//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1535)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. I really appreciate it.I would move that the bill, in clause 136, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 94 with the following:(2.1) An order made by the Regulator in a case referred to in paragraph (1)(a) with respect to a submerged land licence takes effect immediately but is subject to sections 38.1 to 38.3.There is no specific requirement to consider the fish or their habitats or any applicable regional or strategic assessments by the minister or the regulator making decisions on a call for bids or submerged land licences. If the American experience is of any value, then you'll note that, once a call for bids or SLL is issued, the pressure for development is overwhelming, regardless of the environmental issues that are later identified.At minimum, Canadians should expect to see such required consideration in the parent legislation that enables the call for bids or the granting of submerged land licences.It seems like a pretty common-sense addition to the legislation, and I think we heard some compelling witness testimony that would make this a solid addition to the bill.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1550)[English]Thank you very much.I echo the same argument we made with a similar motion done previously. It's that the intent behind them seems fine and all that, but when it comes down to practicality, you're going to have a bunch of people who will be trained for a job, and then they'll be out of a job not very long afterwards because there are only going to be so many machines set up. Then they, in fact, will be the ones who will be travelling internationally and abroad to do all that work. While the intent is fine, in practicality, it just doesn't work, so I'm voting against it.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1610)[English]Thank you.I have one point of concern with the subamendment. Just to be clear, after we're done with the subamendment, Mr. Chair, are we still dealing with the speaking list on the actual amendment?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1610)[English]Okay. I have comments for both parts here. I'll save some of them for the amendment, and I'll just deal with the parts in the subamendment here.Part of what's being removed from the amendment by the subamendment in particular is the wording “the environmental characteristics of the offshore area that support that industry.” I think that's a very important phrase to possibly keep in there. The reason is that we heard witnesses talk extensively about characteristics of the seabed that are impacted by having multiple wind turbines anchored to the ocean floor. Also, with all the interconnecting cabling and things like that, that does alter the characteristics of the ocean floor, which changes the habitat for the various species that live on or close to the bottom of the ocean.I think it's important to recognize that this is a very important factor in this discussion. Simply saying, “consideration of effects on fishing activities” is only about fishing in and of itself. It's not actually about the environment that the fish or other species of the ocean live in.I think that's why having that specific language around “environmental characteristics” was included by my colleague from Lakeland. I think it's important to make sure that it's a fulsome point in there, particularly because where the original amendment is located is in regard to the principles of this portion of the bill, which is also the general rules of the offshore renewable portion.I'll have more comments later on that little bit, which I'll do under the amendment when we get back to the original amendment. However, as far as the subamendment goes and making sure we talk about “the environmental characteristics”, I do think we need to make sure there is some language in and around there just to make sure that we're not forgetting about the fact that there's so much more than just the fishing activity to consider when we're talking about the development of offshore renewable energy.As I say, I have more comments that I'll use for the amendment. I'll stop right now.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I appreciate that we now have this hammered out.I would also like to point out that I got the email at 3:55 p.m. with the subamendment, so it's not like we would have had time to review it and try to propose any other amendments to the subamendment. I'm wondering if I could have the indulgence of the committee here to possibly try to make a.... As I alluded to in my remarks earlier around environmental characteristics, I'm just wondering.... We've agreed on a good subamendment here. I'm wondering if there's any way now to propose an amendment to that subamendment. Maybe I have to come back with a written copy later, but I'd like to have a quick discussion about it right now, because I do think it's important to have “environmental characteristics” included in this new, amended version of the amendment.I'm trying to envision it in my head because I don't have the actual text of what the new amendment looks like. I think that after “consideration of effects on fishing activities”, we could add in “and the environmental characteristics of the offshore area”.I'm wondering if the committee would consider that. I just want to get thoughts from the committee about that to see if there would be an appetite to do something to that effect. If that's the case, I'd be happy to work on a hard copy to distribute to the committee. I want the committee's input first, before I go through all that work, to see what the appetite around the table would be for language like that.Then I'd like to get back to my other point, but I want to deal with this first, if that's okay.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English] Thank you.Now, I guess this would go into my comments that I was going to save for later, but I think the reason this is important is that the existing accord deals with offshore petroleum development. We're talking about one platform that's confined to a smaller area. When you're talking about offshore renewables, you're talking about multiple points across a vast area and a vast landscape. That's why the concerns around the environmental characteristics of the ocean floor all of a sudden become a much bigger factor. Now you're dealing with tens if not hundreds of square kilometres that will be taken out of fishing activities. Also, now we'll be at risk of significantly altering the environmental characteristics of that ocean floor. That's why I'm talking about the environmental characteristics of that offshore area. As I said, with petroleum, it's one platform. It may have multiple points down. It will have the cables, the guy wires, to help support it, yes, but when you factor in a wind farm and what that entails, it's so much more than what one petroleum platform would be. You can't compare the two. They're not the same. There are some principles that do apply, but when you apply it, broadly speaking, to several individual turbines....It does depend on whether it's a floating wind farm. I'm not sure how widely deployed those are at this point, but there still is an anchoring system that goes in there. There will be multiple aspects to that floating wind farm. It's not just one floating apparatus. There will be several of them, which means several points of tie-down to the ocean floor. We are still talking about multiple interactions with the ocean floor. Again, having significant alterance to the environmental characteristics of the floor has a direct impact on the various species that live on or near the bottom of the ocean floor. That's why I think this is an important piece to consider. Again, we did hear that from witness testimony. If the committee wants to have a hard-copy proposal, I'd be happy to get the text of the intervention that we had from a witness. Being that we had only a couple of minutes to do all this, I don't have that immediately in front of me. I do know that it was mentioned in the committee. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English] Yes, obviously, we want to propose something like that. I had a quick chat with the clerk about some wording here. Also, I still haven't seen the new wording of the amendment after we voted on the subamendment. Once I get the actual new wording of the amendment, it will be easier to try to insert something in at that point.I want to go back to the point on how we heard repeatedly throughout the process with witnesses that this was rushed. That's why we are focused on trying to have a piece of legislation—with the addition of this new piece—that is going to actually take into consideration the environmental characteristics of the offshore area. The reason is that, when we put in a new piece of legislation or add a substantive chunk to an existing one, as we're doing with the Atlantic accords here, it's important that we take this opportunity to make sure that we do it right.If you set the standard now in legislation for what they need to do, rather than just wait to do this process when the SLL application happens.... I mean, it kind of comes down to a lot of other government bills that we have seen where there's a change to the Criminal Code or whatever, but it's so vague that there is actually no certainty and it's left to the courts to decide and determine what's actually going to happen and go on. This causes more uncertainty and delay, and then we get some crazy court rulings that end up happening that nobody agrees with.Therefore, I think it's important that we legislate to make sure that we set the parameters that we want as legislators, because we're the ones who are responsible for doing that work. That's our job. I'm not saying that the provinces haven't considered these things. However, when we hear from all these other witnesses about how rushed the process was or about the fact that they were only given a couple of days to prepare their witness testimony because they weren't consulted, that's where it becomes problematic. Because they weren't given the time to adequately prepare what they would like to see in the consultation phase, it becomes problematic. That's why we are going to bat for some of these key issues that came up during limited witness testimony on another rushed piece of Liberal government legislation.I think it's important that we take the time to make sure that we get it right and that we raise up these specific points that, again, we heard throughout witness testimony. That's why this has become a bit of a sticking point here.We definitely agreed to what the government proposed as a subamendment. I do think it did help provide a little bit more.... It kind of tightened it up a little bit, which is good, which is fine. The reason I wanted to let that pass was that I thought, okay, maybe we could tweak a few things here rather than try to do a whole massive thing at once. I thought we could agree on a basis point, and if there was a way to tweak that, to get the certainty around the environmental characteristics.... I just think it was important to do one, and then we can do the other.That kind of answers Charlie's point about what the heck we're doing here.My initial ask was whether there was a will from the committee to include “environmental characteristic” in this. That way I would be able to come back to this committee with a hard proposal for the wording around that. If we can do that on the fly here, that's great, but I was just trying to gauge the feeling in the room to see if there was a willingness to do something on this. I think we've outlined the reason and the case for why we should do that with regard to the characteristics of the offshore area.If “characteristics” is too broad and vague of a term.... Well, I think “characteristics” is actually a good descriptive word because we know that the ocean floor is active and changing. It doesn't just stay exactly the same. It shifts. It changes. It moves. There are ocean currents and different things like that. There are different species there. They all play a role in the environmental characteristics of the ocean floor. It's a moving thing. It's a constant. It's not ever just completely stationary and idle like, say, a mountainside. However, even that changes. We know that.Therefore, it's important that we have wording in here that is going to properly reflect what will provide the most certainty for investors and proponents and for the courts. There's a reason that the Department of Justice is here. We're trying to make sure that we have things that are legally going to work.As legislators, it is our job to make sure that we have everything in the bill that needs to be there. Again, I'm not saying that the provinces are wrong. I'm just saying that I think that, while we have this bill in front of us, it is important to take the time to make inclusions that possibly were missed or were skipped over.(1645) Again, we get back to the point that the bill was rushed, and here we are. We look at the long, extensive list of amendments that have been proposed here. I mean, I've only ever had one or two bills before me in committee over my four years as an elected MP, and I think this has the most amendments that I've ever seen proposed to a piece of legislation.Ms. Julie Dabrusin: What about the 20,000?Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Well....Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes, we did, but beyond that.... My point is that when you're working with the provinces on something like this.... Again, we want to make sure that we get this bill right.We have stakeholders' testimony that is very specific to this. Part of why marine protected areas became a thing.... I mean, there are a few aspects that go into it, but a lot of it is about preserving the condition of the area that we are protecting, whether it's an MPA or protected land. It's about preserving the condition of the environment. We talked to the fisher groups that were here. They want to see as much of the environment in and around any offshore renewable development be as closely preserved and maintained as it possibly can be. If there are substantive alterations to the environmental characteristics of the area, that's where problems occur. We've seen and heard the alarm bells go off from witnesses at our committee but also when we browse through the news. We have seen and heard from around the world what has happened when they didn't take these considerations seriously when they were legislating the frameworks around it. It's important that we take the warnings from other places around the world and apply them here. We had witness testimony in this very committee that pointed to this very issue, which is why we have this part of the amendment.I think it's important that we take the time to do this properly and do this right. I will come back to the committee with some hard language here. Like I said, I'll pull up the witness testimony, and I'll definitely be proposing something in writing when I get a chance to actually see the new amendment in writing. Then I can work with it and make sure that I get it done properly. However, part of this whole point was also to see if the committee agrees that we should have a little bit more language around it, because I don't want to waste my time and your time by bringing back an amendment that nobody is going to want to see anyway. I'm just wondering if there is a broad consensus to try to see something around that. Then I can bring something, and we can work. If it needs to be massaged a little bit to make it fit, that's great. However, I just want to make sure that I'm not going to be wasting my time and yours by doing that.Thank you.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Mr Chair, Mr. Aldag just mouthed the words “eff off” to my colleague right here. I demand an apology from Mr. Aldag.I saw that, John.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]I have a point of order, Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]Thank you, Chair.Right before we suspended, my colleague Mrs. Stubbs was giving her intervention. We hear a lot from the Liberals about “respect, respect, respect”, but I just want to give Mr. Aldag this opportunity to apologize for telling my colleague Mrs. Stubbs to eff off. He mouthed the words. I saw him do it, and so did my colleague Mrs. Stubbs. I know he did it. I would like to afford him the opportunity to unreservedly apologize, because if this is truly about respect and integrity, I would like to afford him the opportunity to show that those are principles he upholds.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]That's right.To be clear, the only personal attack was on my colleague, Mrs. Stubbs, who was merely outlining what the government had done for a period of time, which is not a personal attack, but—JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1630)[English] I have a point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have two quick points.First, I am thankful and grateful that you did allow everybody time to listen to the tributes to former prime minister Brian Mulroney and also to his family. I think it's very important for parliamentarians to do that and be a part of it. However, I want to comment on a process that I think was flawed. I think there should have been notice given not just to all members of Parliament, but also to the witnesses who are sitting here. Some have travelled great distances to be here and, quite frankly, have had to sit there for an hour doing nothing. They are all experts in their fields and there are other things they probably could have been doing with their time instead of sitting here and staring at the wall. In the event that something similar happens in the future, since you have the prerogative to let everybody know what the scheduling is going to be, you should inform members of this committee of the schedule. It would have been handy to know that we were going to start an hour late. We could have made the proper arrangements to make sure this meeting would be as effective and efficient as it possibly can be, and it would have done a lot to prevent wasting the time of witnesses and members of this committee. Again, I think it was important for members to attend and listen to the remarks of the leaders of their respective parties, but I think that the way it was handled could have been better. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]They shall not all at once, no.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]Mr. Chair, I have a quick question for you.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]I may have missed this in your introduction. If that's the case, please forgive me. I noticed that, at least on my list, I have BQ-18 to deal with, which was on clause 62. I want to make sure I didn't miss something here with the order I have on my page. I know we did some jumping around in the last meeting and I want to make sure we're not missing things. I do have amendment BQ-18 on clause 62. It should have been after amendment G-14, because we were dealing with that one clause. Mario, do you maybe have some thoughts on that, in case I'm wrong? I know you withdrew some because something else was defeated previously. I'm making sure that I didn't—Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]All right.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]I must have just missed putting an X on this one, then. Thank you.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]I just wanted to be sure.