Debates of Jan. 27th, 2020

Foreign Affairs

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak about this issue from the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

I would like to remind my hon. colleague that Canada has already put in place a series of strong measures to hold Iran accountable for its support of terrorism. To start, we continue to list the IRGC's Quds Force as a terrorist entity under the Criminal Code. The Quds Force is Iran's primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorist groups abroad. Its actions have destabilized countries across the Middle East and wreaked havoc throughout the region. Our government is also continuing to list a number of terrorist entities that have benefited from the force's patronage, including arms, funding and paramilitary training, and that help advance Iran's interests and foreign policy. These include Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Taliban.

In Canada, recommendations can be made to the Governor in Council for individuals or groups to be officially designated as terrorist entities, and last June our government added three new Iran-backed groups to the Criminal Code list. These three groups are aligned with Iran and their actions further Iranian interests. Iran provides them with substantial resources, including training and weapons to carry out terrorist acts that advance its goals in the region.

Canada has also imposed restrictive measures against entities and individuals within the IRGC that have a similar effect to a listing. The IRGC and its leadership continue to be sanctioned under the Special Economics Measures Act in response to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missiles program. This allows assets of individuals and entities associated with the group to be frozen. Regulations explicitly target the IRGC and several sub-organizations, including the IRGC air force and air force missile command, IRGC logistics and procurement, IRGC missile command, and the IRGC navy and several members of its senior leadership. Iran also continues to be designated as a state supporter of terrorism under Canada's State Immunity Act. Through our engagements in the Financial Action Task Force, Canada also contributes to international efforts to hold Iran accountable for its financing of terrorism.

The Government of Canada will continue to hold Iran accountable for its actions and support for terrorism. We remain committed to ensuring the safety and security of Canadians and Canadian interests against any and all threats.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is really disgusting. We have an important question after so many Canadians have lost their lives and the government does not even bother to send a member of the foreign affairs team. We have the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, which is an important file but a completely different file, coming to read prepared notes when the government should have actually sent someone from foreign affairs. Those prepared notes do not even include an answer to the basic question: Do the Liberals intend to list the IRGC as a terrorist entity in its entirety?

The member mentioned the Quds Force, which was listed by the previous Conservative government. Hezbollah and Hamas were already listed. The government has not done anything effective in response to the situation in Iran.

Next time, hopefully someone who actually is responsible for the file will show up and answer the question. Maybe this member is prepared to actually respond to what has been asked many times and still has not been answered: Is it the policy of the government to list all of the IRGC as a terrorist entity as the Liberals voted to do a year and a half ago? Is it their policy, yes or no?

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I believe I did answer the question, but I will repeat some of what I said for my hon. colleague.

The listing of entities is an ongoing process. Government officials continue to assess all groups and monitor new developments regarding potential entities that could be listed.

With respect to Iran, Canada has already put in place a series of strong measures to hold it accountable for its actions and support of terrorism. Listing the IRGC's Quds Force and aligned groups that I have mentioned will help advance this existing approach. Once again, last year we added three additional Iran-backed groups to the Criminal Code's list.

Finally, we remain unwavering in our commitment to keep Canadians safe, including by taking all appropriate action to counter terrorist threats in Canada and around the world.

Natural Resources

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my home province of British Columbia is in a unique position to make a significant contribution to the fight against global climate change by developing its liquid natural gas industry. The objective, of course, would be for clean, green, environmentally responsible and ethical Canadian energy to replace much dirtier coal that is being burned and used by much of the developing world.

Liquid natural gas, when it finally gets going, will create a lot of good jobs in my riding, in British Columbia, in western Canada and notably in northern indigenous communities. However, the investment community and the resource industry is losing confidence in Canada as a place to invest in liquid natural gas.

Chevron has recently decided to pull out of the Kitimat LNG project, a project that we thought was a go and one that people were counting on for jobs. They are losing confidence in Canada because it has been bogged down in the regulatory quicksand known as Bill C-69, the no more pipeline bill of the government.

I was recently talking to a constituent who operates an equipment manufacturing business that is ready, willing and able to offer good-paying jobs to people so they can service the liquid natural gas development and construction industry. Those jobs are waiting for final investment decisions to be made.

