Christian Paradis

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, NRCAN administers the clean energy fund and not the green infrastructure fund. There seems to be some confusion in this regard.

Getting back to the clean energy fund, $466 million of it were allocated for three major carbon capture and storage projects. An incredible number of megatons of greenhouse gases will not be emitted in the future. As I explained before, this is one of the challenges because we all know that fossil fuels will continue to be a source of supply for decades to come. We should use them, therefore, in a clean way in order to reduce their environmental footprint as much as possible.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, as I said before in regard to the clean energy fund, another $205 million were allocated to the ecoENERGY retrofit—homes program. The 500,000 Canadian families that took advantage of it will reduce their energy consumption by an average of 22%. That is quite something. Imagine the reduction in greenhouse gases this entails. One thing is certain: every dollar invested in the program generated some $10 in economic activity. That is unbelievable. If my colleague wants to talk about the clean energy fund, I have good news like that which I will be happy to share.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, I think I already gave a clear answer to this question but let me add that the department also looked through its files and determined that it did not give any funding to any companies that Messrs. Jaffer or Glémaud may have been promoting.

In regard to funding for clean energy, our government has spent more than $10 billion since 2006 on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and a sustainable environment. To do this, we invested in green infrastructure, energy efficiency, clean energy technologies, and the production of less polluting energy and fuels.

That is much more impressive action than what my colleague is talking about and to which I have responded three times.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As I said, the department has informed me that the documents contained in the access to information request only pertain to Mr. Patrick Glémaud's role as Department of Justice legal counsel and the work he did with NRCan as a public servant.

There were no meetings between the political representatives in my office or the office of the former natural resources minister and Mr. Jaffer or Mr. Glémaud. Natural Resources Canada has not found any files at all indicating any meetings or anything of the kind. That is what I clearly told the committee chair.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Indeed, Madam Chair, I sent a letter to the Clerk of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates indicating that there is no record of any meeting with either Mr. Glémaud or Mr. Jaffer. That is what the committee wanted to know. It received a response to the effect that there was no meeting or any indication of any such thing.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, under the Prime Minister's leadership, our government has introduced the most ambitious northern strategy in the history of Canada, and promoting economic and social development is a crucial component of that strategy. Understandably, a project of this scale must be based on agreement and co-operation.

We are consulting northern communities on all aspects and all initiatives. We want people to become involved in achieving our shared vision of how the region's vast potential should be developed, while facing the challenges that are inherent in an initiative of this kind.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, both the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission have a long history of conducting environmental assessments under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. They have demonstrated their independence and their commitment to safety and the protection of our environment time and again.

The proposed amendment will not change the heart of the law. Environmental assessments, led by the NEB and the CNSC, must meet all the standards of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, period. That includes the provisions for public participation.

We are giving the NEB and the CNSC the authority to establish participant funding programs. This will ensure that Canadians, including aboriginal Canadians, have the support they need to prepare for and participate in environmental assessments in a meaningful way. In fact, the opportunity for public participation will increase since these funding programs will support participation at all levels of the process, not just for public hearings.

I can assure Canadians that the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will continue to be met and that Canadians will have even greater and more meaningful access to contribute to and be part of the process.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, that is false. The National Energy Board has environmental procedures that must be respected. I refer my colleague once again to the Canada Oil and Gas Drilling and Production Regulations, which include many conditions. In the past, the board has conducted environmental assessments that may have overlapped those of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Our Bill C-9 aims to clarify the entire process to make it more user friendly, but more importantly, to better protect the environment. The public will have greater access to any assessments the board conducts.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, no drilling has been authorized in the Beaufort Sea. No authorization has been granted for any deepwater drilling in the Arctic waters in general. I repeat: the National Energy Board is an independent body. It is a quasi-judicial board with its own legislative framework that must be rigorously followed. That is the current situation.

[Business of Supply, May 31st, 2010]

Madam Chair, I would have a hard time agreeing with my NDP colleague, despite the fact that I like him personally. Our positions on the subject are diametrically opposed. He does not think we should exploit Canada's oil resources. I think that we can achieve a balance, and that is our government's position. This is an economic driver that we have to use to ensure our energy security and position Canada as a major player, as well as to ensure responsible development that respects the environment.