Debates of March 3rd, 2022

Opposition Motion—Natural Gas Pipelines and the Invasion of Ukraine

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member and all members know that there is some latitude during debate. The motion does speak about energy, so the hon. member's speech is relevant. However, I do want to remind the member, if it goes to the wayside a bit, to please come back to the motion at hand.

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would tell my hon. colleague that if the truth hurts, too bad, so sad, because the Conservatives have taken the crisis in Ukraine, the humanitarian suffering, the deaths, the murder of innocent people, turned it around and said this is a great opportunity for them to take billions in taxpayers' money to promote the interests of oil and gas. If they do not like the mathematics of how bad that is, then they should not be in the chamber. Too bad, so sad, because this is their motion. We could have been debating anything of substance. Instead, we are debating Conservative mythologies.

As I was saying, over the last few years, 60 financial institutions, including Deutsche Bank, HSBC Holdings plc, Hartford Financial, the Japan Petroleum Exploration, have all pulled out of Canada. Why? It is because of the lack of a plan to deal with the climate crisis.

Not only are the Conservatives misrepresenting the facts in terms of the horrific humanitarian crisis, but they are misrepresenting the facts to workers because the transition is here. We see the potential. Calgary Economic Development and Edmonton Global are saying that if we start to invest now in clean energy, we are looking at an additional $61 billion for the provincial Alberta economy. If they continue with business as usual, there will be only $4 billion. Year in, year out, we see drops in employment in the oil sector and that is not because people are being mean to them. It is because industry is cutting jobs and making more profits. That is the thing.

That leads me back to the Forbes comparison. Forbes says that having lost the debate in Canada on the climate crisis, oil and gas have shifted, like big tobacco, to the global south, where the number one plan is to make some claims about greenwashing, shift massive exports to the global south where it does not count and then only invest enough in clean tech so it looks like they are doing something. Meanwhile, the market has moved beyond, and it has moved beyond in a substantial way. What we have been given, time and time again, by the Conservative Party is a fake, failed mythology when, year in, year out, jobs in the oil patch have gone down and the opportunity for a clean-tech economy is staring us in the face. There is a huge potential, but if we do not meet that, then we are consigning our children to no future.

To get back to the motion at hand in a very clear way, I have seen a lot of ways the Conservatives and the Liberals will bend over backwards to give taxpayers' money to big oil, to excuse all manner of abuses of accountability and to go along with all manner of fake claims about dealing with the crisis, but emissions have continued to rise, year in, year out. We are talking about the future of our planet, but we are talking about it now, within the context of a global crisis, a humanitarian crisis where people are dying. They expect more from us than this gaudy attempt to claim that our best response to Ukraine is to spend billions of dollars on an unproven, unplanned, unidentified pipeline, when the Europeans are already moving toward clean energy alternatives. This is exploitative and crass.

I have enormous respect for my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills, so I will offer an amendment in order for us to come together and show a higher standard. I move that the motion be amended in paragraph (c) by deleting all the words after “Government of Canada to” and substituting the following, “greatly increase humanitarian aid for Ukraine and for countries bordering Ukraine that have already accepted hundreds of thousands of refugees and provide targeted supports to ethnic minorities who have faced discrimination in their attempt to flee Putin's war in Ukraine.”

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The amendment is inadmissible because it goes beyond the scope of the motion.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague across the aisle for his remarks. Natural gas is clearly about defence and security. That is why there has been a raging debate in Europe about Nord Stream 2. It is why Germany just cancelled Nord Stream 2 in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It is why Donald Tusk, then prime minister of Poland in 2014, in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, asked the European Commission to come forward with a strategic framework to address the fact that Russia is intimidating Europe with the use of natural gas. In that strategic framework, the European Commission said that the European Union should partner with Canada in an energy partnership on natural gas precisely to counter Russia's threats in eastern Europe and in Ukraine.

Natural gas produces the nitrogen that fuels the world's food supply. European farmers today are facing a crisis in skyrocketing fertilizer prices caused by natural gas shortages from Russia. There has been a massive drop in fertilizer in western Europe of 10%, and it could lead to serious crop failure and a drop in crop yields this year. It happened a century and a half ago in 1853-56 in Ukraine, in Crimea, during the Crimean War and led to skyrocketing food prices around the world. This is why energy is important. It is not just about defence and security, but also our food supply.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I did not know they built the pipeline in 1854 to deal with the food crisis in Ukraine, but again, the Conservatives will tell us anything. We start with this being a big oil and gas issue, but as soon as we poke them, they start talking about children being hungry.

