Debates of June 8th, 2023

Opposition Motion—Climate Change

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Thank you.

We will now begin the debate.

The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my speaking time with my esteemed colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé, who will be displaying the excellence we all strive for.

Quebec and Canada are grappling with unprecedented wildfires. As we speak, we could even say it is a—

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

I must interrupt the hon. member because there is apparently no interpretation yet.

I will speak in French to check whether it has started, which now seems to be the case.

The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly may continue.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, right now, in Quebec, we are seeing a level of devastation roughly 11 times greater than the average for the last 10 years. We have not even begun to assess the dramatic economic impact of these wildfires.

Over the next few years, we will likely experience many phenomena that will dramatically worsen the impact of climate change. This is very worrisome. The seasons conducive to extreme events, whether they are tornadoes, extreme tropical storms that have an impact in our area, heat waves, droughts, wildfires or floods, will get increasingly longer, begin earlier and end later. The likelihood of extreme events will increase. The intensity of these events will also increase.

These droughts, heat waves, floods and storms will have a very significant impact on Quebec. They will also affect people around the world. These people will have to try to protect themselves and prepare for the situation. One possible way for them to adapt would be to move somewhere else because the waters will rise, deserts will grow and lands that were once fertile will no longer be. We, the countries that can do so, will be responsible for receiving climate migrants. That will put additional humanitarian pressure on migration issues.

On a billionaire friend’s yacht, people do not feel the water rising. At sea, a glass of champagne in hand, they rise with the ocean. However, when the water slowly rises or suddenly rushes over banks and shorelines, entire villages are destroyed, in places where people were unable to protect themselves. It is in places that could, in theory, protect themselves—such as major cities around the world—that massive and extremely costly infrastructure is needed.

To a lesser extent, Quebec will face similar pressure. Every storm and every event slowly and irrevocably changes and adds to the misery in the world.

Ecosystems are unable to adapt to this climate change. Animal species are more mobile, of course, but they are dependent on plant environments. Plant environments cannot move along with climate change. Plants cannot migrate fast enough to new areas with a climate that is conducive to their growth. The Observatoire régional de recherche sur la forêt boréale at the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi is studying these phenomena.

The entire biodiversity of vast regions of the planet, and also of Quebec, is affected. We cannot naively say that the forest will move north, that we will have more space with potential for plant life to grow. It simply does not work that way because things are changing too fast. Within the space of a few decades, we are provoking what has historically taken thousands and tens of thousands of years through changes that others would have us believe are still natural, even today.

The loss of biodiversity is also having an impact. The destruction of economic models comes with this destruction of ecosystems. There is still a massive share of the global and Quebec economies that rely on the growth of plant and animal life. I am talking in particular of fishing and agriculture, and also forestry.

The forests in Quebec are in many ways a resource that is comparable in importance to petroleum resources in western Canada, aside from one small detail: They are a renewable resource. Not only is it a resource that does not contribute to climate change, but it is also a fundamental resource that is still the best way we know to capture carbon naturally and to reduce the phenomena that lead to climate change.

Still, despite the importance of the forests for our economy, for the regions of Quebec, for our very identity as a people and a nation, today we see the effect of climate change. This effect is not direct. Let us not claim that science says certain things that it has not said. We cannot associate the 11-fold increases over the last 10-year average with a particular climate event, but the probability is increased to such a degree that science would never dare to deny again.

This has an even more significant impact because Quebec's money, which should be invested in a much greener and much more sustainable economy for Quebec, is going into western oil, in the form of tax credits, direct subsidies or nonsense such as costly carbon sequestration or, worse, the hypocrisy of wanting to use nuclear energy, which is not a clean energy, so as not to use oil to extract oil.

All of this sends us into a spiral of destruction. Is it not time to put an end to it? Is it not time, given the evidence of the damage caused by climate change, to put an end to all funding of fossil fuels, to rather use this money, especially in Quebec because that is our strength, to ensure a sustainable economy, and to explain to people that environmental challenges are not restrictions on what we can do, but a wealth-creation model that is not only different, but the bearer of increased wealth, especially in Quebec?