I was talking to another constituent, an engineer who runs an engineering firm specializing in servicing the construction industry. The firm has had the advantage of a couple of projects, preliminary design works for the LNG industry, yet it, too, is waiting to hire more people to do the work once it finally gets going.

In the meantime, Canada is sitting idly by, bogged down in regulation rising out of Bill C-69, while our competitors are taking the opportunity. Russia has recently built a natural gas pipeline to deliver natural gas to China to satisfy its ever-growing demand for cleaner energy.

The United States, as well, is fast-tracking a number of liquid natural gas projects, and it is far ahead of us now, even though we had a head start. We are bogged down in regulations, not going anywhere.

Australia, too, recognizes the opportunity. It is also jumping on the LNG bandwagon. In the meantime, Canada is sitting there, bogged down in Bill C-69.

Will the government finally make the amendments required in Bill C-69? Will it support and work with industry, indigenous communities and hard-working Canadians hoping for well-paying jobs in the liquid natural gas industry, or is it content to continue standing by idly while our competition runs with the opportunity?

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at recent investments in Canada's LNG industry. LNG Canada is making the single-largest private sector investment in Canadian history. That is a $40 billion investment in Canada's economy.

This project is expected to create up to 10,000 good, well-paying jobs at the height of its construction. That includes millions of dollars in construction contracts for indigenous business, all while building a new LNG facility with the lowest carbon intensity of its kind in the world.

What is more, once the project is up and running, Canadian LNG will replace the use of coal and power plants around the world, particularly in Asia, thereby reducing the global emissions that contribute to our warming planet.

The Impact Assessment Act is about ensuring good projects that will create jobs and grow our economy, moving forward in the right way.

Our government has a clear vision for clean growth in Canada, one that gets us to net-zero emissions by 2050, a vision that sees us meeting and exceeding our climate goals, that sees Canada using its natural advantage to drive economic growth, enhance environmental performance and advance indigenous partnerships.

That natural advantage is not just about the abundance of our resources, but the experience and expertise of Canadians to develop those resources competitively, sustainably and inclusively. The LNG Canada facility reflects all of this.

Unfortunately, the member's call for amendments to the Impact Assessment Act reminds us that there are still some in the House who do not think economic growth and environmental protection can go hand in hand, as equal components in a single engine to drive innovation and jobs from coast to coast to coast.

Having said all that, our government is open to suggestions for how we move forward with implementing the Impact Assessment Act. Having got the destination right, we welcome input and ideas on the best way to get there. After all, as the Minister of Natural Resources has said, the key to sustainable resource development is threefold: strong investments; regulatory stability; and meaningful relationships with our partners, including indigenous peoples.

That is how we ensure that Canada continues to be the best place to create jobs and to do business. LNG Canada's project tells us that we are on the right track.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Article 6 of the Paris Agreement would create a mechanism whereby countries like Canada could accelerate development of natural resources like liquid natural gas that we are talking about, yet at the recent conference in Madrid, no headway was made.

Could the hon. member opposite give us any assurance at all that Article 6 will finally be implemented or that the government is working on bilateral agreements with countries that would be recipients of our clean, green and ethical liquid natural gas?

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a familiar argument on that side of the floor and one that we have seen many times before. While I am heartened to hear the member supporting Canadian LNG, I know that it is a driver of the economy across the country, particularly in his region, so it is disappointing to hear him opposing sustainable resource development, the centrepiece of the Impact Assessment Act.

We do not have to pit economic prosperity against environmental stewardship. We can do both and we know it is possible because of LNG Canada's $40-billion project under way on B.C.'s west coast, a project that represents the single largest private sector investment in Canadian history.

The only way to move forward with major projects in this country is by protecting the environment at the same time and by working in meaningful partnership with indigenous and local communities. That is exactly what we are doing.

The Environment

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in December 2018, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights sent a letter to the government asking that the construction of the Site C dam be stopped until prior, informed consent was given to the project by first nations.

The Site C dam had large opposition from all the first nations in the region, but after it was approved by the provincial government, a number of first nations conceded. Conceding is not giving consent and there are two first nations that are fighting this in the courts right now.

The government promised it would implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Article 32 states:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands or territories and other resources.

2. States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.

The Speech from the Throne dedicated a section to “Walking the Road of Reconciliation”, highlighting that since 2015 the government “promised a new relationship with Indigenous Peoples”.