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]I would be willing to group clauses 83 to 86 together, if the committee would agree to that.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Clauses 91 through 95 can be clumped together if the committee agrees.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]I'm just wondering if I can get consent from the committee to group clauses 97 all the way through to clause 110.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]Mr. Chair—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]Which numbers are they again?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]Why did we stop it there?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]Well said.ShannonStubbsLakelandGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]Mr. Chair, on a point of order, the notice that was given to this committee said 3:30 to 5:30. It was not 4:30 to 6:30. The official notice on the record says 3:30 to 5:30. You do not have unanimous consent from multiple parties in this committee to continue this meeting. If you want to extend past 5:30, you need UC to do so, but you don't have it. It's done. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1550)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I'm going to speak from my personal experience. I have worked in the wind industry previously. I was not a unionized employee, which is fine. At some businesses, employees unionize; at some they don't. The company I worked for certainly was not unionized. The company I worked for had all kinds of.... It was an international company, but they had North American headquarters. It was an overseas company. There were several different divisions of the company, and as far as I know, I don't believe that any of them were unionized.The experts at the end of the table said about there being no need to include certain language because the terms as they're built already encompass that. I think the way it was originally written would better reflect the workforce scenario because it includes unionized workers but also non-unionized workers. I think we need to make sure that it's reflected that way.Also, in a different job that I had, a company that I worked at for 10 years—not in the wind industry, a different one—I was a member of Unifor. That's a shocker, I know. It was a big corporation that I worked for. There are unionized workers within Canadian corporations as well. I think this is generally understood to be the case.On the surface, project labour agreements and community benefit agreements—I'm particularly going to focus on the project labour agreements—sound like a lovely idea. I get the intent behind them. They seem like a good idea. Practically, especially with wind, they are a lot harder in actuality to do, the reason being that you end up needing a very specialized skill set in certain parts of this industry. For example, the company I worked for was Vestas American Wind Technology. They had guys who were dedicated wind blade repair technicians. As far as I know, there were only two of them in all of North America. Despite the fact that Vestas had several wind farms across North America, with the demand for blade repair technicians, they only needed two or three of them. For building and installing these machines, some of the installation is specialized; a lot of it is generalized. For installation purposes, you might be able to get away with this. However, these companies are looking at the maintenance and service agreements. That's where you're getting the long-term jobs. The farm I worked at had 82 machines. There were nine of us full-time employees on site who did the work on the machines. The guys who did the installations were local people who were hired to help set them up.As far as the specialized parts go, again, it was a travelling crew. There were three travelling crews, one in Canada and two in the United States. Those crews travelled around and did all the site installations. For the long-term installation of these machines, you won't be able to justify having something that prescribes that you need a vast and robust labour force for the installation of wind turbines. I know some people will think that, because there are so many to build, it will work. The reality is that we're going to build a couple of these farms, and that's where it will pause in a region. It's just the way it works. These people will have to travel around the country to keep being installers unless they get on a service agreement to be a maintenance tech. At that point, it's the same thing: You're going to be maintenance tech. If you're in need of blade work, you're going to bring in blade technicians. It might be from the company. It might be a contractor. If you need to swap out a generator set, most likely you're bringing in someone who has the specialty skill to swap out a generator set. If you need to take the nacelle off, you'll be bringing in speciality equipment. You won't be able to have that in a project labour agreement. You're not going to have somebody sitting around waiting for five years for the first generator set to blow up and need to be replaced. The practicality of it isn't going to work.(1555)It comes from the right spirit, but just practically, I don't think it's going to work. I don't think including that in this amendment is going to benefit the area. The intent seems fine, but the practicality of it isn't going to work out in this particular instance.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1600)[English]I think part of it, too, is bearing in mind that the return on investment on this is really thin as it is. There are a lot of wind farms that don't even break even by the time the 20-year lifespan is hit.The beauty of mining is that you can have mines that are open for 70, 80 or 90 years. They can continue to go, they can find new deposits or they can change the focus of what they're trying to find. Depending on the formation, they might be able to keep the mine going and going. In that case, it's a little different because you're able to build and establish a long-term projectable project, but with wind, some wind farms are taken down after 10, 12 or 15 years because there are issues with them and the profitability isn't there. I think making things more cumbersome for offshore in particular.... With the set-up and installation of these things, the costs are astronomical compared to those on land.Creating and finding a sustainable workforce is not going to happen in one particular region of the country because, again, the scalability in the long run is not going to be there. It's great that the provinces are looking at doing this, but the reality is that trying to get the skilled labour you need for this is going to require short-term contract workers to come in. Hopefully, they'll come from somewhere else in Canada—that's certainly my hope—but forcing them to be local.... Maybe that will be great, but people are going to have a job for a year or two, and then they'll have nothing else nearby because they've just been trained to do something and there's no longer going to be any work. Then they'll be the ones who have to travel and be imported somewhere else to do the work. If there are project labour agreements in those places, a person can't get the work in the field they've been trained for. A company will have spent all of that money training somebody to do something they can no longer do. Again, these things sound like a fine idea, but practically it's going to be tough.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1605)[English]I move that clause 38 be amended by adding, after line 19 on page 25, the following:(c) importance shall be given to the development of measures to assist in the preservation of the fishing industry, including measures to assist in understanding and maintaining the environmental characteristics of the offshore area that support that industry.We did hear several witnesses talk about the importance of the fishing industry and the need to be consulted, and we heard repeatedly that they were not. I think it's about making sure that any project will substantially consider the plight of the fishing industry, which is the main industry in these provinces. There are some briefs from first nations groups that were talking about the importance of this for their people, for economic reconciliation and for opportunity.I think this is a good amendment.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English] I hope this means the government is going to be taking seriously the unconstitutionality of the Impact Assessment Act. I believe this is one of the many clauses of this bill that would be impacted by that.This is my only question. It is for Julie, or maybe the officials working on this would know. You mentioned spring, but is there a more specific timeline for when we could realistically see some fixes, hopefully, to the Impact Assessment Act?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English]Okay. Hopefully the minister can answer that if we get to a vote on the motion by my colleague about getting him here for the estimates. Hopefully at that point the minister can give us an update on it, because I would think this is issue number one and there would be a five-alarm fire about getting this dealt with. It should have been dealt with before this point, because when something is unconstitutional, usually that should be priority number one.JulieDabrusinToronto—DanforthGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]I have one more. It's a quick one.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Is this standard procedure? I understand that you're trying to leave room for them to make the amendments to the unconstitutional parts, but in terms of the wording here, is it standard procedure to create wiggle room for them to do that, or will this have to come back to committee, after those proposals are done, for us to revisit it at a later date?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJean-FrançoisRoman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]It's without a distinct date, though. The point of my first question earlier was about the fact that there isn't a distinct date. This is common language to create room to retroactively put in a distinct date—after the fact. This is standard. This is regular. This happens all the time. Is that what I'm to believe here?Jean-FrançoisRomanJean-FrançoisRoman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]You guys don't have a date in mind yet, obviously.Jean-FrançoisRomanJean-FrançoisRoman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Okay. Thank you.Jean-FrançoisRomanGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]At our last meeting, we talked about proposals to group certain clauses together in the spirit of trying to be collaborative and trying to honour the provinces' wishes to get them the piece of legislation they need, while simultaneously doing our job to point out some of the inconsistencies, flaws and problems in this bill. I have a quick proposal for this next grouping. If we could group together clauses 48 through 57, we'd be fine to vote on all of them together in one grouping. There are a couple of other pieces that we would like a recorded vote on after that. There are a couple of clauses after that that we would like to parse out separately, but as far as grouping a few together goes, if I have unanimous consent from everybody around the table for clause 48 through clause 57 to be the next grouping we vote on, I'd be happy to move that.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]I think we've heard quite clearly that the provinces are still interested in developing their offshore petroleum resources. It's unfortunate that there were no bids, but I think it would be wrong-headed of the federal government to tell a provincial government what they can and cannot do with their natural resources. As we all know around the table, natural resource development is the sole jurisdiction of the provinces, so let's let the provinces do what they do best.We will be voting against this amendment. Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]I'd like a quick clarification on the lines here.Paragraph (c) of this amendment says, “by adding after line 10 on page 38”. I'm just curious about deleting three lines on the page prior. Is that not going to impact where the next portion is going to fall in, or does it all just move up and it's all fine? Maybe I'm just overthinking this, but does it not change which line we're talking about here?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]It's just a small technical thing. That's all I was wondering. That's fine.I think our outstanding comments about our concerns with the Impact Assessment Act still stand. This should have been dealt with in advance instead of our having to include this TBD provision in the bill. Either which way, thanks for clarifying that small technical point for me.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]This is a technical question.We still have a whole pile of clause 62 amendments and we're rushing off to a brand new clause. Are we going to circle back to the rest of them? I'm curious as to why we're doing it in this fashion. Later on, we have clause 62.2, but I think that comes up after we've done all of clause 62. No, actually, it does not. There's a 62.2 clause, and then we circle back to 62 again. I'm curious as to why we are jumping around to different clauses, then back again. I'm wondering, Chair, if you want to clarify why we are playing hopscotch with the clauses here.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Why are they considered amendments rather than whole new clauses? Why is that?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Okay. After four years, this is only the second piece of legislation I've ever had a chance to deal with. Bill C-50 was the first one. This is the first time I'm really seeing a package like this. Normally, if there's a clause 47.1 or whatever, we vote for that whole clause. Then we do the next new clause, 47.2 or whatever. That's why I was curious about why it was labelled this way. All of a sudden we're still within the clause we were already working on.At any rate, I appreciate it.C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyÉmilieThiviergeGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]I move that Bill C-49, in clause 62, be amended by deleting lines 11 to 36 on page 38.Once again, this deals with the unconstitutional Impact Assessment Act. When it's already creating problems across the country, I don't think it's good to be imposing the same problems on a couple more provinces. They are going to run into all kinds of issues. We propose that this entire section be deleted. Erase it.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1540)[English]Mr. Chair, before we get into it, I think that, for clarity's sake, maybe we should do a recorded vote. I'm good with grouping them together and having a recorded vote on all of them. When we get to the final vote on each clause, at the very least, I think having a recorded vote would be helpful, just so we're all clear on what exactly we're doing and what is happening.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1545)[English]Thank you. I move that Bill C-49, in clause 7, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 4 with the following:section 5(1), section 29.1, subsection 41(7),That's it.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1600)[English]I move that Bill C-49, in clause 12, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 5 the following:17.2 His Majesty in right of Canada or in right of the Province may rely on the Regulator for the purposes of consulting with the Indigenous peoples of Canada respecting any potential adverse impact of a change to a work or activity in the offshore area on existing Aboriginal and treaty rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and the Regulator may, on behalf of His Majesty, if appropriate, accommodate any adverse impacts on those rights.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1600)[English]Yes, I recognize that a lot of the text is the same, but there's just the one element of a change to a word. Even if there is a change to something after the fact, would the wording of 17.1 still encompass that?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJean-FrançoisRoman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English]Would these be things that are typically gazetted, then, as far as changes are concerned, or would these be something separate in terms of the type of notice that is given?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewAnnetteTobin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English]I guess my question is more for Mr. Simard.Is the intent to broaden what is deemed...or just how many things are considered fundamental? Are you trying to get more things listed as fundamental? What's the intent? Could you just explain the intent behind it again?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Maybe it's because they're not publishing those notices, Charlie.I'm just wondering, do you guys have a definition handy to really hone in on what a fundamental decision actually is? If you have to submit it as a brief afterwards, that's fine, but if you have it handy right now, that would probably be helpful too.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewAnnetteTobin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]This amendment would add after line 11 on page 7: 18.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 31:31.1 Decisions of the Regulator respecting offshore petroleum projects and offshore renewable energy projects must be made no later than two years after it begins its review of the project.One thing we hear regularly is that extended timelines and a lack of certainty for investors and proponents who want to build, regardless of technology, are of paramount concern to them. They want to see more certainty. I think prescribing a two-year window would give a decent amount of time to do the review, and it would definitely put a target date on it, so there would be some certainty for investors. I think it's a good idea to put more certainty on it, because otherwise people are going to go build in friendlier waters. Pardon my pun.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]I move to amend clause 19 by adding, after line 19 on page 7, the following: (1.1) The Regulator shall include with the recommendation a plan that sets out(a) the impact of the project on fish, birds and the environment;(b) the process for decommissioning and disposing of the project; and(c) the site remediation to be done when the project's life cycle ends.Once again, I think this is providing certainty for the region in which these projects will be built. It's just to make sure there's no collateral damage, I guess, for lack of a better term, when the project is done or when it's past its timeline. It's to make sure there are no breakdowns that are simply falling into the ocean and not being cleaned up.