As I have said before, we are open to having the necessary amounts that are now invested in oil but that would be invested in the green transition, stay in western Canada, which really needs to engage in this energy transition.

We need to use this money immediately to fight forest fires, help communities in distress, support research to mitigate the consequences of climate change, which, even if we stopped everything tomorrow morning, would continue to exist, and finance municipal infrastructures to meet the challenge.

We must, however, resist the temptation to make this a political instrument for centralization. We are starting to see that when people say that the Canadian military should be the main resource for fighting forest fires. Quebec has the institutions and the expertise needed to fight the forest fires. What do we not have? Because of the fiscal imbalance, we do not have money. It is the tried and true tactic of saying that, since the provinces do not have money and the federal government would like to take over their jurisdictions, everything will be taken over by the federal government, and the provinces will have to rely on the federal government.

That is not what we want. We want our share of the money needed to adapt to the situation to go to Quebec and the provinces. Given the government's moral collapse, this may be an opportunity to give more meaning to the concept of state and to ensure that people actually see that our institutions, democracy and parliaments can still serve the common good with dignity, honour and respect.

By voting this way, we will be taking action.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the members of the Bloc Québécois for the motion they have introduced in the House today. I want to congratulate them on bringing forward a motion of substance that genuinely calls on the government to do something meaningful within its realm of possibility.

I want to express that I plan to vote in favour of this motion, not only because it is well crafted, but also because it is a motion on something we should be calling upon the government to do.

When we talk about the government investing in fossil fuels, I think it is important that we do not invest in the creation, exploitation or extraction of fossil fuels. However, I believe there is still work for the government to do with dealing with abandoned oil wells, for example.

Could the leader of the Bloc confirm that the motion is attempting to distinguish between investing in fossil fuels from an extraction perspective and dealing with abandoned oil wells and other impacts from previous fossil fuels extraction?

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the reality is one of investments in the form of tax credits or assistance for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the process of extracting petroleum resources.

The only petroleum resources that are safe to develop are biofuels and biogas. They exist, but that is not what we are talking about.

The suggested approach is not really useful. If the industry were able to lower its emissions per barrel, it would only produce more barrels. Our money would then be used solely to maintain the level of greenhouse gas emissions. We need to go a step further and transition away from oil.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I note that in the first item in this motion the member is calling on the government to express consideration for the people affected by the wildfires.

I would like to bring the Bloc caucus up to speed on my private member's bill, Bill C-365 from the 42nd Parliament, which sought to consider the theft and vandalism of firefighting equipment as an aggravating factor in sentencing. The entire Bloc caucus voted against it. I would like to ask the member why.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is not much I can say, because I am not familiar with the bill in question. It has not been on my radar for a long time.

However, in the past few days, I have heard statements that have made it rather hard to differentiate between the positions of the People's Party and the Conservative Party, both of which basically claimed that wildfires are a ploy by environmentalists to make people panic. I was a bit alarmed by that. Today, we all have the opportunity to act reasonably for the good of the planet.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the leader of the Bloc Québécois for his excellent speech.

He talked about the disasters that are occurring in many regions of Canada, including Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, where I learned to speak French, and Abitibi-Témiscamingue, where I spent a lot of time. Of course, our thoughts are currently with the volunteer firefighters and emergency workers who are working in those areas and in other regions of Canada.

The member reminded us that the government is spending billions of dollars on fossil fuel subsidies. We need to make the transition to clean energy. Other countries have already done it. What is the best way for Canada to make that transition and make its contribution to climate justice?

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a number of suggestions come to mind.

As I recently said in the House, we need to walk the talk. In this case, that means that we need to do whatever it takes—even if we are hogtied and gagged—to prevent a government partner from spending billions of dollars on measures that support the oil-related economic chain. That in itself would be a major contribution.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was mesmerized by my leader’s speech. The hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly is a hard act to follow. I always listen to him attentively, because I find him very inspiring.

At the end of his speech, he mentioned something that I think we should all focus on today: the sense of state. Today’s motion by the Bloc Québécois is not a partisan motion. It is not a motion that points a finger at the bad guys and the good guys, but a motion that states a fact, that expresses an important problem we have for the most part ignored: the sense of state.

