Debates of June 22nd, 2021

Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

When I think of my son and of Bill C‑12, I wonder: If one day he has the opportunity to sit in the House, will he be forced to participate in the same debates we are having today?

How does the minister, who I believe also has children, see the future of this debate if the fiscal anchors are not mandatory? Are we not letting this opportunity slip by? What concrete steps should we be taking for the sake of our children?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his son's success.

I do in fact have two daughters, which is perhaps the main reason I got into politics. I think this is a very important issue for all members in the House, but perhaps even more so for those with children.

We have worked very hard to have a very strong piece of legislation that will ensure that future governments understand the importance of climate change and continue to take action to fight it. I fully agree with my colleague.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, listening to the Conservatives, it would seem that they are totally surprised by the fact that we had to bring this motion, so that we could move along with things. The reality is that, if we are being fair, over the last several months there has been a continuous logjam of trying to put legislation on the agenda for various different reasons, whether it is filibustering over various points of order or not letting the House proceed with its normal course of business by using other procedural tactics.

The reality is that this bill, which was introduced in the fall, was debated. It passed second reading in April. It was then at committee. Committee has now reported back because of the programming motion. Now it is back before this House. Yesterday, the minister gave notice that this motion would be coming forward, so nobody should be surprised that this is coming forward today.

I cannot think of an issue that requires more immediate attention and disclosure than an issue with respect to the environment. Can the minister comment on how incredibly important it is that we deal with this now before the House rises for this session?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, this is extremely important. As I said, we are living in a climate crisis. It is critical that Canada have a plan to move forward, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and seize the economic opportunities that will come for countries that are thoughtful about transitioning to a low-carbon future.

We do not have a lot of time both between now and 2030, but also between now and 2050, because we are talking about a very significant change in how we make products, drive cars, do all kinds of different things. It is absolutely critical that we do that. I do think that the kinds of things that we have seen, unfortunately from the Conservative Party, in terms of delaying legislation, have led us to the point where we actually are forcing this conversation very quickly because of the crisis.

At the end of the day, I have been telling parents' groups, and I have been telling environmental organizations that if they want this to move forward, they have to talk to the leader of the opposition's office and tell them how important it is.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was intent on sitting out this debate, but having heard the previous speaker's comments about the filibustering, I could not stand for that.

I want to raise this through you to the hon. minister. What I heard from the previous speaker, quite frankly, is balderdash. If this was important to the hon. minister, then why did it take him until April to bring it forward, and why are they leaving it until this very last day to push it through?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, climate change has been an enormous priority of this government from the day that it was sworn in almost two years ago. We have developed the strengthened climate plan, which is the first plan that Canadians have ever had that shows in a detailed way how to achieve and exceed the existing target. We made additional investments in the budget. We have worked closely with our American colleagues and we significantly raised the level of ambition with the target that we established at the earth summit.

We are moving forward with a plan to address carbon emissions not just at 2030, but to 2050, with a net-zero target through this legislation. It is complementary to all of the work that we have done.

There is no higher priority for this government, beyond getting through this pandemic and supporting Canadians through this pandemic, than fighting climate change in a manner that is going to secure the future for our kids and ensure that we have a strong and thriving economy going forward.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, the minister continues the myth that this has been about Conservatives filibustering this bill. There was barely six hours of debate when they jammed this through to committee, and then the committee decided to accelerate it, so 70 plus briefs were not even considered before amendments. The minister favours an approach of not listening. Now he is putting down closure. He is actually stopping members of his own caucus from being able to talk about an important piece of legislation.

Why does the minister have such contempt for the voices, other than those of his own government, in this chamber?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, I find that a very odd line of questioning. This bill, as I understand it, has a majority support of members in this chamber. It is something most of the political parties in this House, with perhaps the exception of the Conservative Party of Canada, believe is important as a step forward in addressing it.

I was very heartened when the hon. member actually stood up at the beginning of this conversation and said they would support this bill. I was very disappointed when they then decided to vote against the principle of this bill, as I was extremely disappointed when members of their party voted to say that climate change was not real. It is unfortunate, and at some point the Conservative Party is going to have to get with the program in addressing climate change.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is absolutely staggering to hear the government say that we are in a climate emergency. It was an emergency in April, February and all the other months. We have been dealing with a climate emergency for a long time.

