Debates of Sept. 22nd, 2025

Opposition Motion—Oil and Gas Emissions Cap

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will split my time with the new, great member for Terra Nova—The Peninsulas.

In 2023, the Liberals imposed yet another step in their anti-Canadian energy agenda, an oil and gas emissions cap they touted as the first and only kind in the world, designed to limit Canadian oil and gas production, which will really cap and kill Canadian jobs, businesses, private sector clean tech, and revenue for all levels of government to provide programs and services Canadians value. Its true intent, to limit production of Canadian oil and gas specifically, is clearer in the words of the current Prime Minister, who was a senior economic and energy adviser to the then prime minister, Trudeau, when he announced it.

The current Prime Minister, of course, said, “as much as half of [proven oil reserves] need to stay in the ground.” The Liberals, 20 months and three weeks ago, said the Canadian oil and gas cap was bold climate leadership. However, common-sense Conservatives saw it for what it was: an unprecedented, arbitrary production cap, the only one of its kind in the entire world, and self-harm to Canada by our own federal government.

That is right, and let me be extra clear about it. No other country, and importantly, no major oil- or gas-producing country, has imposed an absolute cap federally on its own production: not the United States, Canada's biggest energy customer and competitor, which, because of the last anti-development Liberal decade that killed at least four Canadian pipelines and dozens of LNG projects, turned the world away from Canada and drove hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in major projects out of our country; not Norway; not Saudi Arabia; and not a single OPEC nation made up of hostile, anti-freedom regimes with lower and often non-existent environmental and human rights standards.

Even though the current Prime Minister is another Liberal, he suddenly claims to want to make Canada an energy superpower and put shovels in the ground on major projects at unimaginable speeds not seen in generations. However, how can Canada be an energy superpower when the Liberal government blocks Canadian energy production and exports with its own laws and policies that are all still on the books?

How can Canada lead when the Liberals decided to impose a policy that interferes in provincial jurisdiction and that experts, proponents and indigenous entrepreneurs all say will kill major projects and thousands of jobs? The layer of the Canadian oil and gas cap on top of other anti-energy laws and policies block the very projects that would create Canadian jobs, reduce emissions and get Canadian oil and gas out to allies and to global markets.

The last, lost Liberal decade of domestic policy attacks on Canadian energy has put Canada in a vulnerable, dependent position that was totally preventable. Canada of course still sells up to 90% of our oil and gas to the United States at steep discounts because the Liberals killed two potential export pipelines outright: one to the west coast to access growing Asian markets in the most direct, affordable and safest route, and one west-to-east pipeline that would have ensured Canadian self-sufficiency with western oil for eastern refineries and more competition for customers with exports to Europe.

At the same time, both Democrat and Republican administrations turbocharged the American production and exports of oil and LNG, turning the U.S. into the world's leading global supplier, while the Liberals, while watching all this happen, increased their stranglehold on Canadian oil and gas and workers at every single step. Various experts estimate the discounts cost Canadians big, about $25 billion every year. Just imagine what infrastructure, programs or services that revenue could provide right now and could have contributed during the last decade to benefit Canadians everywhere, if the Liberals had not spent the last decade killing active private sector pipeline proposals to ensure that no new ones would be proposed.

The truth is that the Liberals announced the Canadian oil and gas cap publicly with little consultation and economic analysis in advance. The Prime Minister was even in another country when he imposed it. The Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition at the time did a short study on it at committee, but Conservatives had to dissent in order to properly highlight the cautions about the wide-ranging and catastrophic impacts of the Canadian oil and gas cap.

Witnesses during the committee work did warn them. Dale Swampy of the National Coalition of Chiefs said the government “treat[s] the oil and gas sector like they're the enemy and a problem to be fixed” and that “a cap on emissions will be, in effect, a cap on production”, which kills economic reconciliation opportunities for indigenous communities and business owners who need it most.

The Liberals were warned the cap would harm indigenous, rural and remote communities the worst, but they did not care, even though Canadian oil and gas developers spend about $14 billion through procurement from 585 indigenous-affiliated vendors across 110 municipalities and 45 indigenous communities. That is real money that makes a real difference for indigenous people, all threatened by the revenue-killing, job-killing Canadian oil and gas cap.

