May 18th
- MP
conFri 8:50 am | Ontario, Simcoe NorthThe hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources.
- MP
conFri 8:50 am | Saskatchewan, Cypress Hills—GrasslandsMr. Speaker, I can tell the member what the benefits of the economic action plan are. It is 750,000 jobs across this country. Members opposite need to get on board with that plan.
Actually, yesterday we were able to have our committee meet. We had three ministers come and talk to us about our future plans. We look forward to the changes that are going to be made so that we can develop the economy across this country, protect the environment and develop even more jobs.
Hopefully the NDP will begin to work with us instead of trying to divide workers in one section from workers in another part of this country. Resources extend across this country, from British Columbia right across to Newfoundland and Labrador. The NDP needs to get on board and support Canadian jobs.
May 17th
- MP
ndpMay 17, 2012 3:45 pm | British Columbia, VictoriaI regret to interrupt the hon. member, but her time has run out.
The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment.
May 16th
- MP
ndpMay 16, 2012 11:40 am | Quebec, OutremontMr. Speaker, members of Parliament have a responsibility to debate, study and analyze. To that end, we need answers, not the type of response we just heard.
What exactly are they afraid of? Why are they refusing to answer?
The Prime Minister's guide for ministers if very clear: “As a minister...you must answer all questions pertaining to your areas of responsibility...” We have just seen the opposite.
Here is a clear question that the Minister of the Environment continues to refuse to answer. Will the Prime Minister finally disclose which Environment Canada programs will be eliminated by the budget? We want the names of the programs.
- MP
conMay 16, 2012 11:40 am | Alberta, Calgary SouthwestMr. Speaker, this government does not want to burden the Canadian economy. We are trying to make progress on the environment at the same time as we stimulate economic growth.
I think the leader of the NDP and ourselves are really on different wavelengths here. We are not interested in identifying which industries we are going to call diseases and shut down. Our government is interested in the growth of the Canadian economy while making environmental—
- MP
conMay 16, 2012 11:40 am | Ontario, ThornhillMr. Speaker, again the hon. Leader of the Opposition shows his fixation with carbon taxation, which is something this government has repeatedly said it will not impose on Canadians. We will not attack jobs. We will not threaten investment or our recovering economy.
With regard to the cost of inaction on climate change, those costs would run into many billions of dollars.
I would ask my colleague to familiarize himself with the Environment Canada website.
- MP
ndpMay 16, 2012 11:35 am | Nova Scotia, HalifaxMr. Speaker, I wish the minister was as coherent as his colleague was on Monday about the real reason for closing down the round table. The round table has something the Minister of the Environment does not have, and that is numbers.
We know the Conservative inaction on climate change will cost Canadians in the long run. How much will climate change cost us in the long run? Well, last night the minister did not have an answer, even though the round table has done that study and has those numbers.
I would like to ask the minister again: does the government have an estimate of the cost of climate change to Canada, yes or no?
- MPconMay 16, 2012 11:35 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about who is throwing whom under buses.
My colleague travels abroad to lobby against Canadian jobs and responsible resource development. Her leader dismisses responsible resource development as a disease, playing one region of the country against another. Now he is saying that Ontario's forest industry is responsible and afflicted with this same disease.
I would think that the official opposition should get its own house in order and organize its incoherent policy stances before it criticizes this government.
May 14th
- MPndpMay 14, 2012 11:20 am | Quebec, Outremont
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are abusing their executive power, particularly as they go about eviscerating environmental protection.
The Conservatives are eliminating the independent environmental assessment process, dismantling the agencies that do that work, and preventing individuals from participating in and being represented at public hearings. The worst part is that even if the Conservatives do not get support for what they decide in advance, they can ignore assessments and approve projects regardless of the risks.
How can the Conservatives justify such offensive action when there is no need for it? Why are they hiding it in a budget implementation bill?
May 10th
- MP
libMay 10, 2012 11:55 am | Ontario, Etobicoke NorthMr. Speaker, contaminated sites put the health, safety and economic interests of Canadians at risk for generations to come. Radioactive material may pose cancer risks and one litre of gasoline can render one million litres of water undrinkable.
