Robert Sopuck

[Criminal Code, May 1st, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues on this side of the House for their thoughtful speeches.

I am the chair of the Conservative hunting and angling caucus, and proudly so. We are the only political party that has such a caucus in Parliament. Over the last year, my caucus members and I have met with dozens of hunting, angling, trapping, and outdoor groups across the country. Contrary to popular opinion, the culture of the outdoors—angling, hunting, trapping and fishing—is very much alive and well. My friend from Prince George said it well when he used the term “culture”. We are the only political party and the only government that so strongly defends the outdoor culture.

Contrary to popular belief, this is not a declining culture in our country. In fact, the request for hunter safety instruction is growing by leaps and bounds across the country; this community is roaring back. There are some four million people in this country who hunt, fish, and trap. It is a sizeable part of our country.

In order to help and work with this very important constituency, we put forth Bill C-42, which was widely and positively received by the hunting and sport shooting community. In the environment committee, we are doing a major study of hunting and trapping, and in the fisheries committee we are doing a major study of recreational fishing. Why do I mention those two committee studies? That is because both of those studies in each committee were strongly opposed by the Liberals and the NDP. We were shocked by that opposition. It is the first time that those committees have studied these topics: hunting and trapping in the environment committee, and recreational fishing in the fisheries committee.

Interestingly, the members of the hunting and angling community are Canada's first, foremost, and most effective conservationists. Their appearance before our committee was astonishing. They described the conservation activities that the hunting and angling community does across the country, which this government strongly supports.

In terms of my bill, which is basically a kind of housekeeping bill, as my colleague from Prince George said, we are ensuring that such activities as paintballing and owning a BB gun are not subject to criminal sanctions if some paperwork is not done. This important legislation responds to the needs of the owners of paintball guns, BB guns, and air rifles, providing much-needed clarity with respect to how Canadian law treats this type of property.

How do these devices differ from firearms? They are essentially pneumatic devices that propel projectiles by means of compressed air. This differentiates them from regular bullet-firing firearms, which use a propellant charge. Air guns are commonly used for hunting, pest control, recreational shooting, and competitive sports; for example, the Olympics include 10 metre air rifle and 10 metre air pistol events. Beyond this, they remain popular with thousands of Canadians because they are quieter, more affordable, and their regulation is not nearly as stringent as with true firearms.

Air guns are generally divided into the following categories.

First we have air guns, in which the shot or projectile will not cause serious injury or death. These devices fall outside of the scope of the Firearms Act. An example is a harmless air gun made out of clear plastic, or a device that is a child's toy. The next category includes those air guns that have the potential to cause serious bodily harm, injury, or death, and these fall under the Criminal Code.

I would note, as well, that my colleagues across the way were talking about the potential criminal use of air gun devices. I would point out that it is a criminal offence to point an air gun, or to act as if it is a firearm. If a store is robbed by an individual with an air gun, for criminal law purposes it is treated the same as a firearm.

My bill simply reduces red tape on law-abiding Canadian citizens. This is what Canadians want. I ask all members to support this bill and ensure that we continue to move toward safe and sensible firearms policies in this country.

[Ongoing Situation in Ukraine, April 29th, 2015]

Mr. Chair, I am a member of Parliament with a large Ukrainian population and therefore, this is of interest to me and my constituents. Being of Czech extraction, I do remember the Prague Spring of 1968 when I was part of the Czech community in Winnipeg. It is something I will never forget.

I want to address quickly some of the comments from the member for St. John's East. He told us to be nuanced. We on this side of the House believe in right and wrong. It is because Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul believed in right and wrong that they brought down the Soviet Union. This idea that we can deal gently with the Soviet Union, or Russia, which is actually the same thing these days, is the reason Lenin called the western left, the western liberals, useful idiots.

I would ask the parliamentary secretary what his view is of what Vladimir Putin's end game is in Europe.

