the lowest level of greenhouse gas emissions. The project underwent a thorough independent review and extensive consultations with the public and aboriginal groups.

I am amazed to see the member oppose this project. Maybe it is because she would rather see a job-killing carbon tax. I am not sure.

Public Safety

[Maria Mourani, Independent, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising during this adjournment debate to talk about a question I asked the Minister of Public Safety regarding the violent radicalization of young Canadians to Islam and regarding what he could do in terms of prevention. I told him that a specific budget was needed to address this phenomenon, which is becoming increasingly common in our society.

According to a very recent 2014 report from the Department of Public Safety, the government knew that there were 130 individuals with Canadian connections who were abroad and who were suspected of terrorism-related activities. Syria is unfortunately the main destination of extremist travellers, as they are called. The report estimated that there were more than 6,000 of these people in Syria, including nearly 30 individuals who were apparently from Canada. Those are conservative figures. These individuals can also be found in Somalia, Algeria and, particularly, in Iraq. The government apparently knew that about 93 people had returned to Canada after travelling abroad for various terrorism-related reasons. This situation is very worrisome.

The government introduced a bill about terrorism. We have also seen government policies and bills on dual citizenship. I would like to talk about a young person whose mother I have been speaking to. I have had a number of conversations with her, and I will likely have more. This mother, a good person, a Canadian, had a son named Damian Clairmont, 22, who was born in Nova Scotia into a francophone Catholic family of Acadian heritage. His family moved to Calgary when he was seven. He had anxiety and identity problems and converted to Islam. At the beginning, everything was normal. He was very comfortable in the faith. Then he became radicalized. He went to Syria and was reportedly killed while fighting in Aleppo. This young man is an example, a tragedy. We are seeing this more and more. For example, there are the Gordon brothers and many other young people. What is tragic is that the bills being introduced will not do anything to change the situation. Damian Clairmont is Acadian. He does not even have dual citizenship. This kind of bill will not change his mother's life. What victims want, what the families of these young people want, are prevention programs. This woman is fighting for programs that will help other families and other young people. That is what I am asking of the government: a program with a budget so that we can work on prevention with families and young people.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Ahuntsic for providing me with this opportunity to highlight our Conservative government's commitment to combatting terrorism.

The government's approach to violent extremism is clearly articulated in this year's public report on the terrorist threat to Canada. I think the member actually referred to that report. In fact, our government has taken strong action to combat radicalization, with this being a key pillar of our counterterrorism strategy.

Additionally, the RCMP has developed a countering violent extremism program, which consists of working with local law enforcement partners to prevent individuals from engaging in terrorist or other criminal activities. The RCMP's countering violent extremism efforts complement our counterterrorism approaches, which are designed to disrupt individuals who have mobilized and are committed to further criminal action.

However, there are in fact many facets to countering terrorism. Our Conservative government has a strong record in this area. We have given law enforcement new tools by making it a crime to go overseas to engage in terrorist activities. We have given authorities tools to strip Canadian citizenship from those who engage in terrorist activities.

In fact, despite what we hear in the House day after day from the opposition, we have increased the funding for our national security agencies, such as the RCMP and CSIS, by one-third since forming government.

Unfortunately, we have not found opposition support for any of our past measures. Most recently in this House we introduced new measures to allow our national security agencies to better track threats to Canada.

Although the record of NDP support for any of our legislation on combatting terrorism is zero, I certainly hope that the member opposite will encourage her new-found friends in the NDP to take a tougher stand when it comes to terrorism and how we keep Canadians safe.

[Maria Mourani, Independent, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, following the attack in Parliament and the events that took place in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, which resulted in the death of two soldiers, the RCMP clearly stated that it needs resources to do its work.

The government has to stop hiding behind the RCMP by saying that it is already doing prevention. The RCMP is doing excellent work, but it is not necessarily its job to do prevention. The RCMP can do prevention, but it does repression.

There are organizations dedicated to prevention, but they do not have the means to do their work. The government invested in prevention to address street gang activity, and now it has to invest specifically in a prevention agenda for youth. Now is the time to do that. The government must not wait until other youth become radicalized.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, our Conservative government is committed to addressing the problem of radicalization to violence. We will continue to take action to keep Canadians safe from radical and violent terrorists. It is why we passed the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act. It is why we passed, at second reading, the protection of Canada from terrorists act yesterday. It is why we passed the Combating Terrorism Act, which makes it an offence to travel abroad to engage in terrorist activities.

In closing, it is important to note that, although the member has brought this topic to the House tonight for debate, she has not supported a single measure that this government has put forward to combat terrorism. Perhaps this may help explain to her constituents why she has now chosen to join the NDP.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:38 p.m.)