Debates of Dec. 4th, 2023

Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is incredibly important and needed because we are moving toward a low-carbon future. That is happening around the world. Even if the Conservatives want to deny the reality of climate change, everybody else around the world recognizes that we can have a plan for the economy that does acknowledge moving toward a lower-carbon future.

At the end of the day, it is important that voices from various governments and the proposed partnership council that is part of the bill will have labour representatives, industry representatives, indigenous leadership and youth to have a conversation and help inform government policy about how we grow an economy that will be strong and prosperous going forward.

The president of the Business Council of Alberta said, “The Sustainable Jobs Act represents an important opportunity for Canada: to shape our future and create jobs by providing the resources that the world needs—including energy, food, and minerals.”

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

Madam Speaker, I want to apologize to Luke and Steve. For a year and a half, there was nobody from the Conservatives speaking for workers. They were not interested in hearing workers. Now, we are hearing about Luke—

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

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would ask for relevance.

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

The member is answering the question that was asked.

The hon. member for Timmins-James Bay may continue.

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

Madam Speaker, now, Luke and Steve are being conjured up by the Conservative member who is blocking offshore wind projects for Newfoundland and Labrador. What were his colleagues talking about instead of talking about Luke and Steve? They were talking about their seventies muscle cars—

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

I have to interrupt the hon. member.

We have a point of order from the hon. member for Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague is insinuating that I am lying, that I am conjuring up these names. The people are Luke Jarvis and Steve D'Entremont, who are actually—

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

That is debate. I am going to let the hon. member finish his question.

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

Madam Speaker, I am apologizing to Luke and Steve for the fact that their Conservatives were bragging about seventies muscle cars; talk about entitlement. Poor Luke and Steve are asking how come the member they voted for will not support offshore wind.

No, the Conservatives do not want to. They want to talk about seventies muscle cars. Let us talk about boomer entitlement. While we were talking about workers and offshore wind, they were talking about muscle cars. No wonder Luke and Steve are so upset and fed up with the Conservative lot.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, members will not be surprised to know that I actually agree with the comments my hon. colleague made.

The bill before us is a very important one. It is an important bill for building an economy that would create jobs and economic opportunity in every province and territory in this country, certainly in Newfoundland and Labrador. That includes the offshore wind industry that the member's premier is very keen to move forward on. Certainly, it is an area we have focused on.

It is also across the country. It is the battery manufacturing plant that we announced in British Columbia a few weeks ago. It is the Dow chemical facility and the Air Products facility in Alberta. It is the Jansen potash mine in Saskatchewan. It is the Volkswagen battery plant. It is the Northvolt plant in Quebec. We are building an economy that will be strong and prosperous, and we are involving and engaging Canadians in that process, something that, clearly, the Conservatives are not interested in doing.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Speaker, it seems to be that the Liberal and NDP members really care only about theatrics. I know they are very disingenuous in the things they say; they actually do not care about energy workers.

The labour minister was at committee in the spring. Do members want to know what he said? He said that Canada will definitely need more oil and gas workers going forward. It is ironic that the Liberals are putting forward legislation that would hurt Canadians working in the energy sector. It is not just in the energy sector; it is also in manufacturing, agriculture and construction. There are indirect jobs that would be affected by this.

Why is it that the NDP-Liberals care only about an activist agenda instead of about real Canadian workers?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, my goodness, how should I begin? At the end of the day, this is about creating an economy that would be strong and create jobs going forward. It is not about burying our head in the sand and trying to imagine a future that actually existed 30 years ago.

In order to have a relevant plan for the economy, we have to have a relevant plan for the environment, and our plan is working. At Air Products, it is 230 jobs. At the Dow facility, it is 8,000 jobs during construction. At the Volkswagen plant, it is 3,000 jobs and 30,000 indirect jobs. The World Energy hydrogen facility in Newfoundland will have 4,200 indirect jobs and 2,200 jobs during construction. The Northvolt battery facility will have 3,000 people. The CCUS facilities that are going to be built in the oil sands will have thousands and thousands of jobs.