I will begin by expressing our solidarity with the people affected by the terrible forest fires raging across Quebec. I am originally from Abitibi—Témiscamingue, and having lived for many years in Northern Quebec, I know many people who have been evacuated and who are not sure their homes will still be there tomorrow. I understand their distress. This is a situation of unprecedented magnitude. We must, of course, acknowledge the work of the people on the ground who are trying to put a stop to this horror and those who are taking care of people who have been displaced.

I would also like to acknowledge our colleagues in the House who are directly affected in their ridings, who are on the ground and have been over the past few days. The hon. members for Abitibi—James Bay—Nunavik—Eeyou, Abitibi—Témiscamingue and Manicouagan are doing a remarkable job by being there for their constituents.

This motion expresses our solidarity. Climate change exists. We are not here today to say that the forest fires are caused by climate change. However, there is something that we do know, and that all the scientists are telling us: Climate change exacerbates the conditions that cause dramatic events like the ones going on today by extending the wildfire season and the number of extremely hot and dry days.

Scientists tell us that, even now, during heavy rainfalls, since the ground is very dry when the rain begins, it is unable to absorb the water. This causes erosion, the ground dries out again very quickly, and the next storm will likely spark another fire. That is one of many examples. I could talk about floods. We could talk about a lot of things. It is important that we realize what is going on.

It is also important to recognize that the federal government has the greatest financial resources at this time. Our leader raised the issue earlier in referring to the infamous fiscal imbalance. There is an urgent need to stop investing in oil energy and allocate the funds to the right places, to the right resources, in order to trigger a fair and equitable energy transition for all regions of Quebec and Canada.

I am addressing my Conservative colleagues from western Canada in particular. They constantly promote the oil industry. Today's motion is not a motion against the people in their ridings. It is a motion for the future of our entire population. We are telling them that we want to invest funds in their region to start the climate transition. It has to start sometime. That is the problem.

The final point of the motion states that the federal government must stop investing in fossil fuels and start investing in renewable energy and public transit. That is not always the federal government's responsibility, so that also implies significant transfers. We need to revise our adaptation plan from two angles: first, mitigating climate change, and second, preparing the public for climate change. That is another crucial challenge.

Currently, our municipalities are being left to deal with climate change on their own, even though they already have very little revenue for their development. It is important to decentralize these funds. It is important for our communities to be able to invest in their infrastructure, such as sewer systems or municipal wastewater treatment, because they know it better than anyone. Underground infrastructure is not very popular in the world of politics. There are many communities where various people in power failed to invest in basic infrastructure. It is important that funds be released for this purpose.

The current wildfires are a natural phenomenon, of course, but their impact is exacerbated by climate warming. In 2022, the cost of the damage caused by climate change around the world was pegged at $275 billion. I am not just talking about fires, but about all extreme events related to climate change. This can include floods and ice storms, which are more and more frequent.

Moreover, the cost of insurance directly affects ordinary citizens. Insurance companies are not charitable organizations. I assume that my colleagues have shopped for insurance at one time or another. I am sure that they feel the same way I do: that we often pay a lot for what we get. These companies assess a risk. Unfortunately, that risk is growing. That means that costs are going to go up and up until the insurance companies are no longer prepared to take the risk of insuring us. Eventually, they are going to tell us that they will no longer insure us, because the risk is too high. Who will the responsibility fall on then? It will fall on us and the government. That is why it is important to act quickly.

The Bloc Québécois has made constructive suggestions. We introduced a bill on climate change accountability, which would have made major changes. After COVID-19, we had the good sense to consult the people on the ground and propose a recovery plan based on a change of direction for government measures aimed at fighting climate change. We wanted to make something good out of this bad situation. There are two ways to handle difficult situations: we can either wring our hands, or we can figure out how to turn the situation to our advantage.

We were willing to make major investments. Unfortunately, the government did not follow our recommendations. Right now we are proposing solutions that promote green finance to force the financial industry to stop investing in fossil fuels. I do not know if anyone here has ever tried keeping fossil fuels out of their RRSP or other investment portfolio, but it is not easy. Investors need to be careful and read all the fine print. I think I succeeded, but it was not easy.

