Kim Rudd

[Job Losses in the Energy Sector, February 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused because I am hearing that the member opposite wants the government to get out of the way, yet wants it to pre-approve a pipeline. I do not see how that is getting out of the way. I do not know how pre-approving pipelines, undermining the regulatory system, and having no action on environmental policies gets a pipeline built. Historically, it has not.

[Job Losses in the Energy Sector, February 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, as I have been taking notes tonight and listening intently, I have heard a lot about refining this evening. I know I am changing the topic slightly, but I would like to share this with the House. As I was writing it down, I thought it was important.

We have to remember that Canada is a net exporter of refined petroleum products, and we have not talked about that tonight. Our refining sector produces more product than we use in Canada. There is also some good news. As I am sure members are aware, construction is currently under way on the first new facility to be built in Canada since the mid-1980s. That facility is being built in Alberta. Therefore, when I hear talk about a refinery, I want members to know that this is occurring.

[Job Losses in the Energy Sector, February 8th, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for sharing that, and for reading it with such passion. It is important to recognize, and I think we all have in the House tonight, that we all feel the job losses. It has touched everyone of us in some way. I have friends in Ontario who went out to work in the oil sector in Alberta for about 10 years. They left Ontario because there was a downturn in the automotive sector. They have now returned and are also facing some of those situations. Therefore, we understand, I understand, and I would argue that every person in the House understands.

The question is this. How do we help? I believe we have done a number of things as a government to move that agenda forward. I would like to hear from you some of your thoughts on how we, as a government, can personally respond to those questions. If you would share that, it would be appreciated.

[Natural Resources, February 3rd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, we in this House feel for people who have lost their jobs in the downturn of the energy sector particularly. The low commodity price of oil has affected tens of thousands of jobs across the country. We will continue to work with the modernization of the National Energy Board to create a better system that will have the confidence of Canadians, and get Canadians back to work.

[The Environment, February 2nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague opposite that the forestry sector is indeed a very important part of our economy.

I want to say that we are focused on supporting middle-class Canadians and their families at every stage of their lives. Not only did the Conservatives vote against the Paris Agreement, but when it comes to middle-class Canadians, they opposed our government's reducing taxes for nine million Canadians and a Canada child benefit that helps nine out of 10 Canadian families and will help raise 300,000 children out of poverty.

That is not all. They also voted against enhancements to student loans that will help 250,000 Canadians. Our government is focused on both protecting our environment and growing our economy while helping the middle class and those working hard to join it.

[The Environment, February 2nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to creating a cleaner, more innovative economy that reduces emissions and protects our environment, all while getting our natural resources to market through pipeline approvals and while creating well-paying jobs for the middle class and those working hard to join it.

Unlike the Harper government, we understand that the environment and the economy must not be competing interests but, indeed, shared priorities. After a decade of complete inaction, our government has put in place the measures required to reduce emissions, grow our economy, and create good middle-class jobs.

These actions include accelerating the phase-out of coal, developing a clean fuel standard, taking action on short-lived climate pollutants, and yes, putting a price on carbon pollution.

In December, first ministers met to finalize the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change. This plan identifies actions that will allow us to meet or exceed our greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 30% below 2005 levels.

After 10 years of the previous government only talking about targets, our government took action. Informed by consultations with Canadians across the country, indigenous peoples, and industry, this plan will create the clean-growth economy necessary for the collective health, prosperity, and security of this generation of Canadians and the next.

To address the heart of the question, a price on carbon pollution has not just been endorsed by some of Canada's largest employers but by labour, people of all political stripes, and many other corners of Canadian society. For example, Mark Cameron, the former policy adviser to the prime minister, said, “Federal carbon price plan looks like a good start”.

I could not agree more. The president of the Canadian Labour Congress commented that the “carbon pricing announcement is an important and necessary step for our government to take towards meeting our Paris commitments”.

He is right. As the Prime Minister has said, “you cannot make a choice between what's good for the environment and what's good for the economy.” The choice between job creation and environmental protection is a false one.

In today's world, world economic development and environmental sustainability must go hand in hand. Strong environmental policies, including a price on carbon pollution, are crucial for generating the type of support that is required for major projects, and ultimately, for Canada as a whole to get resources to market in an efficient and sustainable way. Our focus is on taking real, concrete, and lasting action to reduce our emissions, grow our economy, and create good-paying middle-class jobs.

[Transportation, February 2nd, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, our government continues to support innovation around things like electric charging stations and electric vehicles. Indeed, I personally had the opportunity to test drive an electric vehicle while I attended the conference in Montreal.

We know they are the next version of some of the energy saving opportunities we have around carbon, reducing our carbon footprint. We continue to support those innovators who are moving this forward.

[Petitions, February 1st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the signatories in my riding of Northumberland—Peterborough South, I am pleased to present a petition requesting the enabling of a network of community-operated media centres to facilitate access to community television in small communities.

[Natural Resources, January 31st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, we believe that this project must be subject to a review process that instils confidence in Canadians. We recognize that the new energy east review panel has decided to restart the project review process.

[Natural Resources, January 31st, 2017]

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to an open, fair, inclusive, and transparent process for decisions on major energy projects.

Consistent with our campaign commitment, we have established an expert panel to conduct a review of the National Energy Board's structure, role, and mandate.

The panel will provide a report to the minister on May 15, 2017. The findings and recommendations in that report will serve to inform policy or legislative measures to modernize the National Energy Board.