RBC says that by the end of the decade, we will add 400,000 clean energy jobs on a path to net zero. That is because of the investments we are making and because of the plan. We are engaging Canadians in the conversation in a thoughtful way. Shame on the Conservatives for trying to exclude Canadians from that conversation.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, this is about labour. The minister keeps saying it is about the labour that is going into Canadian manufacturing and the labour that he can try to move, with Canadian taxpayer dollars, out of productive industries and into unproductive industries that are not making any money. It is a shift into provincial jurisdiction. He knows that. He knows that the federal government has no expertise here, no reason to be here because it is already being done by every one of the provinces way more effectively than the federal government could ever do.

I will cite an example. We talked about the coal transition, Canadian coal workers and communities. There was a whole bunch, $185 million, in funding until 2025. Where did it go? It went into consultants only. It did nothing for the coal workers. It did nothing for the communities. It got put in the pockets of Liberal insiders, and that is what the government is all about; it is about paying its own friends and not paying Canadians who are going to be displaced in this—

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

The hon. Minister of Natural Resources has the floor.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, this is about two things. It is about ensuring that we actually have a plan to build an economy that can be strong and prosperous in a low-carbon future, and it is about ensuring that we have workers who are available and equipped to succeed, to actually ensure that we are able to build the economy of the future.

I would say to the hon. member that he just needs to look around him at all of the different projects that are ongoing, whether it is the various electric vehicle manufacturing facilities in Ontario, the battery manufacturing facilities in Quebec, the offshore wind development in Atlantic Canada, the potash mines and the nuclear development in Saskatchewan, the Dow chemical facility and the Air Products facility, the carbon capture and sequestration work that will be going on in the oil sands, or the battery facility and the renewable diesel facility in British Columbia.

It is amazing how fast this is moving, but it is moving because of deliberate public policy to encourage and incent the development of an economy that will be strong in a world that must, from a scientific perspective, be a lower-carbon future. That is something we are looking to engage Canadians in. We are engaging labour. We are engaging industry. We are engaging indigenous people. Perhaps most importantly, we are engaging young people in a conversation that is so relevant to their future.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, my understanding is that we are not actually debating the bill at this point; we are debating closure on a motion that is going to move particularly quickly on the bill.

I do not debate the fact that there are various tactics being used by various parties in this place to slow down the business of the House. That being said, this is a bill whose action plan for sustainable jobs would still be two years out, should it get passed. Yet the motion that is being put forward with closure would give only two hours for debate at clause-by-clause consideration.

Can the minister tell us why the response from the government, every time it has delay tactics from the other side, is to go to the exact extreme to limit debate and improvements from other parties on bills as important as this one?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would correct a couple of things my hon. colleague said.

There is actually an interim action plan that has already been released for the period 2023-25. What the bill would do is put into law the requirement that we actually have the action plans going forward, every five years. That is for the purpose of transparency and accountability. It is a very important mechanism, just like was done in the Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act a couple of years ago.

The reason we are moving forward is that this is urgent. The world is moving. Countries around the world are moving. To build an economy that is going to create jobs and economic prosperity in a low-carbon future, they are working with labour and industry to ensure that is done.

We have just gone through five weeks when nothing occurred at the natural resources committee, because the Conservatives refused to allow anything to happen. That is a shame. It is a waste of taxpayers' money. It is something that should not happen in the Parliament of Canada.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, in his answers, the minister spoke a lot about a low-carbon economy. That is good. That is something everyone wants to advance. I have a lot of respect for the minister.

The problem is that the solutions he is proposing are stuck in the oil and gas sector. When he talks about hydrogen, he is talking about blue hydrogen, which relies on carbon capture strategies. No one agrees with that. He is talking about carbon capture for the oil and gas sector, but we know full well that that is not economically viable. Unless big oil companies, the greedy corporations who rake in billions every year, are paid by Canadian taxpayers, then that oil will not be profitable.

Does my colleague agree that the best solution is simply to get out of oil and gas?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is very important that we reduce greenhouse gas emissions everywhere, in all sectors of the economy. We need a plan to accelerate economic development in all the provinces and territories. It is very important.

One hydrogen company in Quebec used the tax credit set up by the government. It is a tool that speeds up—

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

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 participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

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

Vote #467

Government Business No. 31—Proceedings on Bill C-50

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I declare the motion carried.

The House resumed from December 1 consideration of the motion.