What we are telling the government today is the same thing the IPCC and everyone else is saying. Earlier, I said that we could have invested after the COVID-19 pandemic, but that we missed the boat. COVID-19 showed us that governments are capable of stopping everything at once, making investments and taking extraordinary measures. Just look at what is happening in Quebec and Canada right now. It is time we realized how urgent it is to act.

The government is the strongest tool we can collectively use to make major changes, so let us use it. Right now, the government is saying things that seem to be positive, but there is nothing concrete. They are announcing either amounts that have already been announced or amounts that are available for the oil and gas industry to help it hang on a little longer. That is not acceptable anymore.

Every scientist in the world is telling us that the first step in a just, fair and equitable green transition is to stop investing in oil and gas. That is the first step. Today, the Bloc Québécois's motion acknowledges the situation, expresses our solidarity with the people who are suffering, and tells the government that it is time to take action, take that first step and finally end all fossil fuel subsidies.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the last clause of the motion specifically speaks to incentivizing renewable energies, and Quebec has an incredible track record in terms of its renewable energy program.

Some initiatives that have come out of Quebec relate to using government tools and resources to properly incentivize the renewable energy sector. Could the member comment on initiatives from Quebec that the rest of the country can benefit from?

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his question and, in particular, for announcing his support for today's motion. That is very important.

I am pleased that he brought up the issue of resource allocation, because that will allow me to wrap up my point. At present, we are seeing how resources are being wasted at federal level. Money is being given to the biggest global warming offenders.

My colleague asked me to give examples from Quebec. I am very proud to be able to point out today that Quebec is the first government in North America to have announced it was ending oil exploration. It is a significant gesture, and I invite Canada to do the same. It is all well and good to announce investments in clean energy. There is a certain nuance in that wording. When Quebec talks about clean energy, we are not talking about oil that is less dirty. We want to turn to something other than oil.

We want to turn to wind power and solar power, for example, which are renewable.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Berthier-Maskinongé for his very good speech.

He talked about subsidies. We spend billions of dollars on fossil fuel subsidies. We know full well that other countries are in the process of making investments and building networks for clean energy such as electricity grids. I am thinking in particular of the grid that links Scandinavian countries to Germany.

This Nordic grid allows the export of clean energy. In the United States market, for example, states and cities are increasingly demanding that they be supplied only with clean energy. The market is incredible and the potential is there.

Does my colleague agree that we really need to make investments to create an electricity grid that allows us to export energy throughout North America?

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, electric power is definitely an energy of the future.

Still, investments need to come from the right level of government. There has to be fairness in federal investments. We must not forget that. I could talk about past injustices.

As for the importance of investing in the right energies, I would say that, according to experts around the world today, for every dollar invested in oil, $1.7 is invested in renewable energies.

However, that is not what is happening in Canada. This year, investments could reach $40 billion. That is 11% more than before COVID-19. Production in Canada is expected to increase until 2040. We are going off course. We need to steer the ship in the right direction, towards a real energy transition and renewable energies.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our colleague did a good job of explaining that, although forest fires have certainly always existed, climate change is making conditions worse and far more conducive to these types of fires and many other disasters that will keep making headlines. Over the past few days, the air in Ottawa was absolutely impossible to breathe and the sky was totally grey. It was terrible here, even though the fires are raging in Abitibi and on the north shore.

I wonder why people have a hard time understanding this. The government always makes big announcements about money it is spending to fight climate change, but it is also spending billions of dollars on the oil industry, which completely undermines those efforts. Sooner or later, expenditures from this line will have to be put on that line. Why do people not understand that?

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once again, the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot has shown us how intelligent he is and how thoroughly he understands the issues.

What he said was exactly right. We have to take the money that is being given to fossil fuels, move it to a different line in the budget and invest it in renewable energy and in the transition.

I said something earlier that I may not have emphasized enough. We need to invest in the transition, but also in helping people prepare and become more resilient. Unfortunately, it is too late to completely stop global warming, and we are already seeing the consequences. That is why we need to invest in both of those things.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on this important issue today. I thank my hon. colleagues from the Bloc Québécois and commend them for their activism on this issue. I do not doubt their commitment to the issue of climate change for a single second. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for all the members of the House.