[Taxation, April 28th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, our Conservative government believes that parents know what is best for their children. That is why we are increasing the child care expense deduction to $8,000, increasing the universal child care benefit to $1,920 annually for children under age 6, and expanding it to $720 annually for children aged 6 to 17.

Policy is much more than numbers on paper. The right policy has an important human dimension, as I learned from one of my constituents. Ms. Ms. Mackenzie Danard, from Swan River, Manitoba, wrote me a letter to say, “This helps a lot for single parents. Thank you for helping us raise our children”.

Our government is delivering support directly to families like Mackenzie's. The Liberals and the New Democrats want to take that money away from Mackenzie and families like hers. That is shameful.

[Business of Supply, April 20th, 2015]

What is shameful, Mr. Speaker, is the NDP's continuing attack on the families and workers of Canada's natural resource industries.

The oil sands in Alberta generate 575,000 jobs, and so his disingenuous comment about 50 jobs is pure nonsense. We are talking about real people and real families. Getting our oil to tide water is critical. Our economy loses some $20 billion per year, which could pay for a lot of social programs if we got the world price for oil. However, in his next breath, the member was complaining about the low price of oil. Which is it?

Again, another speech from the NDP in which no numbers were put out. There was all of this rambling about the environment and where it is at. The member lives in Vancouver where the Fraser River goes through. In 2010 there was a record sockeye salmon run, and in 2014 an even higher sockeye salmon run under this government's watch.

This government is doing what needs to be done to create a sustainable economy, high growth, high-paying jobs, and high environmental quality. How does he square this?

[Business of Supply, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for giving me this incredible opening. The numbers that he cites are dollar numbers. The only numbers that count are the numbers on the environment, air quality, water quality. I know the idea of actually spending government money and generating real environmental results is foreign to them because for both parties opposite, spending money is an end in itself. If we can spend less money and get greater environmental improvement and protection, this government will do that. In fact, we are balancing our budget and because we are such prudent fiscal managers, Canadians in all walks of life will be receiving tax benefits very soon. That is smart and good government.

[Business of Supply, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, that is a typical rambling, scattered question on the environment, with nothing but hyperbole and speculation.

It is the numbers related to air quality, water quality, biodiversity, fish and wildlife that count. On the other side, they never cite the numbers because the numbers are too good.

Under our watch, in 2010 the sockeye salmon run to Fraser River was the record in history. Lo and behold, in 2014, on the Fraser River again, the sockeye salmon run surpassed the run in 2010. That was a remarkable achievement, done under our watch.

After listening to the members across the way wailing away about things they know nothing about, the only thing that counts is the improvement in the numbers on the environment to the air quality, water quality, fisheries, biodiversity, and almost every one is improving.

In terms of taking the precautions in English Bay, the government is being very prudent in ensuring that everything is absolutely safe before that area can be used again. That is just smart.

[Business of Supply, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with my hon. colleague, the member for Sarnia—Lambton.

I am very pleased to have this opportunity to participate in today's debate pertaining to the Government of Canada's robust marine safety system and environmental response capacity. All of us agree on the importance of the safety of those at sea and protecting the marine environment.

I will be speaking today to the role of Environment Canada in our nation's emergency response system. Emergency preparedness is a shared responsibility and we all have an important role to play in preventing or acting to mitigate the impacts of an unforeseen event. That is why emergency response planning and coordination of efforts among all levels of government, whether it be federal, provincial or municipal, is so vitally important in dealing with potential disasters.

Environment Canada's responsibilities relating to emergencies include administering and enforcing environmental emergency regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. The aim of these regulations is to reduce the frequency and consequences of uncontrolled, unplanned, or accidental releases of hazardous substances into the environment.

