William Amos

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that this is a national debate. The voices of the provinces must be heard, and they are being heard. This is a great debate for us to continue to have.

Looking internationally, we need to be honest. This is not about Canada getting away with doing less because other countries emit more. Obviously, the United States and China are the world's two biggest economies and the world's two biggest emitters. However, that does not mean they are not doing their part; they are.

President Obama said that he would adopt “an all-of-the-above strategy”. He is working closely with Minister McKenna and the Prime Minister to ensure a continental approach to reducing our emissions so it is most economically efficient and we meet our global targets, which we have agreed to with China, the United State, and all our international partners.

I do not think that at this point in time it can be said, as it was said for so many years under the previous government, that there is international disagreement. There is not. The Paris accord demonstrates it. The science is clear. Now it is time to act. Yes, provinces across the country are taking measures, and I congratulate them for those measures. I congratulate the Government of Saskatchewan for its sequestration work, but it needs to do more, and so it will as will the rest of Canada.

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the scientific evidence is unequivocal: the earth's climate is warming.

Climate change is real and Canadians are already feeling its negative effects. Whether it is the increase in the frequency of droughts or coastal flooding, or the accelerated melting of sea ice in the Arctic, the large-scale repercussions of climate change are pushing Canada to take appropriate action.

Previous conclusions are not far-fetched. They are based on an international scientific consensus supported by decades of rigorous scientific analysis and detailed assessments of the state of scientific knowledge about climate change.

Considering that global warming is real and that it is already affecting Canada, perhaps more than other countries, to a considerable extent, it is imperative that we adopt the motion we are debating today, that we continue to work together, and that we call on science to help us face the major challenges that climate change poses for Canada.

Every country in the world emits greenhouse gases that expand throughout the earth's atmosphere, which is why we need concerted global action against climate change. That is the very essence of the Paris agreement, which is based on scientific evidence.

Last December, Canada attended the Paris conference filled with ambition and determination. We worked on an ambitious but balanced agreement. Under this agreement, countries set targets for themselves and report on their progress in a transparent manner. They must also each review and improve their pollution targets every five years.

This agreement is based on sound scientific evidence. Under this extraordinary agreement, each country will take practical measures to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C and limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C.

In order to meet the targets set out in the Paris agreement, the Canadian first ministers agreed to work together to develop a pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change and implement it by 2017. This framework will build on the measures being taken by the provinces and territories, be supported by an extensive engagement effort by indigenous people and Canadians, and be guided by facts and science.

In support of this pan-Canadian framework for clean growth and climate change, Canada has established four working groups, with its provincial, territorial, and indigenous partners, in order to take measures to reduce emissions and meet our commitments. We look forward to these four reports being released later on this fall.

Let us be clear. The people of Pontiac and I appreciate the Prime Minister's leadership on pricing carbon pollution. Canada is determined to build a cleaner and more innovative economy where there are fewer greenhouse gas emissions, the environment is protected, and high-paying jobs are created for the middle class and those working hard to join it.

We cannot afford not to act. The former national round table on the environment and economy, which was killed by the former government, estimated in 2011 that the economy-wide cost to Canada of climate change will accelerate, rising from an average value of $5 billion in 2020 to between $21 billion and $43 billion by 2050. The round table found that the average cost by 2050 would amount to roughly .8% to 1% of GDP. It found that in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, and Montreal, climate change will result in additional deaths from heat and pollution in the order of 3 to 6 deaths per 100,000 people per year in the 2020s. This impact will worsen in future decades. The risks of flooding are clear. As many as 16,000 to 28,000 dwellings will be at permanent risk of flooding. Therefore, the economic costs could be in the trillions of dollars.

This is why our insurance rates are going up, and Canadians know this. Canadians are already paying.

A 2015 study by the Insurance Bureau of Canada found that the direct and indirect impacts of weather effects of climate change on our communities will be great. For example, the cumulative estimated cost of weather effects in Mississauga from freezing rain attributed to climate change could reach over $30 million by 2040. An extreme climate event, such as a 1-in-25-year freezing rain event occurring in 2040 will be estimated to cost as much as $15.7 million.

However, the costs go beyond freezing rain and flooding. They go to the very heart of what it means to be Canadian.

Let us talk about outdoor rinks. A 2014 study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, found that as a result of weather changes from climate change, we will not be able to skate on outdoor rinks as long as we have done previously. On average, the availability of outdoor rinks will decline by about three to four days per decade through 2090. This means that the Rideau Canal here in the national capital region will be available an average of 40 days in the 2040 horizon, but as few as 15 days in 2090. That is down an average of 50 days from the 1972 to 2013 period.

I want my two children to enjoy the opportunity to skate on ponds and play hockey, and I want their grandchildren to have that same opportunity. The people across Canada and the people in Pontiac demand action. For 10 years, they have seen the federal government fiddle while the world burns.

We all know that the time for talk has passed. It is time for action. It is urgent that we take steps to reduce emissions, reduce the impact of pollution on our health, and reduce our environmental footprint. We have to help developing countries transition to a cleaner energy future. We have to help Canadian communities adapt to the inevitable reality of climate change.