If this were so important to the Liberals, they would have put the bill on the agenda much sooner. I hear the NDP saying that they would not have written it that way. That is for sure, because it was obviously the Liberals who wrote the amendments that the NDP tabled in committee. It is because of the Liberal-NDP coalition that we are left to pass a bill that is limp and non-binding.

Now the government is telling us that if we are progressive, we must vote for the bill. We are being asked to vote for something that could have been better. Why did they not put it on the agenda sooner?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I should say that we have included several elements of Bill C‑215 in Bill C‑12.

However, Bill C‑12 is much stronger than Bill C‑215, which was introduced in the House by the Bloc. Bill C‑215 aims for a target of 30% below 2005 levels. That is only a 30% reduction, whereas the targets in this bill are 40% to 45%, which is much stronger.

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

Madam Speaker, two years ago this House declared we were in a climate emergency and it took until November for the government to table this bill, which, when read, looked like no more than a public relations document pretending to be doing something. There is no accountability in this bill; it is hollow. I could not support it at second reading, because there is no principle behind it.

When it came to actually getting it into committee after a very short debate, most of the briefs arrived after the amendment period was over. It made a mockery of listening to concerned citizens. There was no youth or indigenous representation and no climate science testimony. Not a single indigenous witness was heard.

How often can the Liberals say they did not have time to consult indigenous people, while also saying that Bill C-12 respects UNDRIP?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, to argue a lack of accountability mechanisms in the bill, I would just suggest to my hon. colleague that he read the bill again.

It is a legally binding process for the federal government to set climate targets and to bring forward plans every five years, three different progress reports between now and 2030, a 2030 assessment report that has to be tabled within 30 days of the 2030 national inventory report, an annual report detailing how the federal government is managing financial risks of climate change, each year the minister has to respond to the report of the net-zero advisory body and the Minister of Environment has asked, and the bill requires, the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development provide a report by the end of 2024. There is an enormous number of accountability mechanisms, and I just would ask my colleague to review the legislation again.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have a very simple question, and I would appreciate a clear, concise answer from the minister.

If this motion is carried, and Bill C-12 eventually becomes law, who will ultimately be held accountable for Canada meeting its greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, ultimately we live in a democratic society, and it is the government that is going to have to be held accountable for its ability to live up to the commitments it makes under this law.

What this law requires is an enormous amount of transparency and accountability through all of the measures I just mentioned, and it provides the information on which the voters of this country, who are the ones who will make the decision about how urgent and how important this issue is, as they rightly should in a democratic society, will make the decision.

As I said before, we will never again in this country have a government like that of Stephen Harper, which essentially set a target, pretended it was an issue, pretended it was important, but never had a plan and never made progress.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion.

If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would request a recorded division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Call in the members.

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

Vote #176

Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I declare the motion carried.

It being 6:20 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

Parliament of Canada Act

[Lenore Zann, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

moved that Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to rise today to speak to Bill S-205, which seeks to create the position of Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate. This would be an officer of the Library of Parliament, similar to the current Parliamentary Poet Laureate's position. The mandate of the Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate would be to promote the arts in Canada through Parliament, including by fostering knowledge, enjoyment, awareness and development of the arts. In this bill, the arts are defined as drawing, painting, sculpture, print-making, design, crafts, photography, videography and filmmaking.

I would like to thank the sponsor in the Senate of this bill, Senator Patricia Bovey, for her work in moving this legislation to the House. I would also like to acknowledge the artist Peter Gough of Nova Scotia, who was the originator of this wonderful idea. Sadly, Peter passed away before he could see his idea become a reality. However, there are many other incredible artists in Nova Scotia and across Canada who I am sure will be happy to see this bill move forward and honour his memory and the work of Canada's arts community.

Bill S-205 is based on the same concept, as I said, as the Parliamentary Poet Laureate. The Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada, the chairperson of the Canada Council for the Arts, and the president of the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts have all provided their witness testimony about this important bill, as has the director of the National Gallery of Canada.

The position would have a two-year term with a mandate of promoting the arts in Canada through Parliament, including by fostering knowledge, enjoyment and development of the arts. I cannot emphasize enough or too greatly the contribution that Canadian artists make to our society, our collective well-being and our understanding of each other: lifelong Canadians, new Canadians, immigrants, first nations and refugees. The arts can break down barriers that exist between us, which is something we need today more than ever. Canada's artists have been illuminating what it means to be Canadian, where we have been and where we are going through many different media and from the views of many different cultures and regions. These are sometimes critical, but are reflective of who we are.