Since then, the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer has reported that the Liberals' oil and gas cap will kill 54,000 jobs by 2032. That is almost double the population of the Alberta-Saskatchewan border city of Lloydminster. There are hundreds more cities of that size across Canada. That number of jobs will be lost in six years because of the cap, a cut of $21 billion from Canada's GDP. The cap will shrink Alberta's GDP by 4.5%, and the rest of Canada's economy by 1%. It will cause $191 billion of lost activity in Alberta and $91 billion in the rest of Canada.

Why should this matter to Canadians in every part of the country? This is why: The oil and gas sector contributes 7.7% of Canada's GDP. It is still Canada's top export despite the damage the Liberals have done. Over $208 billion every year is what it contributes to Canada's GDP, with $166 billion from direct activity and $42.8 billion from the supply chain. It supports over 446,000 direct and indirect jobs, including more than 10,800 indigenous jobs.

Nearly 900,000 Canadians depend on the oil and gas sector through spinoff or induced job creation. These are also not easily replaceable minimum wage jobs, since the average compensation for an oil and gas worker is nearly twice the national average for goods-producing sectors. Alberta employs 54% of the supply chain workers, but B.C., Ontario and Quebec together account for over a third of those jobs. That means that the cap threatens jobs, paycheques and government revenue from Vancouver to Montreal, and everywhere that oil and gas is produced, from Fort St. John to St. John's and Saint John.

The Conference Board of Canada warns that between 2030 and 2040, the cap could reduce Canada's GDP by up to $1 trillion, and strip $151 billion in federal revenues, money that could go to defence, to border security, to fighting crime and to federal programs, and could be shared with provinces to build hospitals, schools, roads and provide social services.

Proponents across Canada agree the cap is bad policy and that it disadvantages Canadian businesses and jobs. Since growing Canadian oil and gas production and exports is the solution to ensuring Canadian energy security and to help lower emissions globally, the Liberals were warned “this could lead to greater global emissions as we see more coal being utilized than natural gas and sources of supply...coming from jurisdictions that don't have [Canada's] high standards.”

World-class oil and gas operators across Canada point out their ongoing aggressive reductions in both absolute and emissions intensity, which, by the way, the Liberals' oil and gas censorship bill precludes them from talking about. The cap could also have the opposite impact from what its proponents claim, by driving more projects and investment out of Canada, and could “bring all action to a halt”.

The truth remains today that the oil and gas sector, among all private sector developers, invests the most annually in clean tech and emissions reduction technology, more than all other sectors in Canada combined. Warnings that the cap will do exactly what the Prime Minister said he wanted it to do, which is to keep oil and gas in the ground and kill businesses, jobs and government revenue, and that it will also not even achieve the environmental outcomes its proponents claim, should be heeded.

The Liberal oil and gas emissions cap is a production cap. The former environment minister also admitted that oil and gas production falls under provincial jurisdiction, so the cap also inflames already divided provincial governments and sparks legal challenges with more uncertainty that drives away investment.

While Canada caps production, of course the world is passing Canada by, because the Liberals have let them. The EU has signed a $750-billion deal for American energy, and other countries have been forced to sign deals with hostile authoritarian regimes for LNG after the Liberals spent 10 years saying there is no business case.

The Conservative motion today is very clear. We are the only party fighting to repeal the job-killing, economy-killing, emissions reduction-killing cap, full stop. Canadians cannot afford another lost Liberal decade. The motion is clear: Repeal the cap. Unleash Canadian energy to make a strong, united Canada self-reliant—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Questions and comments, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

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

Mr. Speaker, part of the problem for the member opposite is that I was actually here for part of the years Stephen Harper was the prime minister, in 2015. If we were to be honest, what we would say is that Stephen Harper could not even build an inch of pipeline to our coastlines. The member talks about the east-west pipeline proposal, which is something that was determined by the economics, and that is the reason Harper could not do it. It actually took a different administration to get Trans Mountain built. It had nothing to do with the Conservatives. Where the Conservatives might get credit is on propaganda, misinformation and so forth.

Does the member not believe it is a good thing when we have Ottawa and the provinces, in particular Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, working more closely together to ensure that we can build big projects?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it sure is an indictment of his own government and of his sitting here, at least in the last decade since I was elected, that he just admitted the federal government has not been working with provincial governments co-operatively over the last 10 years. Instead, today a consequence of the Liberal government is more division in provinces and people pitted against each other than ever before. What a shame that is.

Of course the truth is that under the former Conservative government, four pipelines were built, and all the private sector proposals for both the LNG projects and the pipelines that the Liberals outright killed. The former prime minister vetoed the northern gateway pipeline, and the Liberals interfered in the regulatory process deliberately to put a pin in the west to east pipeline so Canada could not be energy self-sufficient and have more customers.

