Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2024-05-02 17:20:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills\u2014Grasslands, CPC)",
        "fr": "M. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills\u2014Grasslands, PCC)"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"8364681\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madam Speaker, it is pretty tough to follow the production we just saw from the member for <a data-HoCid=\"278257\" href=\"/politicians/kevin-lamoureux/\" title=\"Kevin Lamoureux\">Winnipeg North</a>. He is something else. We will just leave it at that.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364682\" data-originallang=\"en\">I am a member of the natural resources committee, and I think it is really important that we talk about the process by which we have arrived here today.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364683\" data-originallang=\"en\">There were two bills that were sent to our committee: Bill <a data-HoCid=\"12458211\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-49/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Canada\u2014Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C-49</a> first, and then Bill <a data-HoCid=\"12525473\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-50/\" title=\"An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economy\">C-50</a>. What is important here is this. For a number of years, across multiple parliamentary sessions, Conservatives have been warning the government about its unconstitutional Impact Assessment Act, and over time the Liberals kept denying it and saying it was not unconstitutional. Then the Supreme Court comes along and in a reference case ruling says that the Impact Assessment Act, Bill <a data-HoCid=\"9630600\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-69/\" title=\"An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C-69</a> from a previous parliament, is largely unconstitutional.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364684\" data-originallang=\"en\">It is important to note and make mention here that in the history of Canada no government has ever ignored a reference ruling from the Supreme Court. As we have this debate here today, I think it is extremely important that we start out with that particular point. I think if we were to ask my colleague from Mission\u2014Matsqui\u2014Fraser Canyon, when he gives his speech after me, because I will be splitting my time with him, he might even agree that for a very long time the government has ignored this particular point. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364685\" data-originallang=\"en\">The government needs to take this opportunity at report stage to be absolutely clear about the date and time when it will fix the Impact Assessment Act, because a big part of the issue around Bill <a data-HoCid=\"12458211\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-49/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Canada\u2014Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C-49</a> is that it contains no less than 35 direct references to the unconstitutional parts of the Impact Assessment Act. It is as if the Liberal government has a desire to pass unconstitutional legislation and regulations. We have seen that with its plastics ban, which was also ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Conservatives also warned that it would be a problem. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364686\" data-originallang=\"en\">When we are tasked with passing a piece of legislation that is required for Atlantic Canada to be able to develop its offshore wind resources, we need to make sure that we are passing a piece of legislation that is abundantly clear and would create all the absolute certainty that is needed in Atlantic Canada.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364687\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Of course, there is a consultation process that needs to go on. At committee, all we heard from witnesses, one after the other, was that they were not consulted. This is particularly true of people who are in the fishing industry, which as we know is the absolute staple industry of Atlantic Canada.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364688\" data-originallang=\"en\"> That is an important place where we need to start. I hope that at some point here we will get some clarity and certainty from government members about when that will happen. We gave them many opportunities at committee to tell us when, yet we never got an answer from them.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364689\" data-originallang=\"en\">I want to go back to the fishing organizations that spoke at great length to us at committee. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364690\" data-originallang=\"en\">I will start off by quoting Katie Power from FFAW-Unifor, who stated:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364691\" data-originallang=\"en\"> To clarify, FFAW, in its representation of the owner-operator fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador, has not been consulted or engaged, by governments or otherwise, on Bill <a data-HoCid=\"12458211\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-49/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Canada\u2014Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C-49</a> but serves to be directly impacted by it. In the absence of the appropriate consultation framework not currently built into this bill for adherence, undue conflict amongst fisheries stakeholders, other ocean user groups, future investors and developers of offshore wind energy is inevitable. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364692\" data-originallang=\"en\"> FFAW has been thoroughly engaged in the ongoing regional assessment for offshore wind. Participation on both a staff and harvester level has been immense, reflective of the magnitude of potential impacts and indicative of a desire to be involved. However, this regional assessment has no application in this legislation, and the recommendations of the regional assessment committee to governments are not legally binding. