Mr. Speaker, I rise with great pleasure and interest this evening to speak to the motion moved by my colleague from Brome—Missisquoi, who is also my riding neighbour. We met at a different point in our lives when he was mayor of Bromont. We have known each other for some years. This is a very good motion and we are going to talk about it. The Bloc Québécois supports Motion No. 15, which is a strategic recognition.
I want to commend the conservation organizations for being vital partners in this type of motion. The member and I share a number of environmental organizations in our ridings, including the Fondation SÉTHY, or the Fondation pour la sauvegarde des écosystèmes du territoire de la Haute‑Yamaska, and REHY, or the Regroupement environnement Haute‑Yamaska, which is made up of organizations with some connection to Brome—Missisquoi. REHY and especially the Fondation SÉTHY are working very hard on the conservation issue. I applaud them for being truly vital partners in conserving our land.
Let us come back to the motion. Of course, tax incentives are a great idea because the government cannot simply rely on the generosity of the private sector. The government also has to do its part. It cannot simply leave this to the private sector. We need to protect biodiversity, but that is not just an option. It is a collective responsibility. It is clear that there are various stakeholders who can play a part in protecting this biodiversity.
It is rather intimidating to speak to this motion when my colleague from Repentigny does such a great job as our environment critic. We have discussed this issue, and he would be better suited to talking about it than I am. There really is a sense of urgency. What we want to do in the House is elevate the debate and talk about the major biodiversity crisis, which is on par with the climate crisis. We must not forget that. We talk a lot about climate change, but the biodiversity crisis is also important.
Here are some key figures. There are one million species that are at risk and 75% of terrestrial habitats have been altered. These figures are based on international data. We want to take meaningful action and talk about food and drinking water supply. Biodiversity also has an impact on health. We do not talk about that enough. Without biodiversity, the conditions necessary for life simply cease to exist.
Finally, we want to remind everyone that the government has made commitments. The government pledged to protect 25% of the country's lands by 2025 and 30% by 2030. It is worth noting that we are currently at approximately 13.8% for land protection and 15.5% for marine protection. There have been repeated delays and sometimes a lack of consistency. The government announces ambitious targets, but does not always give itself the resources needed to meet them.
What we want is to send a clear message that the federal government must do its part. In Quebec, 17% of the territory is protected. Quebec is already taking action. We also want to emphasize that protecting the territory falls under Quebec’s jurisdiction. It is clear that Quebec did not wait for Ottawa to act and that it must be able to continue doing so based on its own priorities. That is important.
I have mentioned that the federal government has a part to play and that Quebec is doing its bit. Now, I would like to highlight some organizations that are working really hard, and I want to acknowledge that they are key players in this fight to protect our land and sea. These organizations have practical, on-the-ground expertise. With the Fondation SÉTHY, I actually had the chance to go into a bog in Saint-Joachim-de-Shefford and talk about biodiversity. I even got to vacuum up spiders. It was a fascinating experience to witness the richness and diversity of our region's peatlands and to observe and catalogue the species of spiders. It provided a very interesting insight into the environment.
I tip my hat to these organizations for their in-depth knowledge of the field. Their work is complex, involving legal, scientific and financial aspects. Having met with representatives of these organizations on numerous occasions, I can say that one of their problems is the lack of recurring funding to help them fulfill their mandate. Among the recommended priorities is the renewal of the natural heritage conservation program, or NHCP. There is also talk of conservation investment funds and improving ecological grants. These organizations are the ones who are actually protecting the land, day in, day out.
Land donations provide better tax advantages than monetary donations. Motion No. 15 addresses this imbalance. The solution it proposes is tax parity, which would result in more stable funding and a larger number of projects. People want to donate to protect nature and that should be encouraged, regardless of the form the donation takes.
I also want to point out that protecting natural environments helps to improve quality of life, provides access to nature and ensures that the land is protected. Access to nature is proven to have a direct impact on both physical and psychological health. There is a connection between protecting natural environments and the growth of our regions, particularly for the local communities that depend on these wonderful areas for their livelihood. Protecting biodiversity means protecting our living environments.
We are really talking about chronic underfunding. The government has made announcements recently, but I still want to remind the House that only 3% of projects receive support. According to a letter I received from a coalition of organizations, that translates into 31 out of 980 projects. That means only 10% of the land is being protected and receiving funding.
The problem is not a lack of projects. It is a lack of federal funding. As I said earlier, we are in the midst of consultations. The federal government has its part to play. Quebec is fulfilling its responsibilities and organizations on the ground need to be supported. The organizations are ready, the projects exist and communities are prepared to do the work, but Ottawa is not always doing what it needs to.
The strategic impact we are hoping to achieve is to show that the current system is not operating at full capacity. This justifies the need to go further than Motion No. 15, even though it is a very good start. We want to put forward meaningful, credible solutions for long-term funding.
The proposals include creating a $150-million investment fund for conservation in Canada. We are talking about endowment-type funding, long-term support for land management to make long-term planning and maintenance possible. Ad hoc funding and unproductive announcements are critical issues that need to be addressed because protecting land is not a single act. It is a commitment for generations to come.
This has an impact in our ridings. It is highly relevant to strengthening political roots, given that there are 150 conservation organizations, over 13,000 volunteers and more than 250,000 hectares of protected land. There is a tangible presence in our ridings and a direct impact on local communities. Behind every conservation project, there are citizens, volunteers and organizations deeply rooted in our communities. I would like to commend Martine and her team at Fondation SÉTHY.
The landscapes of southern Quebec are often overlooked, yet over 80% of the population lives there. These areas are rich in biodiversity, but they are also under pressure, with species in need of protection. This creates conflicts between economic development and conservation. An integrated approach is needed. The places where people live are exactly where we need to be working and developing the economy, since there is more pressure on biodiversity in those areas.
We must restore access to nature. It is a social and health issue, as I mentioned earlier. Doctors are now prescribing nature baths and forest bathing. It promotes physical and mental well-being, yet access to nature, be it lakes or mountains, is becoming increasingly limited. We must protect nature, but also ensure people have access to it close to home.
Finally, we need to develop a comprehensive approach and tailor programs to indigenous communities. I want to emphasize that. We also need to facilitate conservation on agricultural land. Farmers keep telling us that they want to be part of the solution when it comes to protecting the land. They do not always want to be blamed. We need to continue working with them and facilitating the conservation of these agricultural lands.
The federal approach needs to be more consistent, since it is sometimes ineffective. We need to work on that. This motion will help, because the solutions must be tailored to local realities, particularly those of indigenous communities and the farming sector. We have lakes, mountains and land to protect. This is essential for future generations. We will work to get this motion adopted.
I want to once again congratulate my neighbour and colleague from Brome—Missisquoi.