The recent oil spill in English Bay, British Columbia, where fuel leaked from the vessel Marathassa, highlighted the importance of having a coordinated approach in handling environmental emergencies. The Canadian Coast Guard, in partnership with its federal, provincial and municipal partners, coordinated a robust response to the pollution of English Bay. As part of the unified command, the Canadian Coast Guard, Transport Canada and Environment Canada, along with their provincial counterparts and response agencies, worked together to quickly and co-operatively contain and remove the pollution. The team worked tirelessly on the subsequent cleanup and their efforts have been successful. In fact, according to the commissioner of the Canadian Coast Guard, within the first 36 hours, 80% of the recoverable fuel in English Bay had been removed.

Interestingly, when I listen to my colleagues across the way, I listen in vain for any numbers, any measurement of the environment, and what is going on in the environment. I notice how my friends, the NDP and the Liberals, never talk about the environment itself. All they talk about is symbolism, because to both of those parties, the environment is a political football and nothing else. They never look at what is actually going on in the environment. Personally, all I care about is what is happening in the environment itself.

I want to point out to my friends across the way that the environment is about measurement and numbers. According to the numbers, there is no evidence that shellfish and groundfish in the area of the Marathassa incident posed any health danger and DFO is taking due caution in the interest of public safety until all sampling confirms that there is zero risk to public health. Furthermore, recent water samples from Siwash Rock, Sandy Cove, English Bay, and the waters surrounding the MV Marathassa had hydrocarbon levels below laboratory detection limits and meet all federal-provincial guidelines.

I know that my friends opposite are scared of numbers and never use numbers, but on our government's watch, most of Canada's environmental indicators for water quality, air quality, and biodiversity have improved and continue to improve. All that counts are the numbers.

I will briefly speak to the motion before us today as it relates to the Coast Guard response.

The commissioner of the Coast Guard has been abundantly clear that the Kitsilano station would not have made any difference in the response. As well, it is important to note that the marine communications and traffic services centres' modernization will actually improve the safety of mariners through state-of-the-art technology.

Furthermore, on the Kitsilano station, the commissioner of the Coast Guard said, “I would like to respond to speculation in the media and confirm that the Kitsilano station never provided these types of environmental response operations, and its presence would not have changed how we responded to this incident”. The parties opposite want to recreate an edifice which quite frankly had nothing to do with this incident. That proves that in terms of the environment, the parties opposite only care about spending money and building buildings, and the environment does not matter at all. To me, it is the environment that counts, and under this government, Canada's environment has improved markedly.

I want to take this opportunity to recognize the dedicated efforts of everyone who is involved in protecting the waters and the coastline off English Bay, particularly all those who came to the rescue of affected wildlife. Our government believes in and strongly supports the polluter pays principle and that taxpayers are not going to be on the hook for this marine response operation. The owners of the Marathassa were responsible to take action to mitigate any damage caused by their ship, and they will be held accountable for damages and cleanup costs incurred as a result of this incident.

Previous speakers have gone into greater detail about how the three federal departments worked together in this particular instance to contain the risk posed by the fuel spill, and nothing more needs to be said about that.

Instead, I would like to speak briefly to Environment Canada's responsibilities in such emergencies, and discuss its role in the protection of migratory birds and species at risk under its protection during such incidents.

In the case of oil spills such as the one that occurred in English Bay, Environment Canada's role is to provide immediate support to the lead agencies and responders. It does that through scientific and technical advice on how best to deal with specific types of environmental emergencies. As was elaborated on by my colleague earlier today, this was done through the National Environmental Emergencies Centre.

The NEEC operates 24/7 to provide its critical support to responders. It supports all levels of government, as well as industry, by providing scientific advice such as weather forecasting, containment trajectory modelling and determining the fate and behaviour of hazardous substances. The centre also provides environmental sensitivity mapping, supports the establishment of cleanup priorities and advises on the protection of sensitive ecosystems and wildlife such as migratory birds. This program is an effective tool in helping emergency response agencies and industries take immediate and effective action to mitigate the potential impacts to the environment and human health of any pollution incident.