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364693\" data-originallang=\"en\"> This, coupled with the complete lack of communication from local governments, leaves the fishing industry with no reassurance, no safeguards for mitigation and an overall lack of trust or faith in the process as it is presently being pursued. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364694\" data-originallang=\"en\">I have another quote, from Ruth Inniss from the Maritime Fishermen's Union, who stated:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364695\" data-originallang=\"en\"> The bill, as it stands before us, is sorely lacking in protections for the fishing industry, the aquatic species we depend on and the livelihoods that depend on fishing. Simply put, while we support the expansion of clean energy, it should not be at the expense of the fishing industry. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364696\" data-originallang=\"en\">I have more quotes that I would like to read, but I realize I am near the end of my time for today. I will finish with one quote, quickly. Ms. Inniss added:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364697\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Rushing poorly thought-out legislation to govern an industrial marine development that remains largely in an experimental stage for Atlantic waters, and legislation that lacks proper safeguards to ensure a sustainable, viable and resilient coastal economy, is extremely irresponsible. </p>\n</blockquote>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"8364681\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madame la Pr\u00e9sidente, c'est assez difficile de suivre le num\u00e9ro du d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"278257\" href=\"/politicians/kevin-lamoureux/\" title=\"Kevin Lamoureux\">Winnipeg-Nord</a>. Il est incroyable. Restons-en l\u00e0. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364682\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je suis membre du comit\u00e9 des ressources naturelles et je crois qu'il est tr\u00e8s important que nous parlions du processus qui nous a men\u00e9s \u00e0 aujourd'hui. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364683\" data-originallang=\"en\">Deux projets de loi ont \u00e9t\u00e9 renvoy\u00e9s \u00e0 notre comit\u00e9. Il y a d'abord eu le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"12458211\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-49/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Canada\u2014Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C\u201149</a>, puis le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"12525473\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-50/\" title=\"An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economy\">C\u201150</a>. Ce qui est important, c'est ceci. Cela fait des ann\u00e9es, de nombreuses sessions parlementaires, que les conservateurs pr\u00e9viennent le gouvernement que la Loi sur l'\u00e9valuation d'impact est inconstitutionnelle. Les lib\u00e9raux n'ont cess\u00e9 de nier ce fait, affirmant qu'elle \u00e9tait constitutionnelle. Puis, la Cour supr\u00eame, dans un jugement sur le renvoi, a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 qu'une grande partie de la Loi sur l'\u00e9valuation d'impact, le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"9630600\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-69/\" title=\"An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C\u201169</a> d'une l\u00e9gislature pr\u00e9c\u00e9dente, \u00e9tait inconstitutionnelle. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364684\" data-originallang=\"en\">Ici, il est important de noter que, dans l'histoire du Canada, aucun gouvernement n'a fait fi d'un jugement sur le renvoi de la Cour supr\u00eame. Comme nous tenons ce d\u00e9bat aujourd'hui, je crois qu'il est extr\u00eamement important de commencer en le pr\u00e9cisant. Je crois que si nous posions la question \u00e0 mon coll\u00e8gue de Mission\u2014Matsqui\u2014Fraser Canyon, qui interviendra apr\u00e8s moi, car je vais partager mon temps de parole avec lui, il dirait peut-\u00eatre lui aussi que le gouvernement fait fi de cette question depuis tr\u00e8s longtemps. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364685\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le gouvernement doit profiter de l'\u00e9tape du rapport pour \u00e9noncer clairement \u00e0 quelle date et \u00e0 quel moment il corrigera la Loi sur l'\u00e9valuation d'impact, parce qu'une grande partie du probl\u00e8me entourant le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"12458211\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-49/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Canada\u2014Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C\u201149</a> est qu'il contient pas moins de 35 r\u00e9f\u00e9rences directes aux parties inconstitutionnelles de la Loi sur l'\u00e9valuation d'impact. C'est comme si le gouvernement lib\u00e9ral voulait faire adopter des lois et des r\u00e8glements inconstitutionnels. C'est ce qu'on a vu avec son interdiction des plastiques, qui a \u00e9galement \u00e9t\u00e9 jug\u00e9e inconstitutionnelle par la Cour supr\u00eame. Les conservateurs avaient bien dit que ce serait un probl\u00e8me.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364686\" data-originallang=\"en\">Quand on a le mandat de faire adopter une mesure l\u00e9gislative dont le Canada atlantique a besoin pour exploiter ses ressources \u00e9oliennes extrac\u00f4ti\u00e8res, on doit veiller \u00e0 ce que sa teneur soit tout \u00e0 fait limpide et qu'elle cr\u00e9e toute la certitude dont le Canada atlantique a besoin.