However, on December 13, 2019, the United Nations committee on the elimination of racial discrimination, through the high commissioner's office, published an early warning and urgent action procedure to the government, urging the government to suspend three projects that neglect the rights of indigenous peoples: the Site C dam, the Trans Mountain pipeline extension and the Coastal GasLink until these projects obtain free, prior and informed consent by all indigenous people affected.

I would like to remind the government of the Delgamuukw decision. Under section 35 of the Constitution, aboriginal rights and titles are affirmed. In the Delgamuukw, it was hereditary chiefs who were the plaintiffs in that case. It was not the elected band councillors who are part of the Indian Act system that was created through colonization.

The chiefs and band councillors have a role to play. They are a legitimate form of government, but it is the hereditary chiefs who are recognized in the Constitution and in the Supreme Court decision.

The Tsilhqot’in decision reaffirms that it must be the first nations that determine how aboriginal rights and titles are determined. The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination calls upon Canada to:

...immediately cease construction of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion project and cancel all permits, until free, prior and informed consent is obtained by all the Secwepemc people....

...immediately suspend the construction of the Site C dam, until free, prior and informed consent is obtained from West Moberly and Prophet River Nations....

...immediately halt the construction and suspend all permits and approvals for the construction of the Coastal Gas Link pipeline in the traditional and unceded lands and territories of the Wet'suwet'en people, until they grant their free, prior and informed consent....

They proposed an alternate route for that pipeline.

They are also calling on the government to pull back the RCMP and to ensure that it does not use force against indigenous first nations, the hereditary chiefs and their decision to affirm their rights and sovereignty over their lands.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to address the question by the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith regarding the Site C project.

In the fall of 2014, the former government approved the project and set legally binding conditions with which the proponent must comply.

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada conducts inspection activities to verify that BC Hydro is in compliance with conditions included in the environmental assessment decision statement. When necessary, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada will undertake enforcement actions to bring BC Hydro back into compliance with these conditions.

The Impact Assessment Act creates a new, fairer and more balanced system for reviewing and approving major projects. This is vitally important for growing our economy, protecting the environment and improving the quality of life for all Canadians.

Our government is committed to building a renewed nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous peoples that is based on the recognition of rights, respect, co-operation and partnership.

Our government notes the efforts of BC Hydro at Site C to mitigate potential impacts, including on-site housing and recreation for workers, mental health and addiction programming, and funding for child care and not-for-profits that focus on vulnerable populations, including indigenous women and girls.

We recognize that consultation with indigenous peoples is not simply a legal duty. It is the honourable way for us to build relationships and work towards reconciliation.

We continue to engage in discussions with indigenous leaders on how we can work together on issues related to consultation, environmental protection and natural resource development.

Our government is committed to ensuring indigenous peoples have the opportunity to express their views, and meaningfully participate and contribute to this ongoing dialogue.

In closing, I want to assure the House and my hon. colleague that we will honour our commitments to Canadians. We will work with Canada's indigenous peoples and other interested parties to achieve results for all Canadians and generations to come.

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there were approvals by the prior government for the Site C project. However, the other parts of that approval were done by the Liberal government after meeting with the West Moberly and Prophet River first nations for a whole 20 minutes, and they had asked for this project to be stopped.

We also know right now that the RCMP has a detachment 30 kilometres off the beaten trail, where they are preparing to enforce an injunction for a pipeline that was given an alternative route by the hereditary chiefs. I am calling on the Liberal government and the government of British Columbia to come to the table to negotiate with first nations in good faith and to call off the RCMP.

This cannot be another black eye on Canada. The action that was taken by the RCMP last year was really a black eye on Canada, and it is a difficult position to put the RCMP in, enforcing an order for a political failure. Let us get to the table and deal with first nations.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his dedication and his passion for this issue. It is evident in the way that he delivers his remarks in the House.

Our government is serious about changing the relationship Canada has with indigenous peoples, and I would like to reassure my colleague and all members of the House that the Crown will execute its consultation and accommodation obligations in accordance with its constitutional and international human rights obligations, including aboriginal and treaty rights.

We are committed to making sound decisions based on science and traditional knowledge. We understand that indigenous peoples have unique knowledge about the local environment, traditional lands and resources. This knowledge is recognized as an important part of project planning, resource management and impact assessment.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

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

(The House adjourned at 7:36 p.m.)