The Liberals are the ones who have a track record of killing pipelines. That is who they truly are, and the Conservative Party is the only party that has been consistent on behalf of oil and gas workers in every corner of this country.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we have seen quite a bit of backtracking on several environmental issues since the new Prime Minister's arrival, particularly with regard to carbon pricing, electric vehicles and Canada's greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

Now, we sense some backtracking on the idea of capping emissions from Canada's oil and gas sector. This shift seems virtually tantamount to climate skepticism. I am wondering what my Conservative colleague thinks about global warming. Is it an established scientific fact?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly could not begin to tell the member how Canadians are supposed to decipher the last decade of uncertainty and the current uncertainty that the Liberals are causing. He raises a great point for voters in every single part of the country who voted for the Liberals based on their concerns and their support of anti-energy and anti-development policies that the government has imposed over the last 10 years.

The people in this place who have to answer for why they are baiting and switching and flipping and flopping, and who can stand here shamelessly and take positions that are diametrically opposed to the ones they defended for a decade, including just six months ago, are the people who have to answer to Canadians about what their views are and what they are going to achieve.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Lakeland, just to the south of my riding, gave a very passionate speech defending people who work in the energy industry. As she very rightly pointed out, a cap on emissions is a cap on production, which will hurt with respect to creating jobs

Could the member explain why there are so many concerns being raised by people in our ridings and throughout Canada about the constant attack from the Liberals? While Liberals appear as though they might possibly change their opinions, with what they are saying with words, we have seen no actual action. I am just wondering whether she could give her feelings on that.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for being such a great representative and advocate for the people in her riding, which makes an outsized economic contribution to the entire country and directly helps contribute to programs and services that are delivered in every province across Canada.

I could not begin to explain the thinking of the Liberals or the damage they have done to their own credibility, but what really dismays me after 10 years is all the lost opportunities, which they did deliberately and were warned about. Hundreds of thousands of jobs lost by people right across Canada because of the anti-energy policy is unconscionable.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, Climate Change; the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, Small Business.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I serve a big riding. I have knocked on thousands of doors. The consensus is clear: Newfoundlanders and Labradorians do not want these emissions caps choking our economy. These emissions caps do not just affect my riding. They affect the whole world. We have allies throughout the world who are starving for more energy.

Our energy is some of the most socially inclusive oil and gas in the world, with the strictest environmental standards. We should be supplying our allies with this energy so we can build our economy, reduce emissions and provide international security.

When Russia invaded Ukraine, the message was clear: Europe needed to eliminate its dependence on oil and gas from Russia. The countries affected, such as Germany, came to my province of Newfoundland looking for more oil and gas, specifically LNG, liquefied natural gas. Instead of the Liberal government working with Germany and our private investors, the government said that there was no business case and tried to sell it hydrogen instead. If the Liberal governments had not axed the LNG projects the last Conservative government started, Germany would have already been purchasing our resources rather than funding Russia and giving it more money and more influence in Europe to fund its wars, wars which our taxpayers send their money to combat. It is an oxymoron.

To recap, we have emissions caps that choke our industry, allowing for more opportunities for Russia to sell its energy to fund its wars. While our taxpayer dollars lose billions in royalties, we send our taxpayer dollars to Ukraine to fight that very country. It is a lose-lose. It does not even begin to make sense. Why will the Liberal government not remove the emissions caps so we can produce more for our allies and provide international security for both of us?

Believe it or not, providing the world with our oil and gas would enable us to reduce carbon emissions. We do not need to choke our economy to lower global emissions. We can actually lower global emissions by producing more and getting more Canadians back to work. Natural gas produces roughly half the emissions of coal. The Fraser Institute estimates that doubling Canadian gas production and exporting it to Asia could reduce global emissions by as much as 630 million tonnes per year, almost 90% of Canada's total amount. Let that sink in. There is also a significant carbon savings for replacing coal with traditional oil. That is why we as Conservatives are standing for it. It is a win-win.

Regardless of what the Liberals fantasize about, as third world countries are rapidly developing, the global demand for energy is skyrocketing. I was once asked this question: What year did the world burn the most amount of coal? I pondered it, thought about it and figured it was probably during the late nineties or late eighties. I was shocked to learn that the answer was last year. It has always been last year and it will continue to be last year for many years into the future. That is heartbreaking.