Over the past year and a half, we have been living through some of the most challenging times faced by our country in decades. The pandemic has forced us into isolation. It has led to loneliness and despair for many Canadians and for our youth, as well. I have to say our youth are looking forward to the day they can get out and enjoy the arts in person again and as my dear, departed niece, Maia, said to me shortly before she passed away this week, “What would life be without music? Life would be so depressing without music.” I have to say that I completely agree with her. Throughout this pandemic, Canada's artists have been there to provide us with a bit of light and hope while we await a time to come when we can be together again as friends, families and colleagues.

The arts are also economic generators. As the third-largest employer in Canada, the arts and culture sector employs some 600,000 Canadians and contributes 7.5% of our GDP. Research has demonstrated that the arts contribute positively to our health, education and the environment, and I suggest we need more arts in schools. The arts are mental health programs. Members can ask any child to tell their story, and I am sure they would rather do it through drawing, through writing or even through drama and putting on a personality, than try to speak as themselves. Sometimes this is much easier for people to do.

Where would the tourism industry be without Canada's arts and artists? The arts are a universal international language and the lens through which other nations recognize us as Canadians. It makes us different from the Americans. The Americans have their own arts and culture, but we need to support ours so we are not drowned out and so people can hear our own stories and our own voices, not just American ones.

The cultural components of international events are there not just to entertain but to show the world who we are, and we are very good at doing this. The Government of Canada has committed to restoring the cultural pillar to our foreign policy. We are depicting ourselves to the world through the arts, which on the international stage creates a greater understanding of who we are.

I believe it is time for our Parliament to have a visual artist laureate, whose works would preserve for posterity the events that grip us as parliamentarians and the work we do to make Canadians' lives better. I ask for members' support in making this initiative a reality. It is a tangible manner of thanking our artists for their contribution to Canadian society, especially during trying times such as these.

I would like to say the words of George Elliott Clark, our former parliamentary poet laureate. The poem is entitled “On the Proposal for a Visual Artist Laureate”:

The blank page—the blank canvas is—
Undeniably delicious—
Like fog, which obscures, then reveals—
What Hope imminently congeals—
A fantastic architecture—
Imagination born secure:
What Vision— the I of the eye—
Had dreamt, is What answering Why. . ..
Rainbows erupt from paint or ink—
And film sculptures light—in a blink;
A needle, weaving, is lyric,
And whatever is shaped is epic.
Art's each I articulate,
Whose vision ordains a laureate.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's preamble talks about the selection process and about having a visual artist laureate selected from a list of three names reflective of Canada's diversity. Why is it important for the hon. member to ensure that Canada's diversity is reflected within her private member's bill?

[Lenore Zann, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I believe that the whole planet is made up of different stories, and people of different cultures view reality and view life from different perceptions. It is only by hearing and seeing and telling the tales of all of them that we see a whole beautiful earth and life. That is why it is so important to have diversity expressed much more than it already is here in Canada, so that more people can experience it and, hopefully, grow from that experience.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank our colleague from Cumberland—Colchester for her bill, which we here in the House appreciate.

I would like to ask my colleague if it would not be more advantageous, in terms of spreading the load, to have a committee of artists in Parliament who could reflect diversity better than a single person could, since a single person might be biased and influenced by their own perceptions. Perhaps a committee garner more universal support than a single person.

[Lenore Zann, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very thoughtful question, and I understand where the hon. member is coming from.

Here in Nova Scotia, we have an arts committee that the province has selected. Its members decide who gets which grants and things like that here in Nova Scotia. However, to be honest, art by committee is a very difficult thing. Each artist brings their own view and their own perspective to their work. We do not usually get 10 people, for instance, making a sculpture. We get one artist creating something themselves and then sharing that view with the world.

That is what this bill is focusing on: bringing a spotlight to individual Canadian artists. A different artist would be chosen every two years to have that spotlight and be able to share their works with Canadians.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Cumberland—Colchester for bringing this bill forward. As the mother of a visual artist who graduated from the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, I am very proud and really happy that the member has done this.

Does the member think that Canadians really underestimate how the arts have impacted the people we are?