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]To create a vivid image for my colleagues across the table here, if we were able to travel for the IRA study to some of the areas we were thinking of going to, we would see the impacts when wind projects aren't cleaned up. When you drive through some of those valleys, you see nacelles hanging off the sides of towers. You see half a blade hanging off a rotor. You see crazy sights and things like that, which aren't being cleaned up and taken care of, and they become safety hazards.I think this provides some extra certainty to make sure that it's expressly written in here to make sure that does not happen in our offshore as it is already happening in the North American context. I am stating it's in the United States where I've seen that. I'm not saying this is happening in Canada, but I'm making sure that we don't have that problem offshore, as we've seen it in other places around the world onshore.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]I move that clause 19 be amended by adding after line 34 on page 7 the following:(5) Any evaluation of offshore renewable energy projects should be done similarly to evaluations of offshore petroleum projects.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1635)[English] Why are we skipping BQ-6?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1635)[English]Oh, I see.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]No.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Thank you very much.I think the provinces should be allowed to decide what their future is. If they want to do more offshore oil and gas development and exploration, they should be able to do that, so I am opposed to this particular amendment.Mr. Chair, would it be okay for me to move my motion that I gave notice of on Friday? I want to take care of it really quickly, if the committee will indulge me for a couple of minutes. I move:That, given that,a) According to Statistics Canada: “In Saskatchewan, the collection of the carbon levy ceased in January 2024—Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Okay. Thank you. I will end there, then.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]I already made my comments on the clause. That's why I was wondering, since I was done with that, if I would be able to comment on my motion. Is there a point in this meeting when I can move this?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Okay.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English] Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I guess I will just get straight to it. I move the motion that was submitted on Friday:That, given that,a) According to Statistics Canada: “In Saskatchewan, the collection of the carbon levy ceased in January 2024, contributing to the province's year-over-year price decline of natural gas (-26.6%).”; andb) Saskatchewan's inflation rate dropped to 1.9%, a full percentage point below the national inflation rate,The committee call on the Liberal government to immediately axe the carbon tax.Given that this deals with a provincial matter, I think I would have support from Mr. Simard, in that provincial jurisdiction is a common theme for him.I think it's imperative that we send the message to the House on behalf of this committee, especially since we heard testimony.... Well, we saw in the Order Paper question, and we've seen repeatedly, that the government doesn't actually track any emissions reductions from the carbon tax. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that it is not an emissions reduction scheme. It's just simply a tax and redistribution scheme.Therefore, I think it would be good for this committee to really send a strong message that we support the resource sector and the development of the resource sector. Also, I think it would be great for the folks who pay their gas bills, their power utility bills, their fuel bills and their home heating bills to see that this committee takes the affordability crisis seriously. It would also be for people who want to invest in Saskatchewan, in Alberta and in Newfoundland in the offshore that removing this unnecessary tax that is.... It removes a competitive advantage that Canada has. I think it would be important for us to send that note.Also, seeing that the House did pass Bill C-234 previously, I think it would be good to just be consistent with that theme, and I think that this motion would allow us to do that. I think the proof is in the pudding here when we look at what Statistics Canada has to say about the price decline on natural gas for ratepayers but also about what it did to inflation in Saskatchewan, which is now below the 2% target that the Bank of Canada set out. Also, the CPI went down 0.1%, which is the first time it has actually trended downward since May 2020. I think that's a key factor, as well—seeing the impact it actually does have on consumers and seeing that the needle is moving in the right direction in Saskatchewan when it comes to affordability by simply axing the tax.I think it would send a good message to people if the committee would just approve this quick, simple motion. We can send it to the House, and I think that would be a good, quick little report from this committee.I don't think I have too much more to say. I think we have a good piece of legislation ahead of us. Obviously, we have some issues with Bill C-49 that we still wish the government would address. However, overall, it's important to my good colleague from Newfoundland and Labrador, here, for his province to do some things that they want.With that, I think I will wrap up my remarks.C-234, An Act to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing ActC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsCarbon taxMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. Resource development is the jurisdiction of the province. It's not up to the feds to tell the province what to do. I think we'll be voting against this amendment for the sole reason that natural resource development is the jurisdiction of the province. Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsClause-by-clause studyEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1715)[English]Show up and you can see who it was, Charlie.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]I have a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.You know, as a recurring theme with this committee, Mr. Chair, I would ask you to remind Mr. Angus to be judicious in his words, because I'm not too sure what he meant by a “gong show”. Is he calling the first nations resource charge a gong show, or was he referring to my colleague as a gong show? Either way, that is a completely ridiculous and absurd thing for him to say. I would hope that he would reconsider the words he chooses next time.Thank you.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]Just to clarify, Mr. Chair, we actually offered to extend the meeting, so the ones who are ending the meeting prematurely are the Liberals, not the Conservatives. Every member of this committee has the right to move a motion, as my colleague did. She was standing up for indigenous people to advance the cause of economic reconciliation, which I hope everybody will take seriously around this table rather than disparaging them.I know that Charlie called that initiative a gong show earlier—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]—so I'm just a little bit concerned about the tone around this table.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1540)[English]Carry on.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1605)[English]I have the reference point.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Thank you very much for coming today, Minister. I'll just correct your dishonest opinion about the Conservative Party. We do actually support the provinces to be able to—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJulieDabrusinToronto—Danforth//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Sure.Your misleading statement that Conservatives don't support offshore wind development is actually factually incorrect. We do support the provinces' ability to develop whatever types of resources they want. What we object to is government legislation that is going to hamstring the provinces' ability to do that.This bill has no fewer than 30 references to the unconstitutional parts of the Impact Assessment Act. Conservatives want to see this bill corrected so that there won't have to be a constitutional challenge to it because of the fact that there are largely unconstitutional parts referenced in this bill.Therefore, Minister, when will you fix the Impact Assessment Act so that it is, indeed, constitutional?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Minister.StevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-MarieStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Yes, there are certain regulations in this bill that are needed and necessary. We all know that. However, what we also know is that there are over 30 references to the unconstitutional elements of the Impact Assessment Act that, so far, your government has done absolutely nothing to address.Therefore, one more time, Minister.... When will you fix the Impact Assessment Act so that it is constitutional?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-MarieStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Minister, if this bill passes as it is, it will be unconstitutional because of the largely unconstitutional parts of it. That is a pretty obvious reason why one would vote against this bill. There would be continued uncertainty for investors and also for the provinces. The provincial stakeholders want this bill because, yes, there are updates to the regulations that need to happen. We all get that, and we all agree with that.One more time.... What is the date on which you'll fix the Impact Assessment Act so that it's constitutional, so that there will be certainty for investors to come and invest in offshore wind off of Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-MarieStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English] I look forward to seeing what those are because I think that will be needed for this bill to actually pass without there being any issues, as your former Bill C-69 has encountered.Now, Minister, does the government measure the annual amount of emissions that are directly reduced from the federal carbon tax?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-69, 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 ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-MarieStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]Minister, you just told a completely different version of an answer that you previously gave. You said that the government does not measure the annual amount of emissions that are directly reduced by federal carbon pricing. It seems we have two different versions of the facts here. I'm very much aware that the government produces the national inventory report. The last year that it is available is 2021, which shows that emissions actually went up over 2020, but you'll also recall that in 2020 and 2021, the country was locked down. The only reason that your emissions went down is that the country was undergoing massive lockdowns and people were not travelling due to the COVID pandemic, so—Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsStevenGuilbeaultHon.Laurier—Sainte-MarieGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Mr. Chair, I'm just wondering if there's any way that we could take 20 seconds. I noticed that she adjusted the boom on her mike down a considerable amount, and I do think there's a chance that her interpretation might be clearer now. I'm just wondering if we could just offer her a quick 20-second courtesy to try again quickly and then—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]You're saying you lost.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]Can I ask one question?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]I believe there was some talk—Mr. Angus mentioned it to us earlier at the start of the meeting—about travel to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. I'm wondering whether there's any update on that or thoughts around it.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1600)[English]Kind of like this screen here.TedFalkProvencherTedFalkProvencher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]I have a point of order, Chair.YvonneJonesLabradorGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.As we know, the NDP-Liberal coalition will get this bill passed right through. We are not blocking or obstructing this bill. We are merely raising concerns about the unconstitutional factors of the bill that should be resolved before it passes, so that there is certainty and confidence for investors. Thank you. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1615)[English]I have a point of order.DarrellSamsonSackville—Preston—ChezzetcookGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English]The member opposite knows that is not true. Conservatives obviously support the creation of good jobs all across the country, especially in Newfoundland and Labrador, and however the provinces want to do that, we support it. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]On a point of order, what happened to the hard stop at 4:30?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Thank you very much, Chair.Thank you to all the officials for being here.Right off the top, it doesn't really matter to me which one of you answers it, but Ms. Graham, this may be easiest for you. What is the current percentage of MPAs in Canada?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewKathyGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]It's 14.66%. The goal is 25 by 25 and then 30 by 30. Do we have a proposed map already for what 25 by 25 is going to look like? Does that exist?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsKathyGrahamKathyGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Thank you.When we look at the regulations of the act, with the way this is drafted with respect to allowing the minister on a project “that is or, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, may be identified under an Act”, we're looking at uncertainty for investors. That's the number one issue, and now it has been verified by the fact that there were zero bids.Who advocated for that clause? Who asked for that clause to be on prohibitions and the right of the minister to cancel a project based on what may potentially be an area? Whose idea was that?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsKathyGrahamKathyGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Okay. Thank you.Ms. Lixfeld, has anybody in industry come to the department and said this is something we need? Especially as it now applies to decisions related to offshore renewable energy, I just want to know if a private sector proponent has come to the department and said they want this regulation written in.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsKathyGrahamAnnetteTobin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]I'm sorry. I have limited time. I don't mean to cut you off.Do you know if any other jurisdictions around the world have that same ability afforded to a politician?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsAnnetteTobinAnnetteTobin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]When we look at the fact that there were zero bids in 2023 after this bill was tabled, that sets the precedent for why people don't want to invest in Canada. I think it's easier for them to go.... We heard from one of my colleagues earlier that over $400 million in bids went to the Gulf of Mexico, for example.Obviously we all care about the environment. We all obviously care about species at risk or wildlife out in nature, and we want to continue to see the protection of those species, but when we have antidevelopment zones in a lot of senses—if I could rebrand them as that for a second—I think that's a huge part of the problem. Companies are going to take their investments and go to other jurisdictions with things like that. As far as this last point goes, proposed section 40.1 talks about the minister having to action “as soon as practicable after deciding to make the recommendation”, and then there's 60 days for a ministerial decision and an additional 30 days. Then it says “No time limit”. Who asked for no time limit to be given to the minister to decide whether or not they're going to proceed with the project?Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsEnergy and fuelGovernment billsAnnetteTobinGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]I don't know why he has to default to violent imagery here. As the chair, you know we're not supposed to say things that are going to incite the committee or elevate tensions. He is deliberately using inflammatory language. I would ask you to be judicious in making sure members don't do that. Maybe he forgot what happened the last time he tried to do that. I would encourage you, Mr. Chair, to rein that in before he gets going too far down a path he does not want to head down and—while he's at it—to tell the truth. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Yes, it was.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1900)[English] I have a point of order, Chair.MarkStrahlChilliwack—HopePeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—Soulanges//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1900)[English]Thank you very much.I understand there have been a few questions in regard to the speaking order. Since I was just subbed into the committee, I'm curious as to who's next on the speaking list, but I'm also wondering, Mr. Chair, if there's a way I could get myself on the speaking list, since I understand there are some issues that would potentially be of great interest to the people I represent. PeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—SoulangesPeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—Soulanges//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1900)[English]On that point of order—TaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley ValleyTaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley Valley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1900)[English]On that point, maybe you want to spend the half-hour to enlighten me on what's happening.TaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley ValleyPeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—Soulanges//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (2020)[English]He has to go to the bathroom. TaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley ValleyTaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley Valley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (2040)[English]You can't move a motion on a point of order.TaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley ValleyPeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—Soulanges//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (2045)[English]We can't move a motion on a point of order. Committee businessPeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—SoulangesTaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley Valley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (2045)[English]You should figure this out so that we can stop wasting our time.TaylorBachrachSkeena—Bulkley ValleyDamienKurekBattle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (2050)[English] Yes, I did—about three hours ago, actually. PeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—SoulangesPeterSchiefkeVaudreuil—Soulanges//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1105)[English]Chair, as soon as you gavelled in the meeting, I had my hand up and was acknowledged by the clerk. I'm curious how you determined the order of things in that regard, because I did not see Mr. Angus put his hand up at that point in time.