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364687\" data-originallang=\"en\">Bien entendu, il doit y avoir des consultations. En comit\u00e9, tout ce que les t\u00e9moins nous ont dit, les uns apr\u00e8s les autres, c'est qu'ils n'avaient pas \u00e9t\u00e9 consult\u00e9s. C'est particuli\u00e8rement le cas pour les gens qui travaillent dans l'industrie de la p\u00eache, qui est, comme chacun le sait, la principale industrie du Canada atlantique.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364688\" data-originallang=\"en\">C'est l'un des secteurs importants o\u00f9 il faudrait commencer le processus de consultations. J'esp\u00e8re qu'\u00e0 un moment donn\u00e9, les d\u00e9put\u00e9s minist\u00e9riels nous donneront des renseignements plus pr\u00e9cis quant au moment o\u00f9 ce processus sera lanc\u00e9. Lors des r\u00e9unions du comit\u00e9, nous leur avons donn\u00e9 de nombreuses occasions de r\u00e9pondre clairement aux questions \u00e0 ce sujet, mais ils n'ont jamais voulu le faire.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364689\" data-originallang=\"en\">J'aimerais revenir aux repr\u00e9sentants des organisations du secteur des p\u00eaches qui ont longuement parl\u00e9 au comit\u00e9.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364690\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je vais commencer par citer Katie Power, repr\u00e9sentante des relations industrielles, de la Fish, Food and Allied Workers Union, ou FFAW. Voici sa d\u00e9claration:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364691\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Je pr\u00e9cise que la FFAW, qui repr\u00e9sente le secteur de la p\u00eache exerc\u00e9e par des propri\u00e9taires-exploitants \u00e0 Terre-Neuve\u2011et\u2011Labrador, n'a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 consult\u00e9e et que sa collaboration n'a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 sollicit\u00e9e, ni par les gouvernements ni par aucune autre partie, au sujet du projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"12458211\" href=\"/bills/44-1/C-49/\" title=\"An Act to amend the Canada\u2014Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts\">C\u201149</a>, malgr\u00e9 les r\u00e9percussions directes pour ses membres. Comme aucun cadre de consultation appropri\u00e9 n'est pr\u00e9vu dans le projet de loi pour ce qui concerne la conformit\u00e9, des conflits inutiles entre les parties int\u00e9ress\u00e9es du secteur des p\u00eaches, les autres groupes d'utilisateurs de l'oc\u00e9an, les futurs investisseurs et les promoteurs de projets d'\u00e9nergie \u00e9olienne extrac\u00f4ti\u00e8re seront in\u00e9vitables. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364692\" data-originallang=\"en\"> La FFAW a contribu\u00e9 activement \u00e0 l'\u00e9valuation r\u00e9gionale de l'exploitation de l'\u00e9nergie \u00e9olienne extrac\u00f4ti\u00e8re. La mobilisation massive du personnel et des p\u00eacheurs, motiv\u00e9s par l'ampleur des r\u00e9percussions redout\u00e9es, t\u00e9moigne de leur forte volont\u00e9 d'\u00eatre parties prenantes du processus. Malheureusement, l'\u00e9valuation r\u00e9gionale n'a aucune incidence sur le projet de loi \u00e0 l'\u00e9tude, et les recommandations du comit\u00e9 charg\u00e9 de l'\u00e9valuation ne sont pas juridiquement contraignantes pour le gouvernement. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8364693\" data-originallang=\"en\"> De plus, le manque total de communication entre les gouvernements locaux fait aussi en sorte que le secteur de la p\u00eache n'a aucune certitude et aucune garantie que des mesures d'att\u00e9nuation seront prises et, par cons\u00e9quent, aucune confiance \u00e0 l'\u00e9gard du d\u00e9roulement du processus. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364694\" data-originallang=\"en\">J'ai une autre citation de Ruth Inniss, de la Maritime Fishermen's Union, qui dit ceci:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364695\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Tel qu'il nous est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9, le projet de loi manque cruellement de garanties pour le secteur de la p\u00eache, les esp\u00e8ces aquatiques dont nous d\u00e9pendons et les gagne-pain qui d\u00e9pendent de la p\u00eache. Autrement dit, si nous sommes favorables \u00e0 l'expansion des \u00e9nergies propres, elle ne devrait pas se faire au d\u00e9triment du secteur de la p\u00eache. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364696\" data-originallang=\"en\">J'ai d'autres citations que j'aimerais lire, mais je me rends compte que le temps de parole dont je dispose aujourd'hui tire \u00e0 sa fin. Je vais conclure rapidement avec une citation de Mme Inniss qui dit ceci:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8364697\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Il est extr\u00eamement irresponsable d'adopter \u00e0 la h\u00e2te un projet de loi mal con\u00e7u pour r\u00e9gir un am\u00e9nagement industriel marin qui en est encore largement au stade exp\u00e9rimental dans les eaux de l'Atlantique, un projet de loi qui ne comporte pas les garanties n\u00e9cessaires pour assurer une \u00e9conomie c\u00f4ti\u00e8re durable, viable et r\u00e9siliente. </p>\n</blockquote>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2024/5/2/jeremy-patzer-1/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/jeremy-patzer/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4574/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "12716645",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": "Ordres \u00e9manant du gouvernement"
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act",
        "fr": "La Loi de mise en \u0153uvre de l'Accord atlantique Canada \u2014 Terre\u2011Neuve\u2011et\u2011Labrador"
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2024/5/2/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2024%2F5%2F2%2F"
    }
}