Does the minister understand that 13,000 sites may need to be cleaned up, that he should stop congratulating himself on a job half done and instead stand up for the environment, develop aggressive timelines and provide the necessary resources to protect Canadians?
- MPconMay 10, 2012 11:55 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, my colleague does not seem to understand the context of the federal contaminated sites program. Hundreds of these sites fall under the responsibility of 16 departments and agencies. The federal contaminated sites program, $3.5 billion announced by our government, is to address the largest, most serious of the federal contaminated sites. We are 50% of the way through those target sites and we will continue.
- MP
libMay 10, 2012 11:25 am | Ontario, Toronto CentreMr. Speaker, yes, I did read the bill, and it is here and here and here. This bill gives extraordinary powers to cabinet.
Everyone knows what cabinet means. It is the power held by one man, in this case, the Prime Minister. This is a huge change that gives even more power to the Prime Minister and none to Parliament or to Canadians. That is the problem.
Why is the Prime Minister doing this?
- MPconMay 10, 2012 11:25 am | Alberta, Calgary Southwest
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Liberal Party should actually read the sections of the bill in question. They cannot be adequately categorized in that way whatsoever.
What is being done in the area of environmental assessment is to ensure we still have thorough environmental assessments but that there will be a defined timeline within which judgments and advice have to be rendered. That time can be up to two years, which is plenty of time. That is the kind of certainty that investors are looking for.
May 9th
- MP
ndpMay 09, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, Thunder Bay—Rainy RiverMr. Speaker, we know the government has identified 142 heavily contaminated sites across Canada. One example is Big Grassy River First Nation on Lake of the Woods in my riding, which is heavily polluted with petroleum hydrocarbons. Eight years ago, the federal budget set aside $3.5 billion to clean up these sites.
Why has the government spent only a fraction of that money to clean up these toxic and deadly sites in Canada? The Treasury Board says it has been monitoring Big Grassy for five years. When will real action be taken to make Big Grassy River First Nation safe?
- MPndpMay 09, 2012 11:30 am | Nova Scotia, Halifax
Mr. Speaker, I would argue that the Conservatives are under-informed about what the environment commissioner had to say.
Yesterday at the committee the Conservatives blocked the environment commissioner from talking about environmental assessments and their impact on future contaminated sites. They blocked the environment commissioner from talking about the environment.
Will the minister find his backbone and put a stop to this environmental train wreck?
- MPconMay 09, 2012 11:30 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, we received the report of the environment commissioner with interest. We also received his compliments on the achievements and progress we have made in a number of areas.
It is clear, with regard to climate change, that the commissioner had points of reference that were at least a year out of date. With regard to contaminated sites, as I said, he clearly misunderstands the federal program.
We are working to address our environmental challenges in our country, and we will get that done.
- MPconMay 09, 2012 11:20 am | Alberta, Calgary Southwest
Mr. Speaker, the statement by the leader of the NDP is completely false. The fact of the matter is that as part of the government's economic action plan to encourage jobs, growth and long-term prosperity, we are streamlining the environment assessment process. It will be extremely thorough. It will be for major projects up to two years. We know that the NDP opposes these kinds of projects completely. However, we have to have a process that is environmentally thorough but that ultimately does allow projects to be approved under some circumstances.
May 8th
- MPconMay 08, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for her question.
What this report fails to tackle is that this program addresses only the most contaminated sites across Canada. In that regard, the commissioner notes that almost half, 42%, of the sites in the inventory were cleaned up by February of this year.
This plan has worked well to date. It will continue to work well as we work our way to address the most serious contaminated sites.
- MP
conMay 08, 2012 11:35 am | Prince Edward Island, EgmontMr. Speaker, our government does understand that registered charities are an important part of our Canadian society, and we do encourage Canadians to donate generously. CRA does enforce the Income Tax Act free of political direction, specific files or interference, and we expect CRA to undertake compliance and enforcement activities, as appropriate, to enforce Canadian laws.