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1105)[English]Okay, but as the meeting was gavelled in, I had a question and a point of clarity that I was seeking. As soon as you gavelled the meeting in, I had my hand up.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1110)[English]I have a point of order.Mr. Charlie Angus: We have two pieces of legislation—CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1110)[English]We cannot hear the member for Timmins—James Bay. I'm wondering if there is an audio issue that could be checked on here.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1125)[English]Thank you, Chair.I appreciate that we have this motion in front of us. It's a new motion. It would have been nice to get notice of motion in advance. I realize because this is committee business, it isn't technically required to have notice for it to be debated. That's the way I understand it, but it would have been nice to have notice of the motion. There was one that was debated on Wednesday. Before we continue, Chair, I'd just like to seek some clarity from you. On Wednesday, we were debating a similar motion, and I had the floor. Standing Order 116(2)(a)—and I'm just seeking clarity from you on this, Chair—says unless a time limit has been adopted by the committee or by the House, the chair of a standing, special or legislative committee may not bring a debate to an end while there are members present who still wish to participate. I'm just curious to know how it was that meeting—I think we ran out of resources in the room—Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1125)[English]Thank you. I wanted to raise this off the top because of the reference to a speaking order. I'm not going to talk about what was said in camera, but I am just curious about the speaking order. This is why I raised my hand as soon as you gavelled the meeting in, because I was curious about that. At the start of the meeting, as soon as you gavelled it, I had my hand up to try to get a point of clarity on that front.I respect your point on the in camera portion. Obviously we can't speak about what was said in camera.Just out of respect for colleagues, I think it would be nice to have been given notice of this new motion in advance. That way we would have had as much time as possible to prepare for how we would want to address it. I think at this point I will end my remarks so we can get to Ms. Stubbs here.Thanks, Chair.Atlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English]Point of order, Mr. Chair. CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]I'm not sure if Mr. Angus is having problem with his Internet connection, but I think he should keep track of what we're actually talking about. Ms. Stubbs has not moved a motion. She is speaking to the government's motion that it has put forward to schedule committee meetings. She is talking about the relevance of the particular government bills that are before us and why we, as Conservatives, as opposition, want to prioritize which bill in which order—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]Mr. Angus should stay on point as well. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]I have a point of order, Chair.MarcSerréNickel BeltMarcSerréNickel Belt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]I have a point of order.MarcSerréNickel BeltGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Very quickly, I think it's extremely important that all members recognize and realize that within Bill C-49, there are no fewer than 33 references to Bill C-69. Therefore, they are intertwined. If the government had got this right in the first place, it would have made things a lot simpler.C-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-69, 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 ActsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]What she is reading is the text from Bill C-49, not Bill C-69.C-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-69, 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 ActsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English]I have a point of order, Chair.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English]I just want to make sure that Mr. Angus can hear what's being said in this room, because I know we had an issue in camera earlier. Ms. Stubbs is reading from the text of Bill C-49. It's a big bill, a long bill. There's a lot of substance in that bill. You should maybe have a listen to what Ms. Stubbs has to say, because she actually knows what she's talking about. She has a long career and background in natural resource policy.C-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English]I'd like to speak on that point order then, Mr. Chair.Again, I just want to remind colleagues that Bill C-69 is directly referenced no less than 33 times in Bill C-49, so it is relevant, and it is unavoidably part of why Bill C-49 is being discussed. Right now, the two go hand in hand. It is absolutely relevant.C-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-69, 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 ActsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Point of order, Mr. Chair.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]At the start of his intervention, we were unable to hear him.All of us have done Zoom committees, Zoom Parliament, and as you said at the start of the meeting, the members have all done their sound checks.The member has dropped on and off the call numerous times. His headset has been on and off numerous times, therefore making his sound check, I would say, null and void.I'm just curious to know at what point we say that you have to keep the headset on and keep from moving it, because you're wrecking that sound check, which causes issues for interpretation and unnecessary delays.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]I do.I just wanted to clarify, Mr. Chair. I'm not trying to impugn the member and his ability to be an equal over Zoom. I'm merely suggesting, though, that in the interest of timeliness, but also in respecting interpretation, that taking one's headset on and off constantly and moving the boom up and down makes that approval of the sound check.... As we go through the sound checks, quite often it's a matter of adjusting the boom and making sure things are proper.That's all.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]I have a point of order, Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]My colleague is not moving a motion. She is introducing her amendment to the government's motion. It's not up to members to determine if it's a motion or an amendment. It is an amendment. The member said it's an amendment. Therefore, it's an amendment.She's trying to amend the government's motion. I would humbly ask all members to just listen to what she has to say and see what her amendment to the government's motion is.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1240)[English]I have a point of order.JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1240)[English]I find it really interesting after what has been said, that would be the comment that would come. That is presupposing what my colleague is going to do regardless of....She was already in the middle of her motion. To presuppose that she's trying to take a dig at somebody for a social media clip is actually very low and very belittling, John. I hold you in much higher regard than that, so I'm actually quite disappointed in you for making that comment.I'm going to cede the floor to my colleague, so she can actually get to the amendment to the motion that she's trying to make.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1240)[English]Absolutely. I hope that she's able to get to the full amendment. You might want her to start from the top on the amendment, Mr. Chair. I'm just going to remind you, Mr. Chair, of Standing Order 117 on decorum. It's up to you to maintain that. When we have members making egregious comments, it is incumbent upon you as the chair to maintain the decorum of this committee. I would hope and trust that you would do that in the future and not allow this committee to devolve into chaos with members saying unbecoming things of other members. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1250)[English]Point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1250)[English]Thank you.There was a speaking order to the amendment and, for something as substantive as Mr. Angus is trying to do, when he has his turn on the speaking order, that point is when he can discuss what exactly it is he's trying to do.That point of order—correct me if I'm wrong—cannot be used to do what he is trying to do, which is ruling her amendment out of order. When he wants to have his turn to speak, he can put his hand up and he can join the speaking list, but you already do have a speaking list, and if we're going to get into substantive debate on this amendment, we need to follow that speaking list. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1300)[English]Mr. Chair, she didn't ask for advice from the clerk. She knows what she's doing. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1305)[English] I have a point of order on a procedural note, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1305)[English] Under the last chair, when we were going through reports and whatnot line by line, we had this issue of just assuming that the will of the committee was as such and then just carrying on without going to actual recorded votes. I know that you quickly just said to put our hands up for this or our hands up for that, but I'm just wondering if it would be proper to do an actual roll call vote to make sure that people understand what is actually happening.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1320)[English]I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.I apologize for doing this as we come back from a point of order, but I just want to make sure that we've actually received the motion in both official languages. That was the whole point of pausing, and I have still not received an email confirming that we have the motion in both official languages. I'm curious to know whether that's been circulated yet.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1325)[English]On that point, Chair....FrancescoSorbaraVaughan—WoodbridgeGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1325)[English]Thank you. I was waiting for you to finish. I did say “on that point” a couple of minutes ago. I wanted to make sure that I had a chance to quickly speak. The question was on the admissibility of it. From what I understand, we're talking about how it's been inserted and then there will be debate on it with a speakers list. I think allowing members to debate the amendment to the motion would help provide certainty and clarity, possibly around Mr. Sorbara's question. Obviously, the Conservatives feel that this amendment is in order because the motion is about the schedule. Our amendment simply rearranges a few things here. I think as you go through the speakers list and as we speak about the amendment, we may be able to help provide a little bit of clarity and debate on the amendment to the programming motion.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1330)[English]Mr. Chair, can you clarify what that speakers list looks like? I do remember all three of us putting our hand up the very second she moved her amendment. As time has gone on and after multiple points of order, it's taken probably 45 minutes to get to that point. I would just like some clarity on what that speaking order is because I think that would help things out.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1330)[English] Thank you very much, Chair. I do appreciate that. I think this amendment is solid. We're trying to order Bill C-49 ahead of Bill C-50 with our amendment because of the at least 32 times that Bill C-69 is referenced in Bill C-49. Because the Supreme Court of Canada has provided a reference on the largely unconstitutional nature of Bill C-69 and since it is referenced in Bill C-49, that is why there is a priority by Conservatives to start with Bill C-49, but that would of course mean that we need to deal with the case of Bill C-69. The court specified that legislators had to find ways to answer to the reference—not maybe they should find ways, but they had to find ways. We spent a big chunk of this meeting laying out the case as to why we need to do the order in this manner now that we have our amendment on. Again, it's of the utmost importance that we do it in this fashion because part of Bill C-50 talks about the jobs. This is a jobs bill. It's a just transition. It's going to kill jobs, but let's just say that the government somehow is able to be successful and transition people to jobs. They won't be, but the issue is that we have heard in this committee—I have been on other committees as well where we heard this—over and over again from the private sector, but also from the public sector, and perhaps even more importantly from indigenous leaders, that Bill C-69 is the single largest barrier to actually getting projects done of any kind of any type of energy, or any type of project they are trying to do whether it's traditional oil and gas, whether it's renewables, whether it's various projects, and we've heard it numerous times.That speaks to the urgency as to why we need to address Bill C-69 and particularly as it pertains to Bill C-49, because this is obviously about jobs in Atlantic Canada and trying to deal with the energy situation there. It would absolutely be appropriate that we deal with Bill C-69 and the impact it has first and foremost.There's a good note from the Supreme Court of Canada ruling that Parliament can enact impact assessment legislation to minimize risks that some major projects pose to the environment. However, “this scheme plainly overstepped the mark.” That's what the Supreme Court said. Moreover, “it is open to Parliament and the provincial legislatures to exercise their respective powers over the environment harmoniously, in the spirit of co-operative federalism.” That's another quote from the Supreme Court ruling.The whole point about Bill C-69 was every single province, every single premier said there were issues, and the territorial leaders did too. It is important that is noted, that going all the way back to 2018-19 when this was debated, flags were raised over issues with this bill by members of Parliament. In particular, all three at this table on the Conservative side spoke to it. In fact, my colleague from Lakeland did multiple times, and the Premier of Saskatchewan, the Premier of Alberta, all the premiers spoke against the overreach of this. Particularly the Ontario premier very strongly stated on it. It's important that this be considered as we look at the ordering of these bills. That is why the Conservatives have put this amendment forward, because we need to respect provincial jurisdiction, which is why the Provincial Court of Alberta made a ruling on Bill C-69, which of course the federal government challenged at the Supreme Court. We then saw the Supreme Court make its ruling in the reference case.(1335)I would just like to note that all throughout the history of Canadian parliaments, any time the Supreme Court has made a reference ruling, Parliament—the government of the day—has decided to make the necessary changes to it.For the certainty of communities and people who are looking for certainty going forward, I think it's extremely important that we address this first.I'm going to read something from the Saskatchewan government. The first line here is, “5-2 Decision Finds That The Federal Government Overstepped Constitutional Authority And Should Be More 'Cooperative' With Provinces In The Future.”The opening statement lays out the case as to why and how co-operative federalism is actually supposed to work. It clearly was not done in this case. The rest of the quote contains kind of no-brainer points. It reads:Saskatchewan welcomes the Supreme Court of Canada's...ruling against the federal government's environmental Impact Assessment Act, formerly Bill C-69.“This decision is nothing short of a constitutional tipping point and reasserts provinces' rights and primary jurisdiction over natural resources, the environment and power generation,” Justice Minister and Attorney General, Bronwyn Eyre said. “It should also force the federal government to reassess other areas of overreach, including capping oil and gas production and electrical generation. The IAA has stalled everything from Canadian highway and mine projects to LNG facilities and pipelines. It has thwarted investment, competitiveness and productivity across the country. This major decision will correct course.”That last sentence, “This major decision will correct course”, is why our amendment has been moved. That's why we feel this bill needs to be done first.I'll finish the article:The IAA received royal assent in 2019. In 2022, the Alberta Court of Appeal (in a 4-1 majority) held that the IAA was unconstitutional, violated the division of powers between Ottawa and the provinces, and took a “wrecking ball” to exclusive provincial jurisdiction under Section 92 and 92A of the Constitution Act, 1867. The federal government appealed the decision to the [Supreme Court of Canada].Last March, Saskatchewan was part of the constitutional intervention, along with seven other provinces, before Canada's top court, arguing that the IAA had exceeded federal jurisdiction.The majority recognized that the IAA is a clear example of federal overreach. Specifically, the Supreme Court majority held that the IAA's designated projects scheme, by which the federal authorities could permanently put a project on hold was an “unconstitutional, arrogation of power by Parliament” and “clearly overstepped the mark.” The majority also found that the Act “grants the decision-maker a practically untrammelled power [of] regulated projects qua projects.”In 2023, Saskatchewan passed the Saskatchewan First Act to [deal with] matters of provincial jurisdiction.My own province has made it very clear where it stands on this case and on this point. We know all of the other provinces did as well when it came to the government tabling Bill C-69 back in 2018-19. The fact that the Supreme Court has made its ruling kind of puts us in the position we're in now, where we have a largely unconstitutional bill impacting a lot of things that the government is trying work on—multiple pieces of legislation. It's not just Bill C-49 and Bill C-50. Other issues will arise if it is not dealt with and addressed.Quite frankly, it is hamstringing the provinces to be able to proceed with projects. We heard about LNG. We heard about simply trying to get highways built or repaired. I mentioned earlier that some of the first nations leaders were concerned about this as well because they're looking at timelines. They're looking at how there will be opportunity for self-determination, economic participation for their residents and economic reconciliation.(1340) Many of them have earmarked and flagged natural resource projects and development and also renewables, which also gets to the point though of why we have a problem with Bill C-69. They have told us over and over again that even on the renewable side, Bill C-69 is a problem. It's not even just about this being the.... It was originally dubbed the “no more pipelines” bill. This is just a “no more energy” bill. That is what we have here in front of us.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: No more building anything ever anywhere.