Canada needs a price on carbon. It may be a carbon tax, a cap-and-trade system, or a combination. Ultimately, it does not matter as long as there is a price on carbon. As long as it is coordinated, it will be in the best interest of Canada's environment and our economy.

However, a price on carbon alone will be insufficient to meet our targets. We need performance-based standards and regulations. This has to be conceived as a human rights issue. It is not just an economic issue. It is not just an environmental issue. It is about human rights.

Climate change poses a serious threat to any number of human rights, including the right to life, water and sanitation, food, health, culture, development, and a healthy environment.

Recognizing the impact on human rights, the parties agreed to a more ambitious target for the Paris agreement. The preamble to the Paris agreement clearly states the following:

...Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights...

Yes, ratifying the Paris agreement has human rights implications, but it is also an incredible opportunity. Canada can and must create green, clean-energy jobs.

By continuing to invest through our infrastructure funds and through our innovation funds, we need to accelerate the elimination of carbon in our economy. We can create a better future for all Canadians in so doing.

[Business of Supply, September 22nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, the notion that the loyal opposition is the only party that cares about Atlantic Canada is laughable. More than that, it is sad.

The reason it is sad is that it is engaging in the politics of demagoguery. It really is. It is politicizing the judicial selection process, a transparent process that has been articulated wonderfully by our Minister of Justice, and it is inserting this regionalist division that is totally unnecessary.

Speaking specifically to the process, speaking specifically to the advisory board, does the member opposite recognize that if the decision of the advisory board were binding, then it would be unconstitutional?

[Business of Supply, June 14th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very important issue for the Pontiac. I am very pleased that my colleague from Surrey Centre mentioned the agricultural aspect. It is very important to people in the Pontiac to be able to sell their products in Ontario, whether they raise cattle or make alcoholic products.

It is very important for farmers in the Pontiac to get those products to market in the Ottawa and eastern Ontario region. I would ask the member to further describe, particularly in the meat sector, for example, where federal and provincial inspections can be such a challenge. Could the member talk a bit about how we might improve the efficiency of that aspect of interprovincial trade?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1, June 6th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, it is sometimes challenging to listen to such hyperbole, with all due respect, moving from attacks against the Ontario government, which have little merit or place in the House.

Let us set that aside for the time being and focus specifically on the issue of gold. The member suggested that the government is somehow engaging in inappropriate practices by selling off gold assets. It seems to me a reasonable thing to do, advised by many financial experts who suggest that diversifying the investment reserves of different currencies is a good plan.

Would the member opposite like to inform the House of the previous government's initiatives to sell off gold, which I understand to have been a standard practice?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1, June 6th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intent behind the member's speech, which is to fight for lower- and middle-income Canadians.

However, I would ask the hon. member what she thinks about the measures taken by the government in the budget to establish the Canada child benefit and provide $6,400, tax free, to families earning $30,000 less for each child under the age of six and $5,400 for children between the ages of six and 18. Does that strike her as a measure that is helpful to middle-class Canadians?

[Parks and Conservation Areas, May 19th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I met today with a group of paddlers who are joining me on a four-day canoe trip down the Dumoine River, a renowned wilderness destination. The Algonquin Anishinabe call it the Aginagwasi Sipi and it is located on their traditional territory.

Located two hours west of Parliament on the edge of Pontiac riding and flowing into the Ottawa River, the Dumoine watershed contains one of the largest areas of unfragmented southern boreal forests in Quebec.

Would the minister of Minister of Small Business and Tourism please tell this House how the government is helping ecotourism and the conservation economy succeed across Canada?

[Réjean Lafrenière, May 6th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I want to offer my condolences to the family of my assistant, Françoise Lafrenière, whose father, Réjean Lafrenière, recently passed away.

Réjean was passionate about politics. He was the mayor of the municipality of Lac-Sainte-Marie for 22 years, and then served as the warden of the RCM of Vallée-de-la-Gatineau for six years. He went on to represent the Liberal party in the Quebec National Assembly as the member for Gatineau from 1989 to 2007.

Réjean was heavily involved in the Outaouais and has left his mark on the region. He will be fondly remembered by everyone who had the privilege of working with him. It was an honour and a privilege to have known him. I will always remember how generous he was in giving me advice at the beginning of my political career.

Very few people understand the spirit of Vallée-de-la-Gatineau and the soul of its people like Réjean did.

I offer my sincere condolences to his entire family.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2016, No. 1., May 5th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to ask a question of my colleague, whose politics I have admired for a long time. She is a very authentic politician from Vancouver Quadra.

Having lived in her riding, and having cycled and taken the bus in that riding many times as a graduate student at UBC, what are her constituents saying about the proposed investments in public transit, and also in active transit, which is so important to our country?

[International Development, May 3rd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, last week, we learned that a Canadian-funded Syrian hospital was bombed. Such acts are clearly unacceptable and an assault on the rights of every woman and man in the world.

Can the Minister of International Development tell the House what our government has done in response to this despicable act?