Last year, the world consumed nine billion tonnes of coal. If the world really wants to eliminate coal consumption, we need to produce an initial 41 billion barrels of oil. I think we can do it here in Canada. The reality is that we cannot miss out on an opportunity to have a better tomorrow because we are fantasizing about having a perfect tomorrow.

Where should these nations turn to to source this natural oil and gas? While our allies look elsewhere, Canada keeps selling almost all of its oil and gas south of the border. Natural Resources Canada confirms that 98% of our crude goes to the U.S., nearly four billion barrels per day. While the Canada Energy Regulator shows that almost all of our gas goes to the U.S., we even sell it at a discount compared to the U.S. benchmarks. It is rumoured that every one dollar of crude that we send to the U.S. is exported for three dollars. Talk about a markup.

It gets worse. While visiting a natural gas plant in Alberta, I found out that it is selling to a grid that can be brought down to the Americans for five cents a unit. The Americans liquefy that and sell it for over $12 U.S. a unit. Something is wrong here.

That is why Conservatives believe Canadian energy should be cutting coal abroad instead of being sold off to the Americans for pennies on the dollar. We are in a trade war with a country where Trump yells, “Drill, baby, drill”. Oil companies are investing in the U.S. rather than here in Canada because there is not enough room under these production caps. The Liberals claim they are trying to fight Trump and build our economy, but they are trying to do it with one arm tied behind their backs.

We need to build these pipelines. We need to build a nation that is able to export to other countries so we can truly lower carbon emissions, yet as the Liberal government was going around claiming it wanted to do that, it refused to take the first step to eliminate the emission caps. Were the Liberals intentionally deceiving voters during their election campaign, or were they simply too stubborn to take the first step?

The reality is that if we, as Canadians, do not supply this energy, other countries will. If there is one country in the world that will benefit from selling energy, I propose that it be Canada. I propose it be Newfoundland. Newfoundland and Labrador's GDP relies on oil and gas more than any other province, even more than Alberta. Newfoundland has more undiscovered offshore oil and gas than we do discovered, yet companies will not invest any further in exploration because of these emission caps.

The Bay du Nord project was delayed time after time because of these Liberals' failures, and if it goes ahead, it will be the last offshore project in Newfoundland due to these emissions caps. There is simply no more room. It is capped. Not only will it be the last project, but also, in 2032, the emission caps will decrease, and the current offshore industry will have to cut back on production. Can our economy really take another hit when unemployment is at an all time high and people can barely afford groceries?

We, as Conservatives, promised to work with the industry to double oil and gas in Newfoundland, which would have added an additional 25% to our provincial GDP. Imagine the roads that we could have paved. Imagine the doctors we could have hired, even in St. Lawrence. Instead, we have a Liberal government that wants to leave the emission caps in place, in effect leaving our roads and health care system in despair.

I have worked in the oil and gas industry, and I can tell members that our oil and gas is the most socially and environmentally acceptable oil in the world. In addition to having some of the strictest environmental regulations in the world, we have the highest safety requirements to protect workers and prioritize quality of life. We have some of the most inclusive oil and gas production in the world. The Canadian energy sector does not discriminate. We hire people of all races, all genders and all sexual orientations. We ensure that our oil and gas benefits everybody in this country.

Without naming names, I am not confident that all energy-producing countries have the same equality that we have here in Canada. Why do our allies, who believe in equality, believe in safety and want to see strong environmental regulations, keep buying dirty dictator oil? It is because the Liberal government refuses to repeal the emissions cap so that we can meet their supply.

As I stated before, we cannot miss out on our opportunity to have a better tomorrow because we are fantasizing about having a perfect tomorrow. I hope this message will move the Liberal government to work with us Conservatives to repeal these emissions caps so that we can put Canada first for a change.

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

Mr. Speaker, we cannot trust Conservative policy. The member is being critical because the United States is taking our oil and then making a profit from it. However, when I was questioning the critic, I mentioned that the Conservatives had not built any pipelines. Stephen Harper did not build any pipelines to the west coast. The response was that they built four. Those four pipelines went to the United States. We can contrast that to the one major pipeline that we put into place, which went to the west coast. Does the member not see the hypocrisy there?

Not to mention Bill C-49, which was to the economic advantage of Atlantic Canada, and the Conservatives voted against it. Would the member not acknowledge that the leader of the Conservative Party and his seatmates were wrong to vote against C-49?

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I will acknowledge a few things. If it is not one thing on one side of the country, it is another thing on the other. The Liberals say that we cannot sell our oil and gas because we cannot get it to market from Alberta. However, for Newfoundland, there is no excuse. We are at tidewater, yet the emissions caps keeps us choked.