We do not carry nitrogen in pipelines. This is about oil and gas. This is a simple fact. For my hon. colleague who wants to go back to 1854, we can go back throughout history. They were not using pipelines to deliver agricultural support and they still are not. Once again, we see the Conservatives using a humanitarian disaster and a humanitarian crisis to promote the false interests of the oil and gas sector.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement]

Madam Speaker, I think this is the first time the Crimean War has been referenced in this chamber in a very long time.

One of the things that has been the most gratifying for me over the course of this debate has been the unanimity, where this House has found total agreement in terms of support for Ukraine. I worry that in this motion we have two propositions that are clearly supporting Ukraine and that everybody in this House would agree to. However, the third, regardless of my own personal opinion on the issue, will divide us. There are clearly members who will vote no.

The hon. member spoke of Russian disinformation. Does the hon. member believe that the House voting against this motion, which has two statements of principle and support for Ukraine, could be used by Russia to claim that Canada's Parliament voted against Ukraine?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I really would hope that my hon. Liberal colleagues are not going to support this motion to expand gas line production, because we are afraid of what Russia is going to say. I just want to put that on the record.

We have been unanimous in standing up on the issue of Ukraine. What we are seeing is the Conservatives using this as a wedge to undermine our credibility by saying that our number one issue at this time, of all the issues that we are dealing with from Russia, is to undertake measures to ensure new, natural gas pipelines be approved. That is such a cynical and exploitive position. I certainly hope the Liberals are not going to go there with them.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Madam Speaker, unfortunately, history has shown us many times how destructive war can be.

A recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report shows how destructive the climate crisis can be.

The Conservatives are claiming that theirs is an ethical solution. However, replacing one bad thing with another bad thing is not an ethical solution.

What does my colleague think of the Conservatives' claim that this is an ethical solution?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, the issue here is really concerning and is a constant misrepresentation. We have a huge opportunity in Canada to be a world leader in moving forward with renewables, hydrogen and geothermal energy. The expertise in Canada is second to none. We could be working around the world with this, but we are not because we are focused on putting billions and billions of dollars into a 20th-century economy when the planet is burning around us. This is a lost opportunity for workers, for regions and also for the future of our children.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, Putin's war machine is being funded by their energy exports to various places around the world, but in particular the almost half of Europeans who rely on natural gas to heat their homes. In a report to the European Parliament, “A Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy”, the European Union, itself, sought to further its partnerships with countries such as the United States and Canada.

Would the member agree that it is the European Union, itself, that has stated that it needs Canada's energy to be able to transition and get off Russian energy?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, if we look at what is happening in Europe now, the discussion is clearly about the need to get off Russian energy. They are talking about doing this through improving the electricity grids and making sure that their non-renewable and nuclear options are in place.

I do not see any of that from this Conservative party, a party that is trying to exploit a humanitarian crisis right now, at this time, in order to sell this false pipe dream that we could in six months, a year or two years, build a pipeline from the west to Atlantic Canada to capture a market, when there are already at least 12 other LNG projects sitting on the sidelines across North America and the European stock in clean energy is going up. All of this is predicated on the usual Conservative scheme of saying, “Let us take billions in taxpayers' money and try to drive it through.”

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Madam Speaker, to go to the amendment by member for Timmins—James Bay, it is kind of shocking to have this motion when we had a practical amendment that would help people today and in the weeks to come and would send a message to our allies.

The Conservatives have used this opportunity not only to attack our allies but also to waste a message we could have sent to our allies. I would like the member to comment on that. His motion to amend has been ruled out of order, but could he expand on that? These are things we could still do today. I am really worried about how this reflects on us internationally.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think my hon. colleague, like me, like everyone in the House, is fielding calls every day from people who have family in the Ukraine. They are asking what we are doing as the Parliament of Canada to help them.

Am I going to say, in response to the fact that their family is trapped in Kyiv or on the Polish border, the Parliament of Canada came forward today to say that what we want to do is approve new pipelines? I cannot call anybody back and say that. I can say that we tried to work with the Conservatives, but they did not want to work with us. We tried to work with them on the issue of speeding up visas, of making sure we could get people to safety. That is what I would like to see.

I am hoping the Liberals will oppose this motion because of the cynicism of it. My God, if I were Putin, what I would be saying now is, “Look at the Conservative Party. They are not worrying about the horrific death rates in the Ukraine. They want to compete with us for our natural gas.” To me, that is an appalling position.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for his very good and very heartfelt speech.

In his opinion, why is the government refusing to sanction Russian oligarchs who have direct or indirect interests in western Canada's oil sands?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague and say, “Welcome to the petrostate.”

Remember how the Conservatives, who are all really upset about Communist China, actually sold off sections of the oil patch to state-owned Chinese companies because as long as it was Chinese companies owning them, they did not mind. Now, we have the Liberals talking about sanctions but refusing to go after these key oligarchs. This is the face of the petrostate between Conservatives and Liberals. We need to have better accountability.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, there are actually two issues here. The first is in regard to how responsible governments, such as the NDP in the province of B.C. on LNG and in terms of the national government, deal with the environment and natural resources.