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes, exactly. No more building anything ever anywhere.I think it's important that we address the issues around Bill C-69, because we've heard from many people, many stakeholders, private, public and otherwise, that this is a problem. I think what we're going—Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: The guys are worried about me interrupting you. You can maybe explain how you feel about that. The guys over there are worried about how I'm speaking to you.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes, exactly. They're looking like they maybe want to have a—Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: I'm pretty sure you would tell me to buzz off if you were worried about it.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Well, exactly. We're colleagues. We banter back and forth about things. We are like-minded. I have the floor.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewFrancescoSorbaraVaughan—Woodbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1340)[English]Well, just on that point of order—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1340)[English]On his point of order, yes, absolutely, because I had the floor. I was speaking. My light was on. I was the one who was speaking. My colleague was so kind as to pour me a glass of water. You know, we work collaboratively on this side, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1345)[English] Yes, I had the floor. I did not concede the floor. It's been mine since I started speaking, and I thank you for making that point. Just quickly, if I may, Mr. Chair, I'm going to say hello to my son. He's back home. He's sick today, so he's home from school, unfortunately, and he is watching the natural resources committee. I just want to say hello to my son. I hope you get better soon, buddy. Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: Knowing kids watch debates really points out how important it is for his future. Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Exactly. He's going to get a chance to learn today how important Canada's energy future is to our generation, to his generation and to the generation that is going to follow after his and how our country is going to work. It's an important opportunity for us to discuss the division of powers in this country as well, because Bill C-69, as the Supreme Court of Canada clearly ruled, has trampled all over that. That is why there is a priority and a precedence on our side to see that we deal with Bill C-49 first, because it directly quotes and references Bill C-69 no less than 33 times. It is causing some grief for members on the other side that we keep talking about Bill C-69, but, because they are so incredibly linked together, we continue to hammer home this point. We want to make sure that people understand that, in order for us to properly get the best result for Canadians, we are going to start with Bill C-49, which means that we have to deal with Bill C-69 and, as the amendment that was moved states at the very end in point 2—it's a very simple line that we have at the bottom—we complete consideration of Bill C-49. What that is doing is ordering Bill C-49 to be first. Deal with Bill C-69, as part of it ties in with Bill C-49, but we are going to complete deliberation on Bill C-49 and, at that point, at the end of the amendment, point number 3 would then be the a), b), c), d), e), f), g), h) and i) that was part of the original motion. It includes the original wording and lettering of the original motion, but it includes direction to have an order prioritizing Bill C-49 in advance. It's a very substantive amendment, and I really appreciate the wording that we have in it here, which we came up with to make sure that it was compliant and in order.It might be worth going over that one more time. At the start of the motion, point 1 is going to be that first we undertake the study on Bill C-69. It references in the opening dialogue about the need to do Bill C-49. We're already establishing that those two bills are going to be part of the motion. We're going to say that we first undertake the following study on Bill C-69:1. First undertake the following study on Bill C-69: “Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling that Bill C-69, 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, is unconstitutional; for the purposes of this study, the committee: (a) hold at least 5 meetings, (b) invite the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change to appear for one hour each, (c) report its findings and recommendations to the House and, (d) pursuant to Standing Order 109, request that the government table a comprehensive response to the report.”, then2. Complete its consideration of Bill C-49.That's effectively—if I'm allowed to use the term—killing two birds with one stone here, because, when we deal with Bill C-49, we have to deal with Bill C-69. We have to start with BIll C-69 to make sure that Bill C-49 is compliant with that law that is now in place. It has been largely unconstitutional since its implementation, which the government was warned about back then and continues to be warned about now. This is why we want to prioritize the order of the bills that we have here in this amendment.There are a few parts to Mr. Sorbara's motion that are still going to have to be addressed and dealt with, possibly in a subamendment.(1350) Before we get to that, Mr. Chair, I think we need to really discuss the impacts that this will have if we don't deal with Bill C-69. I have read a little bit about Saskatchewan and their response to the reference case and the importance of that. I'll just remind members that at no point in history has a government ignored a reference case. They've always acted upon it and prioritized it. Let's take Saskatchewan as an example. We hear a lot about the government doing consultations and how they've been very engaging with people. Well, only about 15% of Saskatchewanians have heard of the just transition. I would suspect that if the other 85% knew what was happening and what was going on, people would have a lot of concerns. In particular, as we have seen and heard, the government's initial attempt at a just transition of coal workers substantively and spectacularly failed. I'll get to that in a bit. People have seen their energy prices already go up. That has already happened. At this point, the shuttering of our coal plants has not fully happened just yet, but we have seen energy prices increase as the government has implemented very strong anti-energy development legislation. Take the cost of the carbon tax alone, for example, on energy production in Saskatchewan. I've heard workers at the coal station talk about how the carbon tax might put them out of a job far in advance of 2030. This is because of the excessive costs that will be associated with producing power as the power plant is phased out and winds down. That escalating cost gets thrown on top, onto the Crown corporation SaskPower.Then you have the case of Swift Current, where I live. They buy the power from SaskPower. In a sense, you have a doubling of costs and regulation here that is causing this issue of affordability of energy for folks. We've heard the government's own regulations speak to the fact that the people who will be disproportionately impacted are seniors living on a fixed income and single mothers. That was right in the government's own regulations, and yet they are plowing ahead with this legislation that is problematic and causing massive cost overruns for people.In fact, we just heard on Friday that the government is going to put a pause on the carbon tax in one area of the country because of the issue of cost, but yet we've constantly been told that people receive more than they pay, so therefore it shouldn't be a problem. Well, clearly it is. This is why people are concerned with Bill C-50, Bill C-49 and Bill C-69. This is why getting to Bill C-69 first will be of the utmost importance to people.In Saskatchewan the working population is 598,000 people, give or take. There were over 43,000 construction jobs, 32,000 manufacturing jobs, and 25,800 agricultural jobs. In forestry, mining and gas there were 19,700 jobs, in utilities about 8,500, in wholesale and retail trade 98,000, and in transportation and warehousing about 30,000 jobs. The potential just transition job impacts are 10,432 direct jobs and 131,500 indirect jobs. A lot of that can be attributed and traced back to the ripple effect of Bill C-69.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-1, An Act respecting the administration of oaths of officeC-49, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and other Acts respecting transportation and to make related and consequential amendments to other ActsC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1355)[English]Thank you, Chair.I thank my colleague for her respectful intervention there. No, I've been working toward.... I've been speaking off the motion and the amendment here. I think it would be important, Mr. Chair, that, first of all.... I'm working on a subamendment here, looking at the original motion. When we order Bill C-49 and Bill C-69 ahead of Bill C-50, obviously it will cause some issues, I think, with the original motion as it is. I'm just kind of working toward that subamendment that I think will be needed to address a few things here.I just wanted to finish a thought I had about the impact on jobs in Saskatchewan. You know, 41% of our available generating capacity comes from gas, and 26% comes from coal. We're already looking at close to 70% of our energy capacity being gas and coal. Yes, we have the just transition legislation in front of the committee, but it still doesn't lay out a plan or a path to actually do something to replace that. It's just a plan to have a plan. That's essentially what that bill is. I think this speaks to why the priority and the precedent should be given to Bill C-49 first and foremost, so that we can deal with that issue. If we're going to change the generating capacity in Saskatchewan, we need the regulatory certainty to be dealt with, which the government is trying to ignore in Bill C-69. If we don't deal with that, how will any provinces, for that matter, whether it be Saskatchewan or Alberta or whether it be the Maritimes, as we're seeing with the Atlantic accord, deal with that? Bill C-69 clearly needs to be the priority for this committee. That is the point we have been trying to make all along here. I think it will be important to get to those bills first, to Bill C-49 and Bill C-69, ahead of Bill C-50.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1400)[English]Oh, thank you.Mr. Chair, I was speaking about the fact that Saskatchewan relies on natural gas and coal for the majority of its baseload power right now. Interestingly enough, on their website for the Government of Saskatchewan—it actually lists this on the SaskPower portion of that website—you can go through and you can see where the province, within the previous 24 hours, got its energy from. You can see where all the kilowatt hours were produced and where they came from. Routinely, about 70% of that was drawn from natural gas and coal. The third highest would be hydro power there. We have a couple of hydro dams in Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, I don't know that we would actually be able to build and complete one single hydro dam in the amount of time that the government is trying to phase out fossil fuels.We've heard about timelines for approvals. That's part of the problem with Bill C-69, and now we have the largely unconstitutional part with what the Supreme Court made their ruling on. There's also the practicality of what we are going to replace the generation of gas and coal with.We look at how long it has taken for a few hydro projects around the country to be complete. We're talking decades. Yet the government has this plan that by 2035 there will not be any natural gas. Natural gas would be basically banned at that point in time. Coal is suppose to be gone by 2030. We're seeing some difficulty around the country in trying to get the reliability factor for wind and solar. We've seen the blocking of new technologies such as tidal power already. Now that wasn't in Saskatchewan where the tidal project was moved, of course. It's a landlocked province. I'm just speaking generally about around the country how that's going to work and how that's going to play out.With wind and solar, solar regularly accounts for less than one per cent of the power usage and energy consumption in Saskatchewan. Wind is regularly less than 10%. It's regularly a single-digit number. Sometimes, it goes a little bit higher. Sometimes it's a little bit lower. Specifically, people are concerned about peak usage and peak demand, right?Now, for those of you who don't follow the weather patterns of Saskatchewan, in the past week, it's been as cold as -15° already and -19° in some areas. I think it's important that people realize that this assertion that you can just throw a heat pump or two on and you'll be good in the middle of winter—I mean, already in October, most heat pumps wouldn't have worked in Saskatchewan. I think it's important that this be noted. In fact, when I was driving home on Friday after flying home from Ottawa, one of the news talk radio shows in Saskatchewan had a conversation around heat pumps. There are people who do use them up at their cabins. The people who have them speak specifically to how that is a three-season solution, mainly because it can be used as an air conditioner in the summer. You might be able to get some warmth in late May or early May at the cabin. Certainly, September into October you can get a little bit of warmth out of it. As I said, it's already been close to -20° in Saskatchewan. That's a common occurrence at this time of year. If you look at October, November, December, January, February, March and into April, the majority of the year, you're not even going to be able to use that as a source of heat in your home reliably. I think that it's important to have that on the table. We talk about the issue of a supposedly just transition and where people are going to get their energy from to heat their homes, to do their laundry, to cool their homes, and we have those severe differences in our temperatures from summer to winter.(1405) We can be in the plus mid-thirties or in the minus mid-thirties, and sometimes you can see that in a span of a week, depending on the time of year. It's important that people have reliable energy, reliable power. That's why Bill C-49, Bill C-69 and Bill C-50 all need to be discussed, but it's also why Bill C-69 needs to be dealt with first: because Canada's strategic advantage over the last number of decades has been the affordable, reliable, sustainable energy sources that we have in this country.There are many countries around the world that would be jealous and envious of the situation we have with our abundance in natural resources and also the diversity of ways in which we generate power and our energy. I think it would be important for us to make sure we keep that. Certainly, Bill C-69 has been a barrier to enabling that to continue, because our population continues to grow, which is always a good thing.... It's good to see our population growing, but it also means that we're going to need more energy.It's interesting to note that it's not going to be very long before, in a province like Quebec, which has a very robust hydro-powered grid, demand is going to outgrow capacity. I'll give credit to Quebec. They do have one of the more robust energy...where's the specific phrase I had here for it? Its grid is one of the most extensive systems in North America. To their credit, that includes the Americans. Also to their credit, they have a very extensive system, but that doesn't change the fact that if we don't have the capacity we need to continue to grow our population, it becomes a problem. That's where Bill C-69 comes into play. Certainly, the folks in Atlantic Canada want to see growth in their capacity to produce energy, to produce power, and that's why they want to see Bill C-69 dealt with and addressed, but because it's also tied in with Bill C-49, which is obviously the Atlantic accords, that is why we have a motion and an amendment before us here today.When we talk about what's happened in other provinces.... For example, with the coal transition that supposedly happened, there were thousands of people who at the end of it were put out of work. They were not transitioned to new jobs. We've seen entire towns in Alberta decimated by that. Bill C-50 is the government's attempt at doing this across the entire country, which is why Conservatives talk about the hundreds of thousands of jobs that are going to be lost, eliminated, because we do have a model to go on that the government has tried. We've heard in other committee studies about how, when there was a transition that was going to happen in fisheries, it just didn't work. Mr. Angus has talked about how workers have been left out in his riding when it comes to plants being shut down or mining projects being closed. I think it's important that this Bill C-69 that has been looming over our country for the last four or five years gets dealt with, gets addressed and gets prioritized.Mr. Chair, when it comes to a potential subamendment, I think of one thing that would help to make the original motion work.(1410) I'm just going to discuss this out loud here. I'm not officially moving anything. I just want to talk this out quickly. Some of the dates that are trying to be prescribed in this programming motion obviously are going to be problematic. In order to make sure that this motion works, getting rid of those dates or bumping them down the calendar at least a little bit, for the flexibility of the committee to be able to properly and appropriately deal with the study—I'm just thinking out loud here—removing those dates is probably going to be best. We want to make sure that we hear from Canadians, from employers, employees, and certainly we'll hear from the private sector unions. We're definitely going to hear from people who aren't in a union, because we have heard from many people that if we talk about what this just transition supposedly is going to do, it's going to drastically impact the work of folks who don't belong to a union.When we talk about the indirect jobs, that number is huge as well. We have to make sure that it considers those folks. That's part of why I think putting in rigid timelines in the programming motion is going to be problematic. It also is going to be a barrier to getting the proper ordering of the motion with the amendment in it that my colleague from Lakeland moved. It would be appropriate for us to look at removing that.With that, Mr. Chair, I'm going to move a subamendment that in section 3, as it's been ordered by my colleague from Lakeland, there be a subamendment that we would remove the reference to the dates in paragraph (a). Paragraph (a) would read, “That the minister and officials be invited to appear before the committee on Bill C-50”. We'll just leave that open-ended so that we have that flexibility as a committee. Then (b) would say, “That the minister and officials...”. I think we would have to remove (b) all together. Again, that's one that's prescribing. It's programming a set date for officials in there. We haven't even agreed to our witness list yet. We have to do that first before we can start putting dates in there for what point officials should appear.