Unfortunately, the impacts of environmental emergencies such as marine pollution are often first felt by our wildlife. Environment Canada's Canadian Wildlife Service is the lead authority for setting emergency response priorities, standards and guidelines in order to protect sensitive migratory birds and species at risk. We take this responsibility very seriously.

Under the Migratory Birds Convention Act and Migratory Birds regulations, Environment Canada has a legislative responsibility for the conservation and protection of migratory birds throughout Canada. As part of its mandate, Environment Canada collects and maintains data on all migratory birds, especially those at risk in areas impacted by marine pollution. It conducts surveys of affected areas, while assisting in the rescue and treatment of affected migratory birds or species at risk. It also offers scientific advice to responders when a critical habitat for a species at risk has been affected.

We are committed, as our record shows, to the protection of Canada's wildlife and to support Environment Canada's key roles in this type of emergency, gathering samples and analysis of affected wildlife for possible legal prosecution of polluters. Environment Canada's enforcement branch is there to ensure that companies and individuals comply with all pollution prevention and conservation rules of environmental and wildlife protection acts and regulations.

I have just skimmed the surface of some of the programs that Environment Canada offers in the protection of our environment, the health of our citizens and sustainability of wildlife. We all have a role to play in reducing the frequency of environmental emergencies and mitigating potential impacts should they occur. Our government remains fully committed to working with its provincial and territorial partners as well as industry to ensure that we will continue to have a strong, effective and coordinated response in the event of any future environmental incidents. We will continue to work diligently on prevention to ensure that these incidents do not occur in the first place.

In closing, I would like to again offer my thanks to all those who have dedicated their time and effort to the successful operation at English Bay. Canadians can be very proud of the strong protection of our shores.

[Taxation, March 30th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian families know that Conservatives understand that parents know best. That is why we introduced the family tax cut and enhanced universal child care benefit that will provide support to four million Canadian families with children.

In fact, this is one of the biggest packages of tax relief for Canadian families in modern history. The vast majority of these benefits will go to low or middle-income families.

Sadly, the high-tax and high-debt NDP and Liberals have not followed our lead in supporting Canadian families in choosing the type of child care that works for them. Instead, the NDP want to undo our support and impose a one-size-fits-all bureaucratic scheme that fails to do anything for 90% of families. And the Liberals, well, they have just promised to take our money away. That is shameful.

The high-tax and high-debt NDP and Liberals need to stop listening to their elites, and start listening to real Canadian parents. Until they do, our Conservative government will continue to support moms and dads in making the best decisions for their families.

[Hunters and Anglers, March 26th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, as chair of the Conservative hunting and angling caucus, I have had the honour of meeting with hunting and angling groups from across Canada. Hunters and anglers were Canada's first environmentalists, and that conservation legacy lives on to this day.

I have visited many hunter-supported conservation projects in all regions of Canada, and I am amazed at the dedication and effectiveness of hunting and angling groups in creating conservation projects that deliver real conservation results.

This view was confirmed by a recent Cornell University study that looked at the contributions of hunters to conservation. The study noted:

—hunters were more likely than non-recreationists to enhance land for wildlife, donate to conservation organizations and advocate for wildlife--all actions that significantly impact conservation success.

The study went on to label hunters as “conservation superstars” and concluded that “The more time we spend in nature, the more likely we are to protect it”.

Hunter and angler conservation projects benefit all society through the conservation of biodiversity, improving water quality and enhancing the health of ecosystems.

[Business of Supply, March 24th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question because it gives me a chance to make the point yet again that under our watch, almost all of Canada's environmental indicators have actually improved.

If the other side actually did the math on the environment, which they never do because it is all emotional political rhetoric, they would see that our environment is undergoing constant and measurable improvement under this government.

The national conservation plan is spending hundreds of millions of dollars, and already some of it has been spent with clear and measurable results. It demonstrates to Canadians that this government not only cares about the environment but is actually doing something about it and generating measurable results.