The question today is around what we should be talking about, which is unity in the condemnation of what is taking place in the Ukraine. This is in fact a lost opportunity. Maybe if my friend was to amend his amendment, maybe by having clause (c) deleted, that might be within scope, and it would be a better motion for all of us to vote on. Could the member give us his thoughts on that?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, we need to rise up to a higher level here, because we are being watched around the world, and this motion brings us to a much lower, much more cynical, exploitive level.

I urge all my colleagues to vote against it. We need to move forward on something that shows that, as a Parliament, we will stand up for freedom for the people of Ukraine and not just for the pecuniary interests of the oil lobby.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with the member for Thornhill.

On Thursday, February 24, moments after Vladimir Putin's deadly, bloody and unlawful invasion of Ukraine, the Canadian Army issued a statement announcing that a contingent of 120 soldiers from Valcartier's 5e Régiment d'Artillerie Légère would be deployed to Latvia within 30 days to support a battery of M777 artillery guns.

Putin's attack is having a direct impact today in my riding. CFB Valcartier is located in the riding of my valiant colleague from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, to whom I give my regards. However, many military members from Valcartier live in my riding. These are people I run into at the corner store, the supermarket or the local café. They are men and women who put on the uniform to defend our country's honour and the values we hold dear. These individuals are in my thoughts today, especially those 120 men and women who are going to be deployed to Latvia in the wake of Putin's deadly attack on Ukraine.

Europe has not seen aggression on this scale since 1945, and all the decent countries in the world strongly condemn it. I want to make it clear that this is about Putin, not about Russians. I know some of my constituents were born in Russia and have chosen to live in Canada. These people join with everyone in condemning Putin's illegal, murderous and brutal aggression. We must distinguish the dictator, Putin, from the rest of the people of Russia, like the thousands of Russians who have bravely, honourably and nobly spoken out against their president.

This aggression has brought back the horrors of Second World War. My background is in history, and I have a particular interest in the history of the Second World War. I never thought I would live to see such horrific images of real war in real time. This is what we are dealing with.

This attack on Ukraine is an attack on the values that we, as Canadians, defend. Our values of freedom and democracy are humanitarian values that Putin so contemptuously rejects.

Like many people, I was very touched by these images. It was so inspiring to see ordinary citizens, with no armour or weapons, confronting Putin's Russian tanks. Let us applaud the courage of these individuals who, alone or with dozens or hundreds of friends, managed to block Putin's tanks to stop them from invading. That is one of the inspiring images we have seen. Unfortunately, it is a rare one, because every day we are seeing the horrors and ugliness of this war of aggression that should not even be happening. However, that is the reality.

My thoughts are also with the million, or almost million and a half, Ukrainian Canadians. We salute them. I know a few personally, of course, and I want to send them my regards.

From the start, the Canadian government has been taking action to address these tragic events, which unfortunately have still not come to an end. We support that action. We applaud the Canadian government for responding so quickly. The Conservatives applaud and encourage the announcements that are being made on a daily basis. We also hope that the government will do even more.

Diplomacy is a way to address an aggression, and the Putin aggression must have a diplomatic reaction from our government.

That is why the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons, in an important and heartfelt speech, talked about a few measures that the Conservatives are proposing the Government of Canada take to show its disapproval of what Putin is doing in Ukraine.

First, the government needs to expel the Russian ambassador. That is a diplomatic measure that will not affect anyone's life. However, it will send a clear message that we are opposed to what is happening. We also need to recall the Canadian Ambassador in Moscow.

The government needs to strongly suggest to the CRTC that it issue an order prohibiting our cable companies here in Canada from broadcasting programming from the Russian television network RT. We applaud the private cable companies that have already done so.

Russia must also be expelled from all international organizations. When, unfortunately, in 2015 and 2016, Putin invaded Crimea, we expelled him from the G8. It was our government that was very proactive in this area. Today, it would be an excellent idea for Russia to be expelled from the G20, among other things.

We also want to speed up the issuing of visas. We know that the government has made announcements to that effect and that they are moving in the right direction. The goal is to allow as many Ukrainian citizens as possible to come to Canada, particularly those who want to join their families.

We must also highlight the fact that this war reminds us of our dependence on our geography. The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, himself a retired lieutenant‑colonel, put it well.

When we look at the map, we think that Canada and Russia are far apart. Russia is actually not that far away, because we share a common border, the Arctic. Unfortunately, I must say that this government has not been very proactive in the Arctic. The previous government and its prime minister, however, were very proactive in ensuring a Canadian presence in the Arctic.