If it is not one thing, it is another. I am tired of excuses. Canada is tired of excuses. A Conservative government would be working together to build this country.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since the arrival of this new government, we have seen a competition between the Conservatives and the Liberals to see who likes oil and gas the most. This is on full display yet again today, with both sides calling to get rid of all environmental regulations.

Investment credits of $5.7 billion are allocated to carbon capture and sequestration, a measure that seeks to help oil and gas companies. Do the Conservatives agree with allocating billions of dollars in this way to an industry that is already making multibillion-dollar profits?

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the member is saying that Conservatives and Liberals are trying to see who is the most pro oil and gas. Every province in Canada is happy to take oil money, but they are not all that happy to play the oil game. We cannot have oil money without playing the oil game.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as a first-generation Albertan with a mother from St. John's, Newfoundland, I want to say how happy I am to have the member joining us from that great province of Newfoundland and Labrador as an advocate for energy workers and resource development right across the country.

Speaking of that, we both know that generations of young Atlantic Canadians have had to find work in other places and that there have been massive job losses since the Prime Minister came to office, specifically in natural resources. Year over year, there have been hundreds of thousands of job losses. In May, June and August, there were losses in forestry, mining, fishing, quarrying, and oil and gas. That is the reality of the Liberals' record and for the future.

What does the member have to say to the people he represents and all Canadians about that?

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador has some of the highest unemployment rates in the country. Next to Newfoundland and Labrador, not far behind is Alberta. That is because the Liberal government has brought in emissions caps and has been choking our economy. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have been travelling back and forth to Alberta and other provinces for years. The member for Fort McMurray—Cold Lake is in agreement with that because she understands. She sees that.

The economy of Newfoundland and Labrador is not just in the offshore industry but also in Alberta. When the west does better, all of Canada does better, including the east coast and Newfoundland.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Mr. Speaker, one of the things the member from Newfoundland so rightfully pointed out is that, for the last 10 years, the government in Ottawa has been telling the energy industry that it should not exist, that it should transition away to something else and that the Liberals were ashamed of it.

Now, the Liberals are saying they are different, but they have not really done anything different. They have not gotten rid of the anti-energy laws. All they have done is created a new framework so they can bypass their own bad policies—

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I have to interrupt the member to allow the member for Terra Nova—The Peninsulas to respond.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Mr. Speaker, we have an interconnected economy. We want to thank Fort McMurray for all the work it has done for Newfoundland and Labrador, and we look forward to working with Alberta to build the best country that we can for change.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

When the previous member was speaking, a member crossed in front of him. Standing Order 16(2) says that a member cannot cross between the Speaker and the member who is speaking. The guideline is not the TV screens but whether the Speaker is in the chair and the member is speaking. This is a reminder for members so this does not happen to the parliamentary secretary.

Resuming debate, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change has the floor.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Carleton.

Today, we are highlighting the concrete progress that greenhouse gas emission limits are making across this country. This policy measure is not just an abstract goal; it transforms the way we build our homes, transport our goods, produce our energy and manufacture essential materials such as concrete. Through these goals, we are seeing tangible results for the environment, public health and the Canadian economy.

Every tonne of GHGs avoided contributes to cleaner air, a more stable climate and more resilient communities. With respect to housing, the residential and commercial sector accounts for a significant share of national emissions. The limits encourage the adoption of stricter energy standards for new and renovated buildings, the optimization of heating and cooling systems and the integration of renewable energy sources. Canadians benefit from efficient homes, with lower energy bills and increased comfort. These improvements not only are good for the environment but also generate jobs in construction, engineering and energy-efficient retrofit services.

Transportation is one of the sectors where limits have a direct impact. Policies that accompany the limits, such as the clean fuel regulations, stimulate the use of low-carbon fuels and support the transition to electric and hybrid vehicles. By reducing the carbon intensity of fuels and encouraging the adoption of cleaner technologies, we are improving air quality in our cities and helping to prevent respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Canadians benefit from a healthier environment while seeing new economic opportunities emerge in the transportation and sustainable mobility sector.

In the industrial sector, the limits encourage innovation and process modernization. Industries such as cement, steel and chemicals are investing in carbon capture and storage, energy optimization and reducing fugitive emissions. These initiatives not only reduce the carbon footprint but also position Canada as a leader in the production of low-emission industrial goods that can compete in an increasingly sustainable global market.