Forests all over Canada are burning. We are facing what will very likely be the worst forest fire season in the history of our country. Families have lost everything, thousands of people are risking their lives to keep Quebeckers and Canadians safe, and I would like to tell everyone affected by the wildfires that our thoughts and the government's thoughts are with them.

Climate change is real, and we are seeing and living its impact every day. In the last year alone, we have seen record-level atmospheric rivers creating havoc in British Columbia; Fiona, the most powerful hurricane we have seen in the Atlantic Ocean; and now, fires raging from the east coast to the west coast and all the way to the Northwest Territories. Everyone in the House needs to acknowledge that.

Canadians are concerned about the impact of climate change. Tens of thousands of people have been displaced this year, sometimes twice or even three times. Some families have lost everything. Millions of people, both young and not so young, cannot go outside because of the poor air quality. People are worried and so are we.

Across the country, the public can see how climate change is exacerbating the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events. As U.S. President Joe Biden recently said to the House, these days, a good plan for the economy is also a good plan for climate change and a good plan for security.

The deterioration in air quality due to the forest fires is so bad that smoke plumes can be seen and smelled as far away as New York. The air quality index was worse in our national capital this week than in cities like Mexico City, Jakarta or even Kolkata. We know that this is the worst fire season on record for Nova Scotia and Quebec, and in Alberta, 2023 is about to surpass the summer of 2016, one of the worst seasons in the history of that province. There are currently more than 2,000 forest fires burning across Canada, and nearly four million hectares have burned, which is 10 times the Canadian average for the same date.

Now I would like to talk about Parks Canada's role in this issue.

Parks Canada is the only federal organization that can provide firefighting equipment and trained professionals in response to requests from provinces, territories and international partners when they need help fighting wildfires. Parks Canada has a dedicated team of firefighters across the country. It also maintains national incident-management teams composed of personnel from field and business units across the country. These teams are dispatched to manage complex fire situations and other incidents.

Parks Canada has many wildfire mutual aid resource-sharing agreements in place at the local, provincial, national and international level, such as with the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico and South Africa. It also works with communities and partners within or near national parks on initiatives to reduce wildfire risks. Its fire management program is focused on prevention and response measures for wildfires that originate in, traverse through or otherwise threaten lands administered by Parks Canada, as well as adjacent communities.

I would like to thank the team at Parks Canada for all its work and for its amazing services to the public.

Last weekend, the Quebec government asked the federal government for help to deal with the catastrophic wildfire situation in the province, and we instantly said yes.

We are working in close collaboration with all provincial and territorial governments, as well as with indigenous peoples. Non-governmental organizations, like the Canadian Red Cross and the United Way, are also providing support to evacuees and other people affected by the forest fires. Members of the Canadian Armed Forces have been deployed to areas across the country, particularly in Quebec, to keep our communities safe.

Climate change is already here, and its effects will continue to be felt. The impact is very real. Climate change is taking a major toll on our communities. That is why our government, unlike the official opposition, is committed to doing more and doing it faster, both to reduce our climate pollution and to better prepare Canada and Canadians to deal with the consequences of climate change.

Let me give a few examples.

A little over two years ago, we enacted the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, which requires the Government of Canada to set emission reduction targets for 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2045 in order to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The act provides for consultations with the provinces, territories and indigenous communities, as well as public participation when the government is establishing or amending targets or plans. This must be done openly and transparently.

The act requires governments to plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 at the latest, to table their plans in the House and to make any corrections necessary. It also establishes the net-zero advisory body, which is responsible for providing independent advice with respect to achieving this goal.

The government's role is to create incentives and to make regulations that send clear, long-term signals to the markets to foster the reduction of emissions in a flexible and economical manner.

That is also why we implemented carbon pricing in 2019. Our approach is recognized worldwide. It is flexible, because it allows the provinces and territories, including Quebec, to develop their own system or to opt in to the federal system. It also sets minimum national standards that must be met to ensure that all the provinces and territories are comparable and that they contribute equitably to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Our approach is one of consistency and fairness for all Canadians. It also aims to cover a wide range of emissions and to ensure the effectiveness of the carbon markets.