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewMarioSimardJonquière//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1415)[English] Part of my subamendment is going to get to part of Ms. Stubbs' amendment. Based on what you said, I'm making sure that I'm absolutely clear on this, because I will be amending her amendment as well.Can I do both at the same time? Is that correct?Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1415)[English]I'm making the case that the five meetings that we have in the amendment are going to impact the dates as part of the original motion. The amendment is substantive to the rest of the motion and needs to be ferreted out. I was under the impression that with the amendment, we had a text of a new motion to work with.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1420)[English]Okay. Thank you. I was getting to a part that would actually do that as well.If you would accept my—Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: Indulge.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes, indulge.Now we're having a back-and-forth here. It's funny how that doesn't get a point of order from other folks, but it's all good. I don't mind. It's a collaborative approach. I don't mind a little friendly banter around the table. It's respectful, so I don't mind it.I'll indulge the committee—to use my friend across the way's term.I guess I have to withdraw the point I was making about the dates because I guess it's out of order as far as it would go as being a subamendment. I'm trying to make the case, though, for what will need to be fixed when we adopt my colleague's amendment.I'll speak to that point of it right there. As we go through this motion.... I'm hoping that my colleagues will vote to accept the amendment, but once we accept the amendment, we're going to have to deal with the issue of the dates. That's what I was trying to establish, Mr. Chair, and I've been corrected by my colleagues as to how to properly do that.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1420)[English]Just to help out my colleagues here, I guess, I will put my subamendment forward. I'm going to move a subamendment to the amendment, which won't deal with the rest of the motion. I would like to amend the amendment. It would be after point b). This would be a new point c) of the original amendment, for the sake of ordering. “That the committee invite witnesses from Sudbury”. That would be my subamendment, that we specifically invite witnesses from Sudbury. That would mean point c) would become “d) report its findings and recommendations to the House”, and d) would become “e) pursuant to Standing Order 109, request that the government table a comprehensive response to the report.” I think it's important to make sure we get witnesses from all across the country. That's why I wanted to move that particular subamendment. It is easy for us to focus solely on people from Coronach, Rockglen, Willow Bunch and Assiniboia. I talk about those folks all the time.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1425)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Of course, the problem here—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1425)[English] Thank you.My common-sense subamendment to the common-sense amendment was simply, after b), including this. It would be a new (c) in the ordering of things. It's coming after “for one hour each” and then “c) including witnesses from Sudbury”. That is the subamendment right there. Then the original c) would become d) and the original d) would become e) in the common-sense amendment that my colleague put forward. The subamendment is simply “including witnesses from Sudbury”, but in the ordering of where it goes in the original common-sense amendment, it is between b) and c). It would be the new c), I guess. It kind of bumps things down in order.I apologize that I do not have it translated, of course, because we were not given notice of the motion in advance of the meeting. I know we don't have to because it's committee business and it's not required, and that's fine. Those are the Standing Orders. Those are the rules, and we play by those rules, but when we are not given the courtesy of a notice of motion in advance of the meeting, it makes it impossible for us to have pre-prepared amendments and translation done for them. In the spirit of collaboration, I guess I would make my case to all colleagues that if, in advance of the meeting, you could submit a notice in advance, that would certainly be handy for everybody—for interpretation, translation, everybody—to know what exactly it is that we are going to be debating here today.Mr. Chair, there's one thing before I continue. I should just get clarity from you. Are we pausing for question period and then resuming? What's happening here?Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1430)[English]When we did our original raising of hands, it was to continue til 2:30, and now that it is 2:30 and about to go beyond 2:30, I just wanted to make sure what the direction of the committee for today was going to be, but—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1430)[English]Mr. Chair, should we suspend for five minutes so we can get translation?CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1430)[English]I'm sorry, Charlie. I tried to get us to suspend so that you would have a chance to get the text of the motion, but I guess the government wants to continue.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1430)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair.All these bills, Bill C-49, Bill C-50and Bill C-69, which is from a previous Parliament, obviously have a far-reaching impact across this country.If I recall correctly, after I moved my subamendment, I was speaking to the types of witnesses we would need and the importance of them. I moved the subamendment because we need to hear from witnesses from all across the country. Mr. Chair, I promised you earlier that I would talk about the good people from southeastern Saskatchewan—actually, south Saskatchewan, the southeast corner of my riding. Geographically it would just be the due south of Saskatchewan there in Coronach and Rockglen and Willow Bunch. It's a great part of the province, a great part of the country. There are going to be witnesses coming from that region for sure, but, as you know, the reason we have the subamendment is to make sure we don't forget about other parts of the country that are going to be impacted potentially by Bill C-49 and Bill C-50 but also if we do not make changes to Bill C-69. We do know this is the “don't build anything” bill, as it's now become and as we've heard numerous times in committee, whether this committee or industry or environment or any other. Even in finance we hear that regularly. I think it's important that we make sure we address Bill C-69 with witnesses from all over.I know some of my colleagues from Atlantic Canada are looking forward to bringing witnesses as well. They are obviously going to be bringing in multiple witnesses for multiple pieces of legislation, whether it's Bill C-49 or Bill C-69. I'm sure they will be very keenly interested in Bill C-50, because the fate of Bill C-49 is going to be tied to what happens with the just transition as well, since they are from part of the country that generates its electricity largely from coal and other means. They will also be disproportionately impacted by all the pieces of legislation we're talking about in the motion, the common-sense amendment and the subamendment.I spoke a little bit about the jobs that are going to be impacted in Saskatchewan. I spoke a little bit about what's happening in Alberta as well, and in Atlantic Canada. I think it's important that we get a good list of witnesses.Really, people are going to be concerned and talking at length, I would imagine, about the Supreme Court ruling.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1435)[English] Thank you.The subamendment is obviously about hearing witnesses from all across the country because, as I was elaborating on, the folks from Saskatchewan.... I would definitely make the point that greater Sudbury is home to the largest integrated mining complex in the world. Mining, mining supply and mining services are key economic drivers for the community. These employ somewhere over 14,000 or 15,000 people in Sudbury. I know the member opposite is aware of that, as well. That's 15% of the population. When we talk about where we're going to get witnesses from.... This is why we have a subamendment in place that will hopefully bring in folks from Sudbury. That's why we specifically want to include it. It's 15% of the people in that area. Certainly, when we talk about regional impacts in Ontario, oil and gas is 28% of the energy sources. A lot of that would be used to provide energy for the mines in Sudbury, which is why it's important we hear from folks in that area.We don't want the people in rural Ontario to be forgotten around the table when we're discussing what the energy transition is going to look like. I think Conservatives have done a very good job of speaking about the impacts in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Atlantic Canada. We're just getting started, Mr. Chair, on talking about the impacts this will have in Ontario, as well. I'm from Saskatchewan and we have colleagues from Alberta at the table here, again. That's why most of our time so far has been about those regions. We like to represent our ridings the best way we can. We are also going to make sure other parts of this country are not forgotten. That's why the subamendment is happening.I know the current government has openly admitted they are more than willing to forget about other parts of the country based on how they vote. I would think, Mr. Chair, this is offensive to you, given the fact that you are from Alberta. One of your own ministers took a shot at you by saying there's no representation around the table from the west, regarding why there's no carve-out from the carbon tax. Hopefully, you didn't take that one from your own colleague too much on the chin. A little friendly fire—Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewFrancescoSorbaraVaughan—Woodbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1440)[English]How rude of me; my colleagues haven't had a chance yet. I'm sure we'll get to them soon.As I was saying, Mr. Chair.... I was speaking to the subamendment. I was talking about energy and power generation in the communities of Ontario, particularly Sudbury, which is why I moved that common-sense subamendment about including a specific region of Ontario that will be part of this 28% of oil and gas used for the grid in Ontario.Conservatives want the country to know that we care about the entire country. Just because I'm from Saskatchewan does not mean I don't care about the energy future of Ontario, Atlantic Canada, Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and the territories. That's why the common-sense subamendment to a very strong, common-sense amendment was put forward.Within that 28% of oil and gas for Ontario and rural Ontario.... Boy, that's 10,482 megawatts—a substantial amount of power generation out there, which will be impacted by what's going on with these bills. Bill C-50 will deal with that 28%, but if Bill C-69 is not addressed and dealt with first, there's no point in talking about Bill C-50 and what we're going to do with that 28%.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1440)[English]This is debate.VivianeLapointeSudburyVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1440)[English]Thank you.Sometimes it's fascinating to see how certain points of order end up going and why people want to them bring up. Certainly, government talking points are not what any individuals want to see. They want to see actual results and to see things happen. They want certainty. They want to know what's going to happen to their future. They want to know what's going to happen.Just as an aside, Bill C-50 doesn't actually have a plan for how to address that. It's a plan to make a plan. We've seen that over and over again with this government.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1445)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair.As you know, prior to having the point of order, I was actually speaking about where the folks of Sudbury are getting their energy, where their power generation comes from and where rural Ontario gets it from. This is why we put that specific common-sense subamendment in place. There was a point of order while I was talking about that. I was merely offering up a quick response to the point of order because I found it quite fascinating myself, to be honest. What I was getting at was the fact that there's over 10,000 megawatts of gas and oil being used for power and energy for rural Ontario and for communities like Sudbury. It is important, when we have a common-sense subamendment outlining the people of Sudbury, how it relates to the motion, which is its link to Bill C-69. This is because of the reference case by the Supreme Court of Canada making it largely unconstitutional. How's that going to implicate Bill C-50?Again, let's just pretend for a moment that Bill C-50 was somehow magically going to work. It's not going to work because it's a job-killing initiative, but let's just pretend for a moment that it would. There are going to be issues trying to get the jobs and the energy transition for these workers and for these communities like Sudbury to be able to have reliable, affordable energy going forward.In order for Bill C-50 to possibly be effective, Bill C-69 has to be dealt with first and foremost. When we see that gas and oil is 28% in Ontario for the high-voltage provincial grid, it is important that we speak to why Bill C-50 has a part to play and what's going to happen to the people of Sudbury—which is what my subamendment is all about.Providing context to amendments and subamendments is important. That's what I am trying to do. That's the point I'm trying to make and, unfortunately, I keep on getting points of order over that. I don't know if it's because when people hear how this is going to go and how this will be laid out...because, as I mentioned earlier, there was already an attempt at a coal transition in rural areas of Alberta. I mentioned the thousands of jobs that were lost. Workers were not transitioned into other jobs. They were certainly not given what was mentioned, which was that there would be sustainable, well-paying jobs for everybody. Again, it's fantasyland to think that the 177,000-plus direct jobs are all of a sudden going to get the same or jobs or greater jobs that are talked about by the minister in the just transition or the Canadian sustainable jobs act.We know it's not going to be a just transition. That's why the government has moved to try to change the name and the title of it. The Minister of Labour actually admitted that people don't like the phrase “just transition”. I think it's because people know what it actually means. It's just going to be a transition into unemployment for a lot of folks, or into a position where they are going to be out of work or be paid substantively less. We heard a witness the other day say that 34% less is what people will be paid when and if they are transitioned to a different job.I can guarantee that the people of Sudbury do not want to take a 34% haircut. That's not what people want. The bill actually does nothing to make sure that it is going to say...we've seen government internal documents even admit and say that this is not going to happen.We have on the record from the government that this is going to be problematic, and we're still ramming through legislation that was time-allocated after minimal debate in the House of Commons. That's what happened back in 2018-19 with Bill C-69. It's what happened with Bill C-50. It's what happened with Bill C-49.It's also important to talk about the energy transformation going forward for the people of Sudbury. That's why we want to have people at committee to testify to this. It's because when we see what the coldest temperature on record for Sudbury was recently, over the last couple of years, last winter, in fact, the coldest temperature was -37°C.(1450) There was no carve-out for the carbon tax in Sudbury. People are going to need to heat their homes with a heat pump that only works up until -7°, which is about 30 degrees short of what people are going to need to stay warm. This is why we're talking specifically about making sure we get people from a community outside of Toronto to testify at committee.This committee is also going to study the impact of the Supreme Court decision on the resource sector, and we want stakeholders from Sudbury to be included in that study. That's the main point of the common-sense subamendment that we have. I think it's important that we let the people of Ms. Lapointe's riding have a say. That's why we moved this common-sense subamendment, Mr. Chair. I'm waiting for an applause. I'm going to end my remarks there.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1455)[English]I think that was debate, Mr. Chair.VivianeLapointeSudburyGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1500)[English]Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1500)[English]No, but it's about the vote and the—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1500)[English]Defeated from having members from the community of Sudbury come...? Okay.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1535)[English]I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1535)[English]That is part of the point of order, Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1535)[English]I'm just seeking clarity. There is a standing order that says unless a time limit has been adopted by the committee or the House—and we've obviously extended well beyond our usual sitting time, so there's clearly not a time limit. Standing Order 116(2)(a) says that “the Chair...may not bring a debate to an end while there are members present who still wish to participate.” As you've referenced, there is a speakers list. There are many members who still would like to participate. I do think it's not appropriate at this time to be calling for a vote.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1540)[English]Mr. Chair, on that point of order, I do believe that if any member wants to sit at the table as an elected member of Parliament, they're able.... To your point, there's only a certain list that can vote, but if others want to be part of the debate, they are allowed to be part of the debate.Points of orderSubstitutions of committee membersGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1545)[English]On a point of order, Chair, I think this might be debate. This is not a point of order. MarcSerréNickel BeltGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1545)[English]This is not germane to the conversation. He's debating the member. Perhaps he should stick to the point of order at hand, or maybe you should rule the point of order as out of order. I will let you decide, Mr. Chair. That's your prerogative and not mine. He should stick to the debate at hand. This is not a debate.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1550)[English] I think you gave our friend from the Bloc a heart attack there.