We are taking action so that Canadians can be sure that charities are using their resources appropriately.
- MP
conMay 08, 2012 11:35 am | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'AppelleOrder. The hon. member for Brossard—La Prairie has the floor.
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:35 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, as I have said any number of times in the House, we do have a plan, and that plan is working sector by sector. We began with the transportation sector, which accounts for 24% of our annual greenhouse gas emissions. We are about to bring down final regulations for the coal-fired electricity sector. We are in consultations now with the oil and gas sector. We will continue and we will hit those 2020 targets.
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:30 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, I think that our colleague needs some help reading the report.
The report indicates that the commissioner says the Government of Canada is making good progress in addressing contaminated sites across the country. Through the federal contaminated sites action plan, the Government of Canada is addressing harmful effects of past practices and protecting Canadians and our environment for future generations.
- MP
ndpMay 08, 2012 11:30 am | British Columbia, Burnaby—New WestminsterMr. Speaker, what a crock. According to the commissioner, those sites are the legacy of poor planning, inadequate environmental assessment and weak environmental regulations.
The Conservatives are using their budget bill to force Canadians to accept changes that scuttle environmental protection for Canadian families.
When will the Conservatives stop their constant attacks on environmental regulation? When will they start protecting the health of Canadian families?
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:25 am | Prince Edward Island, Egmont
Mr. Speaker, we have announced measures in the budget to provide more education to charities to ensure they are operating within the law and more transparency for those Canadians who donate so generously to these charities. We are taking action so Canadians can be sure that the charities they donate to are using their resources appropriately.
- MP
libMay 08, 2012 11:25 am | Quebec, Westmount—Ville-MarieMr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment is hiding behind the Prime Minister and the Minister of National Revenue—his human shield.
- MPlibMay 08, 2012 11:25 am | Ontario, Etobicoke North
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, the commissioner of the environment gave the Conservative government a failing grade. His report contradicts the government's unfounded claim that it will be able to meet even its weak greenhouse gas emissions targets. The commissioner said that poor planning, inadequate environmental assessment and weak regulations become expensive mistakes for future generations. Why does the government insist on gutting environmental legislation, despite the expert advice of the commissioner?
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:25 am | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Order, please. The hon. member for Vancouver East.
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:25 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, what the commissioner did not note in his report was my greenhouse gas inventory report released last month. It shows that emissions have declined in almost all sectors, including oil and gas, since 2005; our GHG emissions are down 48 megatonnes from 2005—
- MPndpMay 08, 2012 11:20 am | Quebec, Outremont
Mr. Speaker, the commissioner of the environment tells us that the Conservatives have no real plan to protect Canada's health and environment. He tells us that it is too late for the government to meet even its inadequate climate change targets for 2020.
Already future generations are going to be responsible for $7.7 billion in environmental liabilities, and that is only the contaminated sites we know about, not the ones that continue to be created today. Why are the Conservatives compounding their environmental failures with a budget bill that would further gut environmental protection?
- MPndpMay 08, 2012 11:20 am | Nova Scotia, Halifax
Mr. Speaker, the government has not even done a simple cost-benefit analysis. There is no implementation plan to reduce emissions. Conservatives have no idea what their failed approach will cost the Canadian economy in the future.
Last fall the minister made the bizarre claim that withdrawing from Kyoto would save us money. But it seems he has not done a full life cycle accounting of his own plan.
Why will the minister not come clean with Canadians? Why is he hiding the full costs of the Conservative approach?
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:20 am | Alberta, Calgary Southwest
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, this government has made record investments in environmental remediation and cleaning up sites that were not properly assessed in the past. This government is ensuring that we have thorough environmental assessments going forward.
We differ with the NDP in that we think that while environmental assessments have to be thorough, there also has to be a time limit. There has to be the ability to actually have economic development in this country. The no-development party does not favour that, but we do and Canadians do.