Its goal is both to reduce pollution and to support Canadians in the transition toward a cleaner and greener economy, which is why all direct proceeds from the federal system remain in the province or territory they came from and are used to keep life affordable while taking aim at climate pollution.

Wherever federal fuel charge proceeds are returned directly to households, eight out of 10 families get more money back through the climate action incentive rebates than they faced in increased fuel costs. This is particularly true for low-income households, which come out significantly ahead. Households can use these funds however they see fit. As households take actions to reduce their energy use, they will come out even farther ahead because they will still receive the same amount in climate incentive rebate.

If any members of the House of Commons have not yet read the 2030 emissions reduction plan released last year, they should.

It is the most comprehensive, detailed, and transparent plan in our country's history. It charts a course to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 40% to 45% by 2030. It continues and enhances support for the deployment of market-ready renewable energy technologies to drive the decarbonization of electricity grids. It sets an interim target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20% below 2005 levels by 2026. This plan has been welcomed by organizations such as Greenpeace, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Climate Institute of Canada.

We also introduced the clean fuel regulations, which are part of a very significant approach to reducing Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. These regulations replace the former renewable fuels regulations.

They seek to drive innovation in clean technologies and expand the use of cleaner fuels throughout the economy. The regulations are based on initiatives in other jurisdictions, such as British Columbia and California, that have directly contributed to the growth of the clean-tech sector and the supply of cleaner fuels.

These regulations will reduce the carbon footprint of gasoline and diesel sold in Canada. They will also encourage investment in clean energy, thereby helping to reduce the country's greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26 megatonnes by 2030. Following the announcement of these regulations, more than $2 billion in investments have been announced over the past few months in the hydrogen and renewable fuels sectors in Alberta, Quebec, and Newfoundland.

I would now like to talk about faster and further: Canada's methane strategy.

This strategy relies on Canada's progress and current commitments, including the 2030 emissions reduction plan. It provides a path for further reducing methane emissions, a very powerful greenhouse gas, throughout the entire economy. I will give a few examples. The oil company Cenovus reduced its methane emissions by 40% over the past two years. Saskatchewan reduced the methane emissions of its oil sector by 60% between 2015 and 2021.

Still, we need to bear in mind that all the initiatives I have mentioned so far are just the highlights and do not exist in a vacuum. It is the combination of initiatives that changes everything and our plan is beginning to bear fruit. Between 2019 and 2021, our greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 53 million tonnes in the country. That is the equivalent of removing 11 million cars from the roads in Canada, or more than half of all the emissions in Quebec. In 2020 and 2021, Canada had the best performance in the G7 when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Many environmental groups have said that they are seeing overwhelming evidence of progress. For example, Climate Action Network Canada says, “The [report] released...by the federal government shows that...greenhouse gas emissions fell by 8.4% below 2005 levels”. That is what economists call a decoupling of emissions from the country's gross domestic product, with emissions intensity from the entire economy down by 42% since 1990.

Since 2015, our government has committed over $200 billion to implementing more than 100 measures to support climate action. Canada has bent the curve downward even as our economy continues to grow, creating well-paying jobs.

Earlier, the leader of the Bloc Québécois talked about fossil fuel subsidies. Here are a few encouraging facts about this issue.

The federal government is hard at work on delivering its G20 commitment to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. We are preparing a rigorous framework to identify what is a fossil fuel subsidy. This will apply across all departments in the government.

We are proud to lead ambition on the global movement of fossil fuel subsidies. Canada has accelerated its G20 commitment, from 2025 to 2023, and we are on track to deliver on this accelerated timeline. We are also calling on peer countries to accelerate their timeline. When we come forward with the fossil fuel subsidies framework, this will be a first-of-its-kind approach to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. No other country has published its methodology for so transparently identifying fossil fuel subsidies. This is the second of a three-part commitment on the financing of the fossil fuel sector. The first was international financing of the fossil fuel subsidy, which we delivered on last December, with widespread acclaim from think tanks and environmental organizations. The second commitment is on domestic fossil fuel subsidies, which we are on track to complete shortly, and the third one is on domestic public financing of fossil fuel subsidies.