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1550)[English]Thank you. I'd like to comment on that point of order briefly. If Mr. Viersen wants to join this debate, even not as one of the four voting Conservative members on this committee, he can do that. He's fully within his right to do that. If one of the independent members or a member from the Green Party were to walk in and sit down at this table, they'd be able to join in this debate. This is a debate on a motion. It's not a substantive part of committee policy. Right now we're debating a motion, and they'd be able to join into the debate.Points of orderSubstitutions of committee membersGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1550)[English]On that point again, as I understand it, when it comes to allocations of time slots in regular committee, it's parties with official status that get time allocations for committee. When we are debating a motion such as we are here, I was under the impression.... I appreciate what you have said, but I want to clarify that since we're not in the traditional framework in which, for example, Conservatives have a six-minute slot and the Bloc has a six-minute slot, it is the case then that only the four at the table.... I want to get some clarity around that. I understood that any member of the House of Commons actually had the ability to be recognized at a committee table outside of that. Points of orderSubstitutions of committee membersGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1550)[English] I would like to challenge the chair on that point then, Mr. Chair. Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairDecisions of Committee ChairsPoints of orderSubstitutions of committee membersGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1555)[English] Thank you for that, Mr. Chair.On the subamendment we have at hand here, as we laid out the case before, the case will be laid out again as to why we want to hear from witnesses all across the country. Certainly, we want to hear from folks who work at the mines in and around Timmins and James Bay. I think Mr. Falk highlighted very well the importance it has for the greater region and greater area—in particular, for resource development for economic reconciliation—and opportunities for all of Canada to be able to participate in the economy.We have lots of proposals for witnesses. We just want to make sure that the area in the riding of Timmins—James Bay won't be left out and forgotten, as we found out not a single person there has received a heat pump or a carbon tax carve-out either. I think it's important to make that note as well. I think it would be good to hear from people from Timmins—James Bay. The government hasn't done much in the way of helping those folks out. We look at how just transitions have previously gone and been attempted. We heard previously that workers have been left out in that region of the country, so we want to hear from them about what might happen when another just transition is forced upon resource workers in this country. It's not just the smaller scale of the first attempt that spectacularly failed and how that was done up; now we have a national scope and scale for a so-called “just transition”.Conservatives put forward another common-sense subamendment to another common-sense amendment. As we know, after eight years of this government, the penchant to do things that are largely unconstitutional, as we saw with Bill C-69, is problematic. It would be good to hear from the folks in and around Timmins—James Bay about what their thoughts are on that. If we don't deal with the issue of Bill C-69, how's that going to play out for the folks in that area? They're obviously looking for more involvement in the development of natural resources in that area. We've heard the extensive list of critical minerals available for the energy transition—not just here in Canada, but around the world—that people want for components. Therefore, trying to get the best opportunity for people to be able to speak to what we're dealing with here at committee with this bill and getting their perspective will be of the utmost importance.I would recognize Timmins—James Bay as another area of the country.... I was talking about the stats earlier. In Ontario, with a pretty significant amount of gas and oil that is still used for power and energy production, and without a doubt with the amount of mining that goes on in Timmins—James Bay, certainly a lot of it would be used there as well to make sure that they can power their operations and keep the work environments in a manner that is suitable for the workers.I think it's important that we deal with witnesses from all across the country. That's why we have another common-sense subamendment here that we're looking forward to dealing with. I want to thank Mr. Falk—I know he has left—for moving this amendment. I look forward to seeing what the good people of Timmins—James Bay have to say.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1605)[English] I have a quick point of order, Chair.MarioSimardJonquièreGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1605)[English]Thank you. I have a point of clarity on an earlier ruling that was made. Standing Order 119 does state that only members may vote or move a motion, but it also says this:Any member of the House who is not a member of a standing, special or legislative committee, may, unless the House or the committee concerned otherwise orders, take part in the public proceedings of the committee, but may not vote or move any motion, nor be part of any quorum.It actually does say that they may take part in the debate, but they can't vote, move a motion or be part of the quorum. If they want to just have their voice heard, according to Standing Order 119, they are able to do so.I'll just leave that with you, Chair. Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: It's important. That's an important common-sense [Inaudible—Editor].Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes. It's a point of privilege for members, to be honest, and it's a common-sense one at that.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1610)[English]I had a point of order, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1610)[English]Part of why I brought up that standing order was that I am also concerned about the precedent we are setting by ignoring certain standing orders and basically effectively stripping the rights and privileges of members of Parliament—of all members, whether they are part of a party with official status or not. I am concerned about their being able to have their rights stripped from them in this situation.I do think that we need to be mindful of the precedent that is being set here because, as my colleague from Peace River—Westlock mentioned, he was actually denied the opportunity to speak. According to the Standing Orders, he had every right to have his name on that list.Now, he was not able to move a motion, which he was not attempting to do. He was not asking to be a voting member of this committee, which was clearly established because Mr. Falk was still here. He was merely attempting to get on the speaking list. The standing order itself does specifically state that they may “take part in the public proceedings of the committee,” and that is what Mr. Viersen was attempting to do.I think it is very important that we make very clear what is going on right now.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English]I have a point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]No. It relates to what you just said.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]I have a point of order. Mr. Chair, one point for clarity would be that when I challenged you, it was just on an open comment in regard to the rights and privileges of members. In this second go-around here, we are discussing a direct quote from the actual Standing Orders, so it is substantively different. I read into the record the standing order that governs it. If we accept the vote that happened there, you are effectively rewriting this standing order without our actually talking about that particular standing order in that moment—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]—so I'm just letting you—CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]We're trying to help you help yourself here. You put yourself in a position—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Yes. It's on what Mr. Angus is saying right now.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]I think Mr. Angus needs to make sure he has his facts correct, because what Mr. Angus is saying is actually not true. That is not what the point of privilege is.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]The whole point here is that any member can raise a point of privilege on this particular issue. Mr. Genuis has every right to raise the point of privilege on behalf of another member. That's fully within the scope here.His point of order is not correct.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]I have a quick point of order, Chair, if you don't mind.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]No. It's a separate point of order, Mr. Chair. I'm just—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]For sure.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Chair, because there was lots going on here at the start, when my colleague moved his motion, I believe I had raised my hand for the speaking list. I'm just curious whether you can confirm who the next two or three speakers are on the speaking list for this motion.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1735)[English]On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I do believe it's all been addressed and dealt with through the clerk. We do have our four members already identified with the clerk as to who is part of the committee.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1740)[English]I had raised a point of order before Charlie.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1740)[English] I want, for the record, the actual clip of the interaction that we had back at 3:39 p.m. from MP Serré over here. He said, “I see there are Jeremy, Ted and Garnett. They've all asked to be acknowledged. I just want to understand who the members across the way are. Can we just get who's voting? Who's a member?” In the context of the previous discussion we had, the point was raised by one of the colleagues across in regard to who was voting. That was the context in which our whole debate and everything happened earlier this afternoon.Given that we had the whole vote go down over that, I'm just trying to make sure that we.... In the context of what happened, but also based on what Standing Order 119 says, we have a member trying to just take part in the public proceedings of the committee.Mr. Charlie Angus: I have a point of order.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: He's not trying to vote, which is what was asked for by my colleague from the government. He asked, “Who's voting?” Then everything that happened from that point onward basically up until now was over the quote as to who is voting and who is a member.Now, my colleague Mr. Viersen wants to take part in the public proceedings of the committee. You have recently acknowledged that he is on the speaking list. You added him to the speaking list so that he can take part in the public proceedings of the committee.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6435)[English]How many times did you raise a point of order at the last meeting?CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6445)[English]First of all, Mr. Angus was complaining about our raising points of order, and then he raised a point of order to interrupt our member who had the floor. He is already contradicting himself. Of utmost importance here is the relevance of what he is saying, because he, obviously—I have to be careful and I recognize this—was not physically present in the room because he was on Zoom. He could not see physically that Mr. Viersen was, indeed, in the room. I think it's relevant to say that, because he did not see Mr. Viersen trying to get his name on the list. That is of utmost importance. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6505)[English]I have a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6505)[English]I have a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6505)[English]I would like to be succinct. I have a point of order on this point, Mr. Chair.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6505)[English]Thank you, Chair.I do believe this will help remedy Mr. Angus's concern. The point was raised, and after that point was raised, you then proceeded to grant Mr. Genuis the floor, because you agreed that his point was actually in order. Therefore, this is why we are discussing this issue right now. You proceeded to allow the debate to happen. This is where we are. That was your ruling, in effect, and now we are here.Thank you.Mr. Charlie Angus: Point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6510)[English] Who are you to determine the appropriate esteem?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6610)[English]Thank you.As Mr. Angus knows, the rules do actually allow for other members to be subbed into the committee, which Mr. Genuis was at the start of the meeting. For him to impugn he is not a member of the committee is, by any stretch, out of order and should not even be entertained or be allowed to be said that way. I hope he withdraws that statement.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (6615)[English]Let's reflect on this. Mr. Genuis had the floor because he would not have been able to move his point of privilege, the motion he moved, if he did not have it. As we know, you cannot move motions if you do not have the floor.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18350)[English]On that point of order....GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18350)[English]It's on the point of order.GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18350)[English]If I recall, the meeting last week was suspended. Therefore, the member who had the floor at the end of the meeting, who was a Conservative member—An hon. member: No.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: —should still have the floor. That's the way it works. It was a suspension. You did not adjourn the meeting. If you had adjourned the meeting, that would have been completely different, because that was something that happened previously, but because you suspended the meeting, it's a continuation of the meeting.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18350)[English]I have a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18350)[English]I have a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18350)[English]For him to say I'm making a false claim insinuates that I'm lying. You know, Mr. Chair, he is not actually allowed to do that.At the end of the last meeting, there was a Conservative member who had the floor—it was not Mr. Angus—so it's pretty straightforward.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewColinCarrieOshawa//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]I have a point of order.ShannonStubbsLakelandGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]I think it's quite clear how this is supposed to go. You shouldn't have to challenge the chair every single time there's merely a simple question around how we finished the last meeting.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]That's what it comes down to.Yes, it is a point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]It sure is.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]Mr. Chair, I do not think it reflects well upon yourself that every single time we restart a meeting you're going to tell people— GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]—that if they don't agree with you, they have to challenge you on every single point.ShannonStubbsLakelandGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]I'm trying.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]Thank you.Thank you for turning your mike off, because I had the floor. The only person who turned their mike on to interrupt me was you, Mr. Chair. I think that was a bit of a problem.Again, the point I was simply trying to make is that we do not need to have to challenge the chair every single time there's a question.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]We expect the chair to be able to uphold the rules of the committee—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]—the rules of the Standing Orders. They're there for a reason.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18405)[English]I'm being interrupted again.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18430)[English]Thank you very much, Chair. I just want to get it on the record that every single time one of us has had the floor, a point of order has been raised and then all of a sudden someone—sometimes it has been you—starts talking over one of us. That's contributing to multiple people talking at the same time, and then we see Mr. Angus jump in on top of it as well. We end up with three people yammering on the mike. I just hope your statement will apply equally to everyone, including yourself as the chair. I recognize that as the chair you have a certain level of authority and we do acknowledge that, but just to be fair and consistent, I hope that statement would reflect upon yourself as well.Thank you.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18440)[English] I have a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18440)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I do have something that maybe the clerk can help enlighten us on. It is the issue that we seem to still be at loggerheads over, and that would be Standing Order 41, in regard to when business is interrupted.The Standing Orders apply generally. This is a standing order that governs debate in the House of Commons. It does reference when debate happens and then we hit question period or Statements by Members, so that would be like when a member stops. It references it in Standing Order 30(5) as well. When interrupted, the business resumes after the interruption is done, and 30(5) alludes to Statements by Members and question period.At the end of question period, all other business that happens at that point, with points of order and things like that, it is the member who actually had the floor prior to.... That would be when—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18440)[English]—that person resumes. This would be the same situation in committee as it is in the House of Commons, because the Standing Orders do apply generally.