Cathy McLeod

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I have noticed a pattern with the government. It consults when it feels like it. In the case of the tanker moratorium, in the case of the northern gateway project, and in the case of the Beaufort Sea moratorium, there was no consultation. How does the member align that with his words about consultation around this bill, when clearly there are many times when the government has utterly failed in that area?

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I have found it very interesting that as the Liberals have been debating this particular bill, they only pay attention to half of the bill, and that is the half related to the water board issue. They are completely silent on the very important second half, which is a direct paradox to consultation and collaboration. It is where the government is taking the power onto itself, in terms of placing moratoriums through Governor in Council, through the executive branch, for very vague national interest reasons.

I would ask my colleague to ignore part A in his answer, but look at Bill C-69, Bill C-48, the letter that was sent yesterday from the premier of his territory and part B of this bill, and tell us if he believes that the government is acting in the best interests of his territory.

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 11th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I have suggested that the bill, in spite of the fact that it has taken the Liberals so many years to get it here, is a paradox. It is about the consultation. What the minister has failed to mention is the fact that part 2 is an arbitrary move by the federal government to give extraordinary powers with respect to moratoriums around resource development.

Is it the position of the government that it consult to perhaps stop progress or stop projects, but does not consult when it wants to stop them itself?

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, this is an expression that I think should apply here: that the government's lack of planning and good House management does not constitute an emergency on our part.

This particular government was aware. It introduced Bill C-88 months ago. The Liberals have rarely brought it up for debate, and now they want to shut it down in the last couple of days of Parliament. It is a piece of legislation that deserves an opportunity for appropriate debate.

Again, they have had it on the Order Paper for over 18 months, and finally they bring it up in the last week. I would like the minister to explain what happened to the last year and a half when we could have been debating this legislation.

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make two points and perhaps the member for Barrie—Innisfil could reflect on them.

I found it very interesting that the Prime Minister announced he wanted to shut down the oil sands when he was in Paris and then he announced a moratorium in the U.S. What does that say to Canadians about his interest and willingness to allow our energy resources to develop?

Today, we had the hammer put down on debate. Maybe five speakers have been able to debate this important issue. The government has had this legislation on the docket. Probably the Liberals should have introduced it two years ago. Now all of a sudden, they try to make their lack of planning our emergency. Quite frankly, I do not believe it is.

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Liberals on the opposite side question relevance, but I would suggest that every single point you made was relevant, and that is talking about how part 2 of Bill C-88 is consistent with their anti-energy policies.

Could you quickly mention some of the other legislation that they have introduced that is so detrimental?

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are consistently trying to confuse as they ask questions tonight. I have described part 1and part 2 as the paradox in this bill. Part 1 is about the consultation process and reflecting on what happened, and part 2 is about ignoring the appropriate consultation process.

With regard to part 2, I would like my colleague to talk about how it is consistent with almost every single piece of legislation the government introduces in Parliament in being anti-resource development and against support for our industry.

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated the comments from the member for Sarnia—Lambton and how she drew the subject of health into it. However, the point of her speech that I really picked up on was where she talked about how the current government is reversing legislation and, in many cases, very important legislation that gave people who wanted to invest in this country a comfort in terms of what their process and regulations were going to be. One that comes to mind that she did not mention was Bill C-69 and navigable waters.

I used to be a municipal mayor and I remember the navigable waters act, which drove municipalities across the country crazy, because if there was just a tiny body of water that could float a canoe, we had to get permits through Transport Canada to do anything, such as minor road repairs. It was a very onerous piece of legislation. Unfortunately, the Liberals and the NDP painted it as an environmental nightmare that we had got rid of protection for waters. To be frank, in all the time after that piece of legislation was enacted, I am not aware of one issue of environmental concern that came about because of that particular change to the navigable waters act.

I wonder if the member could make some comments in terms of perhaps the difficulty of reversing legislation that protects the environment but ensures that people who want to move forward in this country can do so with comfort, knowing that they have reasonable regulations in place.

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, that was an incredibly important question. Every move the government has made, with one exception, is consistent with the Prime Minister's stated objective to phase out the oil sands and basically destroy Canada's energy sector.

[Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, certainly we have talked about the challenge of part 1 and part 2 being totally unconnected pieces of legislation, but I want to take it further. The government, in its budget implementation act, embedded massive changes and the separation of the department into Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, something it definitely promised it would never do. The government referred it to our committee, but the Liberal majority on the committee would not allow for witnesses and allowed for departmental officials only. It went back to the finance committee and we found out there were flaws in the bill that the government had to table amendments to. Who knows what is wrong with the budget implementation act.

We look at Bill S-3 and its sloppy drafting. When it came to us, the government said everything was great and that it would fix a legal problem. It turned out it was a total mess and it had to be taken back to the drawing board.

What is happening is that the Liberals are trying to force legislation through very rapidly at the end of a session, and who knows what flaws are embedded in this particular piece.