Several organizations, such as Equiterre and Environmental Defence, have publicly highlighted the progress made on this issue while indicating that there is still work to be done. The NGO Oil Change International has published a report showing that, among G7 countries, Canada and Great Britain are at the forefront on issues of international funding of fossil fuels.

We also need to be better prepared to face the impacts of climate change. We must ensure the health, security and well-being of the population and communities across the country. A good adaptation strategy is also a good economic strategy and will help minimize the costs of the impacts of climate change, which have already been assessed at several billions of dollars per year.

Those are our main objectives in collaborating with the population to develop Canada's first national adaptation strategy. Part of this work focused on the approach needed to build resilience to the impacts of climate change. This approach includes, among others, a framework to measure progress made across the country so we ensure that our measures remain effective as the climate continues to change.

The following are a few reactions to the release of the Government of Canada adaptation action plan.

The Insurance Bureau of Canada said, “Canada's first National Adaptation Strategy is brave and ambitious. No other country has proposed such a comprehensive suite of adaptation targets.” The Federation of Canadian Municipalities said that the National Adaptation Strategy is “a critical framework that will help to better protect Canadian communities from the effects of extreme weather events made more severe by a changing climate.” Finally, Climate Proof Canada said, “Climate Proof Canada applauds the Government of Canada on world-leading National Adaptation Strategy", and that this “represents a bold step forward by delivering a strategy with world-leading targets and clear goals that will drive necessary progress on adapting to the worst impacts of climate change.”

Climate change is a global problem, and Canadians want real climate action. The government owes it to them to be responsible and bring in policies that are known to be the most efficient and cost effective, which is what we are doing.

However, it is important to remember that the federal government cannot meet Canada's objectives for climate change and adaptation on its own. A concerted effort is needed from all governments, economic stakeholders and Canadian society as a whole. Each sector has a role to play and a responsibility to reduce climate pollution.

Action on climate change has become the driving force for economic opportunity in the 21st century. Countries and businesses across the world are moving rapidly toward net-zero emissions.

With the initiatives we have already introduced, and many others that are still to come, we are taking action today to ensure not only that Canada is not left behind, but that we actually become a leader in the global low-carbon economy.

We must continue to fight climate change. We recognize that we need to do more to tackle climate change, prevent its impacts and support communities affected by natural disasters. We must continue to work together and do more. However, in order to do more, we need the support of all parties.

It is unfortunate to see that, in 2023, we are still having to try and convince the Conservative Party of Canada that climate change is real, that it is happening now and that it is costing Canadian lives and dramatically impacting our society.

There are forest fires burning all across Canada right now. People are risking their lives to ensure Canadians' safety and protect the environment. However, the Conservatives are trying to block everything we try to do to fight pollution.

Last week, we saw the member for Red Deer—Mountain View rise in the House and tell Canadians that climate change is normal. Pretending it is normal is irresponsible and it is disrespectful to Quebeckers or Canadians who are fighting for their lives against raging wildfires.

It has been 271 days since the leader of the Conservative Party was named leader and still no plan to fight pollution, no plan to support the economy of the 21st century and no plan to support Canadians.

The Leader of the Opposition spoke for four hours last night in the House, but did he talk about the linkages between the devastating forest fires and climate change? Did he talk about his plan to fight the climate crisis or even how he would work to help Canadians face those impacts? He did none of those things, because, like his party, he denies the very existence of climate change.

Rather than investing their time in debating carbon pricing or blocking everything we are trying to put in place to fight pollution, perhaps the Conservatives should invest that time toward writing a real plan for our environment, for the future of our kids and grandkids, and for the future of the economy of this country.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the minister alluded to his having prepared the country, that we know climate change is here. I would like to ask the minister this. I had a cabin burn down in northern Ontario. The firefighting force up there told me it was short water bombers.

If we look to the CL-215, the government could have procured more water bombers. The president of Viking said yesterday that if a Canadian province ordered a water bomber, it could not even begin construction until 2030 now. All the orders are from Europe. Europe knew what was coming and it reacted. Our Canadian military now cannot get helmets. We have the new airbus A-330s. They are going to have to go out and procure fuel tankers.