- MPlibMay 08, 2012 11:20 am | Quebec, Westmount—Ville-Marie
Mr. Speaker, when asked yesterday about his irresponsible allegations about so-called money laundering by unspecified NGOs, the Minister of the Environment hid behind the Minister of National Revenue. Maybe the government is nervous about him getting up and speaking. I spoke to him afterwards and told him that he should not make irresponsible allegations, to which he replied, “Don't you know what a figure of speech is?” A figure of speech. Will the Minister of the Environment get up and explain to us why slandering an NGO by innuendo is a figure of speech?
- MPconMay 08, 2012 11:20 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the commissioner that costing, as it becomes available, should be shared with both him and Parliament. As for costing in advance of consultations with industry, for example, as we are with the oil and gas industry now, that would be premature and speculative.
Costs that my colleague will not see in that report are a carbon tax, increased cost at the gas pump, increased home heating costs and generally an increased cost of living.
May 7th
- MPconMay 07, 2012 11:40 am | Prince Edward Island, Egmont
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, we do understand that registered charities are an important part of our society and we do encourage Canadians to donate generously to these charities. However, in order to protect Canadian interests we have a duty to ensure that these organizations are operating properly and spending their resources appropriately.
- MP
libMay 07, 2012 11:40 am | Saskatchewan, WascanaMr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment has accused Canadian environmental charities of money laundering. That is a serious criminal offence triggering international obligations under FINTRAC, the G8 and the G20.
The minister's allegations are irresponsible. Could he actually define money laundering? Could he provide a specific example of it? Has he reported anything to FINTRAC or the RCMP? If not, will he withdraw his reckless allegation intended only to smear people he does not like?
- MPndpMay 07, 2012 11:35 am | Nova Scotia, Halifax
Mr. Speaker, silencing electors is not enough for this government. It also wants to silence scientists and all of its critics.
The Minister of the Environment has gone too far in his attempt to discredit the people who criticize him. A group representing over 1,300 charities in the country has written an open letter to the minister asking him to retract his comments about environmental groups, which he accused of money laundering.
Will the minister apologize?
- MPconMay 07, 2012 11:35 am | Prince Edward Island, Egmont
Mr. Speaker, the measures announced in the budget would provide more education to charities to ensure they are operating within the law and more transparency for Canadians who donate so generously to those charities.
We understand that registered charities are an important part of Canadian society and we encourage Canadians to donate generously. In order to protect Canadian interests, we have a duty to ensure that these organizations are operating properly and in compliance with all federal laws. That is what we will be doing.
May 3rd
- MPconMay 03, 2012 11:55 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, that is false, absolutely false.
I would remind my colleague that the primary responsibility for shale gas rests with the provinces and territories except, as he said, where it might be found on federal land. We are continuing to accumulate data and the latest scientific information on this legitimate resource practice. We will continue to work with the provinces and territories.
May 2nd
- MPlibMay 02, 2012 11:45 am | Ontario, Etobicoke North
Mr. Speaker, the government is tainted by the largest electoral fraud scandal in our country's history. Canadians are realizing they cannot trust the government.
The government did not have the courage to campaign on gutting environmental regulations. It did not tell Canadians it would cut legislation that puts their health and safety at risk.
Can the minister please explain why he is killing 50 years of safeguards, and does he have the conviction to hive off environmental gutting from the budget?
- MPconMay 02, 2012 11:45 am | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
The hon. member for St. John's East.
- MPconMay 02, 2012 11:45 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, that question was all over the yard, but I can assure my hon. colleague that while the previous Liberal government paid mere lip service to the environment, this government is getting things done. We are spending more money on water quality, on water monitoring, working with our international partners to reduce greenhouse gas—
Apr 27th
- MPlibApr 27, 2012 8:50 am | Ontario, Etobicoke North
Mr. Speaker, astonishingly, the Minister of Natural Resources is proud of legislation that will gut environmental protection.
Could the Minister of the Environment explain how slashing 200 positions from Environment Canada, cutting research and monitoring initiatives in air pollution and water quality, and cutting the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency by 43% is protecting the environment? Is he ashamed?
