Hélène LeBlanc

[Petitions, September 22nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table a petition that draws the attention of the House of Commons to the fact that Canada Post's plan for reduced service, including the elimination of home mail delivery for a large majority of my constituents in LaSalle—Émard, will really have a negative impact on people.

This petition has been signed by hundreds of members of my constituency in LaSalle—Émard, and I am very pleased to table it today.

[Energy Efficiency Program, September 22nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House today in support of Motion No. 497 on energy efficiency.

I learned to conserve energy when I was very young. At home, my father would always ask me to close the door and tell me that we do not heat the outdoors. He would also ask me to turn off the tap so as not to waste water. Thanks to his guidance, I became aware at an early age that energy is a resource and a commodity to be respected, and the same goes for water. Water conservation and energy efficiency are values I fully support. In my opinion, Canada must support those values as well.

I will read this very important motion. It contains concepts that are very important and must be underscored. The motion states:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should implement an energy efficiency program to encourage owners of houses, residential buildings, shops and businesses to reduce their energy consumption, with a view to: (a) combatting climate change; (b) lowering the energy bills of Canadians; and (c) creating jobs and stimulating the economy.

I think this is a very good motion. It contains three points, one of which is combatting climate change. This is quite timely, considering that there is a major climate change conference being held in New York City right now. The motion also touches on lowering energy bills.

I have the pleasure of representing LaSalle—Émard, which is southwest of Montreal. When I go door to door, I talk to people who own commercial and residential buildings and homes. They too are struggling to make ends meet because their energy bills continue to go up while incomes are stagnating.

An energy efficiency program would be most welcome. As some of my colleagues have mentioned, the eco-energy retrofit program was a big success. I do not understand the government's decision. Although some programs are quite successful, the government decided this one was no longer needed and put an end to it. The program was doing well and would have continued to do so.

I would like to remind hon. members that, when it comes to energy consumption, Canada has made some tentative steps forward, but the battle has yet not been won. In 2010, the residential sector was responsible for 16% of Canada's energy consumption and 14% of its greenhouse gas emissions. That is rather high for a sector that is not industrial and not related to transportation. The consumption rate is very high.

It appears as though Canada is in denial about its northern nature. We cannot seem to accept or take into account that we are a northern country. However, living in the northern hemisphere is a challenge, and with that comes a number of opportunities for Canada to become a leader in energy efficiency. As we know, energy consumption in northern countries is mainly related to heating. Obviously, in the summer, it is associated with the use of air conditioning. We want to create an environment where people are comfortable.

I do not understand why Canada does not want to show that it can be a leader in energy efficiency. Right now, Canada is one of the heaviest users of energy. Just because we produce energy, does not mean we should waste it. Instead, we should recognize that energy is a very important resource for our country and respect it. We should be creating value-added jobs in this area.

If we do research and development and develop energy efficiency technologies, we can export those innovations. Unfortunately, the government does not seem to recognize that way of doing things. However, some very worthwhile jobs could be created in this area. Canada already has companies that work in the area of energy efficiency, but unfortunately, they are barely getting by because the incentives are not big enough for these companies to thrive and grow from small to medium-sized businesses.

Reports from the different areas of the industry show that the least amount of research and development in Canada is done by the construction sector. If there were some sort of incentive, such as the program proposed by my colleague from Drummond—and I applaud and commend him for moving this motion—the federal government would be showing leadership in order to stimulate all economic sectors associated with what we call “green technologies” or “energy efficiency technologies”. This would create jobs and encourage the construction industry to do more research and development and use innovative materials worthy of the 21st century. The residential sector would then be able to do its part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase energy efficiency.

Canada claims to be an energy superpower and so it should really show leadership when it comes to energy efficiency. That makes sense to me. We call ourselves an energy producer, yet we waste the energy produced instead of using energy savings to stimulate job creation and the economy.

I am not the only one saying this. In one of his reports, the former environment commissioner said that protecting the environment was good for business. The motion by my colleague from Drummond says the same thing. If we invest in energy efficiency and give the means to owners in a sector as large as the residential sector, which is growing, or even the commercial construction sector, we will get a very significant return on our investment.

I agree with him. I often say that protecting the environment does not run counter to responsible economic development. The construction industry is growing in tandem with demographic growth. Why not ensure that the residential sector can be more energy efficient?