The concrete and building materials sector is particularly energy-intensive and responsible for a significant share of industrial emissions. Thanks to the limits and complementary policies, we are seeing the increasing adoption of low-carbon formulations, alternative cements and carbon capture technologies. These advances reduce the carbon intensity of construction while maintaining the quality and durability of materials. They are a perfect example of how emission limits encourage innovation and create economic opportunities in traditional sectors.

A central element of this progress is the reduction of methane emissions. Methane is a potent gas, responsible for nearly 30% of global warming to date and hundreds of thousands of premature deaths each year due to air pollution.

Canada is a co-lead of the comprehensive methane arrangement, alongside the European Union. This includes measures in the oil and gas sector, as well as in landfills. These actions not only reduce emissions but also improve air quality, public health and the competitiveness of Canadian products in the global marketplace.

Reducing GHG emissions and air pollutants, such as volatile organic compounds, directly improves the health of Canadians. Volatile organic compound regulations in oil and gas facilities reduce exposure to harmful substances such as benzene. Each reduction in emissions helps prevent respiratory diseases, premature deaths and health costs estimated at more than $146 billion annually. This shows that emissions reductions are not only good for the climate but essential for the well-being of communities.

The success of the boundaries depends on collaboration with provinces, territories and indigenous communities. Each region has its own priorities and solutions to reduce these emissions. The government is working in partnership to align policies, maximize reductions and support communities in their energy transition. Indigenous communities are actively involved in the design of clean energy projects right across the country, contributing to local solutions while benefiting from sustainable economic opportunities.

Emissions reductions drive innovation across all sectors. Companies are investing in clean technology, energy efficiency and carbon capture, creating low-emission products and services that meet the growing demand of international markets. At the same time, programs like the biofuels incentive program support the domestic production of renewable fuels, creating jobs and economic opportunities for regions right across the country.

The goal of reducing emissions has already produced concrete results. Fugitive methane emissions from the oil and gas sector decreased by 33% between 2013 and 2023; the concrete, steel and clean fuel industries are adopting innovative technologies to reduce carbon intensity; and buildings and transportation are experiencing energy efficiency gains and increased adoption of low-emission solutions. This progress illustrates that emission limits are not an abstract idea but an effective tool to achieve tangible results for both the environment and the economy.

Limits on emissions are making a real difference in the lives of all Canadians. In housing, transportation, industry and even the concrete sector, we see measurable improvements in energy efficiency, emissions reduction and air quality. Combined with methane reduction and Canadian leadership on the international stage, these measures position our country as a global leader in climate and clean energy. They show that it is possible to reconcile economic growth, public health and environmental responsibility.

The national emissions cap is not just a policy; it is a road map to a cleaner, safer and more prosperous future for all Canadians today and tomorrow, for my children's generation and my grandchildren's generation.

[Scot Davidson, Conservative, New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have never heard so much fluff, and I really do not even know where to start.

To the member, first of all, if he could comment, my riding did not receive the rural top-up under the carbon tax that the government defended for 10 years. He talks about the retrofit program: “Federal government pulls plug on home retrofit loan program”. Thirdly, he talks about the transition. The northern part of my riding is on propane. We have been pleading for 10 years for a natural gas line. We cannot even get a natural gas line. We have old, phase one hydro infrastructure.

This is what frustrates the people in my riding. When the government sends money overseas, they are on the outside looking in, saying, “What about us?”

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is why we are investing in LNG Canada phase 2. We are investing in new technologies to ensure that the future of this country is safe and secure for future generations. We will continue to do that today, tomorrow and for the future. I want to ensure that my kids and grandkids, in the future, can live, play and recreate the way I did on the mouth of the Fraser River.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, experts at the Canadian Climate Institute were very clear last week: Canada will not meet its greenhouse gas reduction target for 2030.

This is because of oil and gas production, whose emissions increased by 83% between 1990 and 2022. Last year, they increased even more and that cancels the efforts in other sectors, including the efforts of Quebec. Will the government unequivocally commit to capping greenhouse gas emissions in the oil and gas sector to ensure that Alberta finally makes the efforts it needs to make?

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect and deserve a clean, low-carbon and resilient future. That is why we will continue to work hard, making sure that we make bold decisions for all Canadians right across this country and trying to reach our targets as strongly as possible. That is what this side of the House will continue to do and what I will continue to do as the parliamentary secretary for Environment and Climate Change Canada, working, hopefully, on both sides of the aisle.