- MPconApr 27, 2012 8:30 am | Saskatchewan, Cypress Hills—Grasslands
Mr. Speaker, responsible resource development is key for Canadians if we want to have a strong economy and we want to have strong environmental protection in the future. I get tired of the no-development party over there because it criticizes everybody and praises no one.
For example, in Saskatchewan there has been successful sequestration for years. We have worked with the Saskatchewan government on the issue. The minister in Saskatchewan said, “I think the eyes of the world are focused on the success that Saskatchewan is having on clean coal and carbon sequestration, building on a decade of our work”.
Why does the opposition not get on board and actually celebrate the successes that we are having?
- MPconApr 27, 2012 8:25 am | Saskatchewan, Cypress Hills—Grasslands
Mr. Speaker, we are modernizing the regulatory system and, if the member had come to the natural resources committee over the last year, she would be well aware that everyone is asking for that. Everyone is demanding that there be some improvements in the regulatory system. We want to enhance the opportunities for investments in resource development. We want to create the conditions for economic jobs and growth, particularly for aboriginal communities, and we want to protect the environment while we are doing it.
The NDP needs to get beyond its ideological blinders and come and join us to make this into a good project. We want responsible resource development in this country and we are going to see this through.
Apr 25th
- MPlibApr 25, 2012 11:40 am | Ontario, Etobicoke North
Mr. Speaker, budget 2012 is Canada's environmental inaction plan. The government has gutted environmental regulations, put our waters and fisheries at risk and muzzled non-partisan scientists whose work contradicts the flawed ideology of the government. Instead of evidence-based decision making, cabinet will use ideology to overrule the National Energy Board.
Could the minister stand and explain why he is willing to risk the health, safety and in many cases the livelihood of Canadians?
Apr 24th
- MPndpApr 24, 2012 11:45 am | Nova Scotia, Halifax
Mr. Speaker, yesterday when asked why the government sent meddling overseers to the International Polar Year Conference, the minister said that muzzling scientists was “established practice”, but scientists disagree. A senior Environment Canada expert called the new media guidelines unethical and enormously embarrassing to our country on the world stage.
Will the minister explain how interfering in media access to our scientists fits in with the government's so-called open government approach?
- MPconApr 24, 2012 11:45 am | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, the premise of that question is false.
Our scientists in Montreal at the polar conference are spreading the good news of the policies of our government, both with regard to mitigation of climate change within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as well as outside, with a number of like-minded countries, to address short-lived climate pollutants.
Of course, my colleague should know of the significant investment our government has made in adaptation in the Canadian Arctic.
Apr 23rd
- MPconApr 23, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, Thornhill
Mr. Speaker, yesterday was indeed Earth Day, and 2012 will be remembered as the year when we reported in our greenhouse gas inventory that we had levelled off and were 48 megatonnes lower than our 2005 emission megatonnes.
A year ago we estimated that we were about one-quarter of the way toward meeting our Copenhagen commitments. We are now well past that and moving toward fulfillment of our goals.
- MPconApr 23, 2012 11:55 am | Saskatchewan, Cypress Hills—Grasslands
Mr. Speaker, nothing can be further from the truth. Our government is focused on jobs, growth and prosperity for Canadians. We will focus on four major areas as we review the environmental process for major economic projects. We want to make the review process more predictable and timely. We will reduce duplication and regulatory burden. We will be strengthening environmental protection and we will enhance consultation with aboriginal people.
I wonder why the member opposite is so opposed to timely reviews, protecting the environment and consulting with aboriginal communities.
- MPlibApr 23, 2012 11:50 am | Ontario, Etobicoke North
Mr. Speaker, for decades, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the National Energy Board have been arm's-length organizations that use consultation and science to ensure a balanced approach to energy projects, the environment and the health and safety of Canadians. Now Canada's environmental system is in shambles and cabinet will get the final say over decisions made by the NEB.
Would the minister explain why political expediency is more important than science and the health and safety of Canadians?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