The government has not prepared the country, so I would like the minister to comment on the water bomber situation.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think the member almost recognized the reality of climate change. For that, I am extremely grateful.

As I said, we have presented Canada's first-ever national adaptation strategy. No other government did that before we did. That strategy has been applauded by many stakeholders in this field. I also recognize that we need to do more. We are not ready to face the impacts of climate change. To get Canada ready to face the impacts of climate change, I guess the Conservative Party would have to recognize that climate change exists.

We are on it, we are working, but I recognize more work still needs to be done.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have often heard the Minister of Environment boast in the House about 2021, saying that emissions reached record-setting lows that year. This is hardly surprising, considering there was a pandemic going on. Although he denied it, I remember that the vast majority of Quebeckers had to comply with a curfew for half the year, which says a lot about the strict lockdown in effect at the time. Needless to say, planes were grounded, and teleworking meant that cars stayed in the garage.

What did not increase during that lockdown year, but that certainly made up for it in the inflationary year of 2022, were oil company profits. What did not decrease were the billions of dollars that Ottawa supplied to oil companies.

Given that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has shown that 80% of oil must remain where it is, underground, can the Minister of Environment promise us that there will be no more new oil development projects?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

First, I would like to remind him that, in 2021, Canada's economic growth was the strongest in the G7, at 5%. Economic growth in Canada leads to increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Second, despite the global pandemic, we had the best record of any G7 country of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The pandemic affected not just Canada, but the entire world. As I said in my speech, we eliminated international fossil fuel subsidies last year, and we will eliminate domestic subsidies this year, in 2023. That is two years earlier than all our G20 partners.

Third, I think that my colleague and the Bloc Québécois would be the first to object if the federal government encroached on provincial jurisdiction. The use of natural resources is a provincial jurisdiction. Where we can make a difference is on pollution, and that is exactly what we are doing.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, right now, as forest fires are raging across the country, from Nova Scotia to Vancouver Island, what are the Liberals doing? They are building pipelines and subsidizing oil and gas.

While the Liberals are patting themselves on the back, right now a fire is burning in my riding, and not just anywhere. It is at Cameron Lake Bluffs, on the doorstop of Cathedral Grove, of the ancient rainforest in my riding. This is in early June.

We need the government to step up and take action on climate change, but also to ensure that there is a separate firefighting agency in Canada to support provinces when there are surges. We also want to ensure that the government has people's back when it comes to mental health supports and climate infrastructure.

Right now, as I said, Highway 4 is cut off. I cannot even get home this weekend. Thirty thousand of my constituents are trapped on the other side of Cameron Lake. Seniors cannot get to their doctor appointments. People cannot get to work. The indigenous communities are greatly impacted.

Will the government have the backs of people in my riding, and across the country, if my province asks for help?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his advocacy on this issue. He talked about the forest fire situation in Canada. It is likely going to be the worst year for forest fires.

The federal government is supporting all the provinces and territories, as well as indigenous communities that have requested help from the federal government. I have spoken personally to some indigenous leaders. Parks Canada has been working with some of them, either to evacuate or to support their communities in their forest firefighting exercise.

I am the first one to recognize that we need to do more. The member spoke about fossil fuel subsidies. He knows that when it comes to eliminating international fossil fuel subsidies, we are the best performing country in all of the G7 countries. That is not me saying that; I am not patting myself on the back. The member can look at reports from Oil Change International or at what organizations like Environmental Defence have said.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, again, climate change is the challenge of this generation and of these times.

In my community of Windsor—Tecumseh, we had two devastating floods in 2016-17 that put thousands of homes under water. It was absolutely devastating. Today, we see a blanket of smoke covering our community.

At the same time, our community of Windsor—Tecumseh will be leading the transition to a zero-emission economy. We will be building electric vehicles in Windsor. We will be building batteries at the Stellantis plant in Windsor.

Could the minister speak to how the goals of environmental support and protection are not mutually exclusive to economic development, when in fact they are reinforcing goals to both the economic and the environmental aims?