Building projects are popping up all over, whether we are talking about the condo frenzy or construction projects that foster urban sprawl. I was fortunate to travel out west to Edmonton and Calgary, but I did not need to go very far because right in Montreal we have urban sprawl. We have to reconsider and ask ourselves if that is the best way to save energy. We should also examine whether these buildings, which go up in a hurry, meet energy efficiency criteria.

This motion is worthy of the 21st century. This motion shows leadership and aims at reducing greenhouse gases, fighting climate change and lowering energy bills so that we can invest in the jobs of today and the future.

[Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, September 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague. I also appreciate the history lesson to remind us how things were done several decades ago. That was not so long ago. He also explained how there used to be mechanisms in place that were like what we would now call a polluter pays system and how that system could be implemented at little cost to taxpayers.

I would like the member to clarify what he just told us and explain why this is even more important in 2014, given the increase in transportation of all kinds of goods. We have to have a mechanism to ensure fair compensation in case of a spill. I would also like him to tell us why we absolutely have to have protective measures in place to prevent this kind of accident.

[Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, September 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his wise comments. I thank him also for continuing to share his experience with his colleagues in the official opposition caucus.

I would like to hear him say a few more words about the situation on the west coast. The province of British Columbia is a jewel in Canada's crown because of its landscape and other assets. Would my colleague tell us about marine traffic along the west coast and the dangers it poses?

[Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, September 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Joliette for the tour of her region. She told us about the beautiful vistas in the riding that borders Lake Saint-Pierre and the St. Lawrence River. My riding also borders the St. Lawrence River and this natural waterway is of unquestionable economic importance for all of Quebec and Canada, not just because of the St. Lawrence Seaway, but also because it is a tourist attraction for all Canadians.

My colleague did a good job of explaining the importance of intelligent regulation and having inspectors on land and water to protect the Canadian public. I would like her to elaborate on that and reaffirm the importance of intelligent regulation.

[Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, September 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Acadie—Bathurst for his speech. He truly understands the importance of the fishing industry to the Atlantic provinces, and he fights hard for the industry and for all of his constituents.

Over the years, this government has scaled back its inspectors' oversight in terms of regulations. It has done away with independent oversight in favour of letting companies self-regulate.

This may be a small step forward, but does my colleague see this bill as another example of the Conservatives' marked tendency to favour industry self-policing rather than objective, independent oversight to protect the Canadian public?

[Citizenship and Immigration, September 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, more than 200 people attended a rally in support of the Fuh-Cham family in Lasalle. The family is facing deportation. Another rally was held yesterday, in Montreal. The family has three children. If they are deported to Cameroon on October 9, they will face great danger, including the circumcision of their two daughters. Will the minister intervene and allow this family to stay in Canada and have their refugee claim reviewed?

[Ebola Outbreak, September 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from the Liberal Party for his speech. I have come to know his passion for Africa and for the parliamentary association in which actively participates.

The hon. member did a good job of explaining what steps need to be taken to deal with this terrible disease and the different ways Canada can help.

I heard a report on Radio-Canada about the many children being orphaned by this epidemic. The report talked about what needs to be done not only immediately, but also on the heels of the devastation the Ebola virus has caused in the affected countries.

Can my colleague explain in detail what he thinks about this?

[Ebola Outbreak, September 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank my colleague and congratulate her for having taken the initiative that has allowed us to debate this undeniably urgent matter and show that Canada is a compassionate country that cares about others. We also want to do our part to help our neighbours and friends, our extended family, which is indeed all of humankind.

She mentioned an acronym I have heard before, but I do not remember exactly what it stands for: DART. I wonder if she could talk about what this acronym means and the impact such an intervention could have on the current crisis.

I would like to point out that as the member for LaSalle—Émard, I have the honour and privilege of representing many members of the African diaspora who have been seriously affected by this epidemic and have suffered because they have family and loved ones in those regions. In my riding, many members of that community have received deportation orders to various countries in Africa. This is causing a great deal of stress for these African families, which I am fortunate enough to represent. I have met with them many times in my office.

My question has two parts: how are we showing solidarity with the people of Africa, and can my colleague talk a little more about the DART initiative?

[Energy Safety and Security Act, September 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his speech, which truly enlightened us about the possibilities and the limitations within this bill. I would like my colleague to elaborate on some of these limitations he talked about in his speech.

In his view, what improvements could be made to the bill? Can he talk about the NDP'S proposals to improve this bill that the government unfortunately left out?