That also means modernizing and updating our NORAD facilities and military infrastructure, from equipping our air force with F‑35s to shipbuilding. This tragedy taking place in Ukraine calls into question our relationship as Canadians with our neighbour to the north, not our distant neighbour to the east or west.

This tragedy exposes the fact that, now more than ever, the whole world needs to ensure energy security for all. Russia supplies 40% of the natural gas consumed in Europe. Putin and his thugs are wielding this fact like weapon and have been doing so for a long time.

In 2015, the European Union, the EU, wrote a report detailing the situation we are facing now. It says that energy policy is often used as an instrument of foreign policy, especially in major oil producing and transit countries. It is talking about Russia. The report also states that the EU will use all its foreign policy instruments to establish strategic energy partnerships with producer countries and transit countries or regions that are becoming more important.

That proposal was made in 2015, but nobody listened, unfortunately. In December, Democratic U.S. President Joe Biden said there would have to be agreements with other countries, such as Norway. Canada should be part of it too. On February 24, President Biden said that his administration has been “coordinating with major oil-producing and consuming countries toward our common interest to secure global energy supplies”.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is quoted in the Globe and Mail today. He stated that the events of the past few days have shown him that a responsible and forward-looking energy policy is crucial not only for Germany's economy, but also for its environment. It is also crucial for its security. He believes that his country must change course to overcome its dependency on single-source energy imports. His comments are similar to those of the Democratic U.S. President and those of the European Union in 2015.

That is why we believe that Canada, which is the fifth-largest producer of natural gas, must lend a hand in this situation to ensure global energy security. We must also remember that millions of Ukrainians are currently suffering as a result of Putin's vicious attack, and that 120 Canadian soldiers at CFB Valcartier, in the Quebec City area, will soon be deployed to Ukraine.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, when I reflect on the many debates we have had throughout the week and look at what is taking place in Ukraine today, I think about how we have a wonderful opportunity to be able to send a very strong message to the people of Ukraine when we bring motions forward. I think it would be so much better to have solidarity in the passing of a motion at this time when referencing what is taking place in Ukraine.

I am sure the member realizes, as the Conservative Party would realize, there is no way there is going to be unanimous support for the motion on the floor today. Would the Conservative opposition party entertain any amendments to the motion to make it a strong solidarity type of motion, given what is happening in Ukraine today?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, I welcome the comments of my colleague from Winnipeg North. I know he is, as is everybody in the House, very supportive of any action in this struggle to fight Putin's aggression. We are all in solidarity. We have all shown solidarity toward the Ukrainian people here in Canada, but first and foremost toward those who are suffering under this attack. This motion is not only about the solidarity that we as Canadians have to show, but also about addressing some of the issues that have been raised by the European Union, the Biden presidency and the chancellor of Germany.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague. The first part of his speech truly reflects how we all feel about this war in Ukraine and the distress this is causing people we meet in our communities. I believe that is what points (a) and (b) of the Conservative motion are all about.

With regard to point (c), my colleague mentioned the urgent warning and energy security. I would like to ask him the following question.

Given the urgent warning to all countries on climate change and the warning that we must find concrete, pragmatic and meaningful responses for Ukrainians, does my colleague believe that betting on pipelines, the continuity of energy policy—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Order. I must give the hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent the opportunity to respond.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville for her question.

They are not mutually exclusive. As the member pointed out, there are three points in our motion. Everyone agrees with the first two. The third, however, is a global issue, a matter of global energy security, and we would be remiss if we overlooked that.

Canada has a concrete opportunity to help these people, and we are not the only ones saying this. The European Union sounded the alarm in 2015. The Democratic U.S. President himself, Joe Biden, and I do not use the word “democratic” lightly, is looking to partner with countries around the world to find a solution. The German chancellor is of a similar mind.

The Conservatives in the House of Commons are not alone in thinking this. World leaders are on the same page.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Madam Speaker, in his speech the member spoke about the dangers of having Russia as a direct neighbour to Canada. One of the reasons why that threat is increasing is because the Arctic is far more accessible than it ever was before. However, it is far more accessible because of climate change and the world's dependancy on fossil fuels.

Therefore, I would like the member's thoughts on how the Conservatives think part (c) of this motion is at all helpful. He talked about the increasing dangers of the accessibility to our Arctic by our Russian neighbours, when it is the climate crisis that is part of the growing tensions between our countries.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, as long as we need energy, I will always fight for Canadian energy. It is not only me asking that. We have seen the Chancellor of Germany asking for support from elsewhere. We have seen the Democratic President of the United States asking to have more people working on that. We have seen the l'Union européenne asking to have partenariat with other countries.

Canada is the fifth-largest producer of natural gas, and I will always fight for Canadians.