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (18505)[English]Thank you, Chair.Let's just quickly let it be known also that it was Mr. Angus who was trying to shout over top of you just a few seconds ago.My point of order is that we cannot pick and choose which standing orders we decide to follow. Either we follow all of them or we don't follow any of them. If we're going to accept the standing order that was quoted by Ms. Dabrusin, but not the one that was quoted earlier by me....The Standing Orders are here to govern and guide this committee. I know there's leeway for committees, but the Standing Orders are actually quite clear. In fact, there is also another lovely book called House of Commons Procedure and Practice. In chapter 20 it says: Every standing, legislative and special committee observes the Standing Orders of the House of Commons so far as they may be applicable, except the Standing Orders as to the election of a Speaker, seconding of motions, limiting the number of times of speaking and the length of speeches.This means that, in principle, the number of times a member may speak in committee, and the length of his or her speeches is not subject to any limit. The member can thus take the floor as often and for as long as he or she wishes, provided the chair has duly given the member the floor.This goes back to the point I was making in regard to the standing order that I quoted before. If we were to read the transcripts from the last meeting.... Perhaps the clerk would like to do that to settle this once and for all as to who had the floor. According to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, chapter 20, it would clearly say that Mr. Genuis had the floor, based on who had it at the end of the meeting.Thank you, Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23245)[English] Thank you.On Mr. Angus's point of order—and actually this applies to several issues here, and I think this would help with the interpreters—when one of us, a Conservative member, has the floor and somebody else raises a point of order, we are immediately cut off by the chair. Mr. Angus was speaking. I let him go for a little while, and I had a point of order I wanted to raise. I wanted to let him finish, but there came a point when I thought, no. I had a point of order on what he was saying, and respectfully—you saw me—I didn't hammer my microphone. I wasn't yelling into my microphone. I put my hand up, and I said, “Point of order, Chair,” respectfully, and you just kind of put your hand up and just let him go on and on and on. Equal and fair treatment of all members by the chair is a general and accepted rule of practice by the chair. I read it multiple times in multiple instances in Bosc and Gagnon that it's standard practice. We expect the chair to be equal and to be fair. Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: We do. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23305)[English]Thank you.I'll be very, very succinct.I just think it would be beneficial for the committee to be aware that over the three previous meetings Mr. Angus has raised no less than 57 points of order, so when we want to talk about who is actually interrupting and preventing members from speaking, Mr. Angus is leading the charge.In this meeting alone, he's added no less than five points of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23335)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I was actually planning to agree with you and echo your words because you read about persistent interruptions. Again, I will note that's the seventh time Mr. Angus has interrupted one of my colleagues today.In the last three meetings, he has point of ordered Conservative members 57 times. If you want to talk about persistent interruptions, there's one member who's guilty.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23420)[English]On that point of order, Chair....JulieDabrusinToronto—DanforthGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23420)[English]It's building off a point that she had made. I think this might help provide clarity, so that we can proceed. I think it's in the best interest of the committee, I would assume. It goes all the way back a couple of meetings. A point of privilege was raised. The words from your mouth were that you granted the point of privilege to Mr. Genuis.If you read a little bit further in chapter 20—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23420)[English]This is not about whether—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (23420)[English]Thank you. It's on a point that she had made and I think this helps to provide clarity. I am reading and quoting from Bosc and Gagnon, so I am not debating her.House of Commons Procedure and Practice says, “If a member wishes to raise a question of privilege during a committee meeting, or an incident arises in connection with the committee’s proceedings that may constitute a breach of privilege, the committee Chair allows the member to explain the situation.”Charlie, it's page 1060, if you want to read along.The Chair: Mr. Patzer—Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Please let me finish because it's—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51505)[English] Thank you, Mr. Angus, for reading the original motion. I'd also remind committee members that there is a substantive amendment to the motion from the Conservatives. Mr. Charlie Angus: I have point of order.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Do you want me to read that in as well, so we can get that in there?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51505)[English]I thought we were going to finish points of order before we got to the next point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51510)[English]Wow.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51510)[English]And I raised a point of order. It's not a big deal. An hon. member: Shush.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Don't shush me.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51520)[English]This is a separate point of order from my original one. Building off what my colleague Ms. Stubbs just said in regard to using the term “abuse” so flippantly as Mr. Angus is doing here, we are simply here as elected members of Parliament doing our jobs. Because I had a simple point of order, it does not mean that I am engaging in abusive conduct towards the member for Timmins—James Bay. When he alleges that, he is directly and deliberately undermining people who are actually legitimately suffering and going through abuse this very day. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJulieDabrusinToronto—Danforth//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51520)[English]I think it's absolutely appalling that he would dare to bring that language into this committee. He needs to apologize and withdraw that. I know he doesn't agree with me on my point of order, which is fine, but because he simply disagrees with me does not mean that I am being abusive to him. I think that is absolutely ridiculous.Mr. Chair, I would ask you to be judicious in the way you monitor this committee and to make sure that members are not belittling and undermining people who are legitimately going through and suffering from abuse.Thank you.JulieDabrusinToronto—DanforthGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51520)[English]You're not the chair, Charlie. Just remember that.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51520)[English]Yes, absolutely.Mr. Angus started the meeting with the floor. He was not interrupted until he finished reading the motion, but he conveniently left out the amendment the Conservatives put forward to make sure that Bill C-49 is actually given precedence. We want to undertake a study on Bill C-69, but of consequence, we want Bill C-49 to go ahead of Bill C-50, for the sake of ordering.I just want to make sure all committee members remember that Bill C-49 should come ahead of Bill C-50, and we would like to see Bill C-49 first.Thank you.C-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51530)[English]I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51530)[English]Yes, I absolutely did. You've talked to all committee members at length about being respectful to their colleagues, and while Mr. Falk was talking, Mr. Angus was yelling at him from that end of the table...over top of him.I want to make sure we put that on the record, because he is quick to point out that members are being abusive, but he is the one who is yelling at other members. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51530)[English]I want to remind you, Mr. Chair, that the rules apply to everyone. I would ask that you make sure Mr. Angus is not the one who also—CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51530)[English]—provides crosstalk and yells over top of people.Thank you very much.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51535)[English]Thank you very much.Multiple times Mr. Angus has tried to imply that we have been lying over here, providing misinformation and things like that. I would ask that you be judicious in making sure that it applies to all members, especially as it pertained to me just a couple of minutes ago here, Mr. Chair.Thank you.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51535)[English]Let's just be clear. When Mr. Angus alleges falsehoods and things like that, we know what he's doing. He's deliberately saying that we are lying. Now, there's no falsehood that was said, yet here he is right there deliberately defying what you just told him literally 20 seconds ago, to not accuse people of lying.I just ask, Mr. Chair, when members do that, that you make sure they are stopped and asked to apologize. We know they're not allowed to do that in the House of Commons. We know that whenever somebody accuses somebody of lying, they're not allowed to continue until they apologize.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51550)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to say that I am paraphrasing, because I do not have your direct quote in front of me. At a previous meeting, you said that when a member has the floor on a point of order, as Ms. Stubbs did, that we were not going to be interrupting them, because of the issue of crosstalk and the fact that there are multiple problems that come with this.You had asked us previously—and I would be happy to stand corrected by you if I am wrong here—that we would let points of order finish, and then proceed to the next one so that we could maintain order. This would also allow members to finish their points of order without being interrupted, because there's been a point of emphasis from you to make sure that we don't have crosstalk, excessive noise and things like that.When Ms. Stubbs was giving her intervention, there were multiple attempts to try to cut her off and not allow her to finish her point of order.I would like to know what's going on here.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51555)[English]Based on what Ms. Dabrusin just said, but also by Mr. Angus's own admission, he was talking about somebody outside of Timmins—James Bay, so he wasn't speaking to the actual motion either. He was not on point. He even admitted that himself.The other part is we were making sure that Mr. Angus was speaking on facts. My colleague was simply pointing out what Conservatives have actually done, such as a motion that is in front of the committee. It's not the one that's being studied, but we want Mr. Angus to have the facts.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51610)[English]No, it's on your....GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51610)[English]Also, the Standing Orders say that members who are not voting members but they are maybe an independent member or a non-official party status member or other colleagues who aren't the main voting members are allowed to participate in a public committee meeting but may not vote. That is what the Standing Orders allow for.Also, there is the other point that maybe we're going to be subbing in members to speak and they want to get a spot on the list, but maybe we want to sub those members in before they get the floor and other members don't know that. I just want to make sure that we're protecting the rights and privileges of all members regardless of political stripe or whether they are a voting member or not. Committee businessCommittee membersPoints of orderSpeaking orderGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51615)[English]You literally just finished telling committee members that they cannot do that on a point of order. Mr. Angus raised the point of order, which meant that he does not.... Within that context, he does have the floor for the motion, but you granted him the mike on a point of order, not on returning to the debate of the substantive motion at hand, right? Therefore, Mr. Angus is not actually able and allowed to do that, because it was only on a point of order and now Mr. Genuis has a point of order separately too. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51625)[English]Thank you.There was a soft allegation put out there about decorum. I think we've all done a good job of raising our points of order and waiting to be acknowledged. I just want to make sure we're not impugning the integrity of individuals around here. I just want to make it clear that we've done, I think, a very good job of making sure we are respectful of the order and, as we raise the points of order, waiting for you to acknowledge us, Mr. Chair.I look forward to hearing Mr. Angus's closing remarks.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (51635)[English] Further to that point, on page 1065 under “Substantive Motions”, it says, “A substantive motion is a separate, self-contained motion.” I think Mr. Angus's motion fits that description quite well. It says, “It does not arise from another motion”—which also fits the description. “Generally, a substantive motion is debatable and amendable.”It's quite clear based on the text found in House of Commons Procedure and Practice on page 1065 that what Mr. Angus said fits the very definition of what a substantive motion is. Therefore, it is debatable and is not a dilatory motion.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56845)[English]My point of order is on Mr. Simard's comments. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56845)[English]There we go.I just think it's extremely important to note that sometimes the banter that does happen in this room is when the microphone isn't on. To insinuate that members are shouting into the microphones as a means of disrupting each other on purpose.... No one is turning their microphone on so that they can chirp somebody on the other side. If somebody is having a bit of banter back and forth, then quite often, probably about 99% of the time, it's actually with the microphone off. It's just individual banter between the two people. Mr. Chair, when we're having our interventions, as we are right now, it's important to have the microphone on so that it can be interpreted for everybody to hear. But let's say John and I were having just a bit of banter back and forth. Before you were chair, sometimes we would do that. Mr. John Aldag: [Inaudible—Editor]Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes—just like that right there. I mean, that's not abusive or offensive to the interpreters when you just mention a quick little whisper. I don't really care that you do that. You didn't say it in a rude and angry way. It's kind of fun and good-natured. It's not, “Oh, no, now he's glaring at me”—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56845)[English]The point is that, look, we're all grown-ups. We can have a little good-natured banter back and forth on some of the points. Obviously, many of us have different views and opinions on things. Sometimes, to avoid blasting into the microphone on people, we just want to say, “John, nice haircut!” We don't want to cut somebody off or interject over top of somebody just to say that to John.You have a nice haircut today too, Mr. Chair. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56900)[English]I also have a point of order on Mr. Angus's comments.ShannonStubbsLakelandShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56905)[English]I had a point of order on Mr. Angus's comments earlier.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: So, we're still missing going back to the point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56915)[English] I have two separate points of order. Which one do you want me to go with first, the one on the comment you previously made before you gavelled us out or the one prior to that?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56915)[English]Well, I'll do the current point of order.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56915)[English]First of all, you made a comment that the list keeps on changing. I imagine you understand how problematic that is. I do not recall any of my colleagues asking to be removed from a list. Yes, names get added to the list, but we certainly have not been removing ourselves from the speakers list. I have not heard anybody else around the table removing themselves from lists, so I don't know how the list keeps on changing.There's also concern because you alluded to the fact that we've had multiple clerks. Who is keeping the list? Who has the actual list here?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56915)[English]There's also the issue that members who might not physically be present in the room but were on the list before have not told you that they do not want to be on the list. There's nothing to say that I'm on the speakers list when I have to go to the bathroom and I get up and leave. Well, Mr. Patzer is not in the room, so even though my turn might not be immediately next, that doesn't mean that I remove myself from the list. I think we have to be careful what we're doing by saying that the list is constantly changing here. I recognize that we have had Mr. Genuis in the meeting quite a bit. He's also left the meeting already today. He wasn't one of the voting members of the committee, but there's nothing to say that he didn't put himself on that list with the full intention of returning to speak to whatever the thing is. I don't even know what the list contains. We've been trying to find what that is from you anyway. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56925)[English]Thank you, Chair.Mr. Angus was using language earlier, not even in his most recent point of order but in one prior to that, probably half an hour ago, for which I initially tried to flag you on a point of order. It was something that we had brought up at a previous meeting, the issue of Mr. Angus insinuating that he is being abused in this committee.We made the point that there are people who legitimately, actually, have experienced abuse or are currently undergoing abuse. When he insinuates that he is being abused because members of Parliament are simply doing their job, I would like you, Mr. Chair, to make a ruling. Is Mr. Angus actively being abused in this committee? Do you share his opinion?It's a real point.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (56930)[English]Just on that, Chair, because—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (68310)[English]I have a quick point of order, Chair.I'm just wondering if you could enlighten the committee as to who the next four or five speakers are for the subamendment here. That would be beneficial to the committee.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (68315)[English]Mr. Chair, I have a quick point of order.Obviously, Mr. Genuis is not here. I'm curious to know.... You alluded to the fact that the next speakers after him were, it seemed, all on our side here. Could you give us the breakdown of who the next three or four speakers are?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73640)[English] Thank you.Right off the top, it's probably worth mentioning that it was nice, at the last meeting, how things just went along. Everybody was respectful. The points of order.... Only a couple of them happened, and they were, I think, received well. I can count on one hand how many points of order we had last meeting, so that was quite nice and a bit of a change of pace. I want to welcome Ms. Zarrillo to this committee, as well. It's nice to see her here.On the point about the subamendment to bring witnesses from Timmins—James Bay, my colleague Mr. Falk did a great job talking about a lot of the mining companies that exist in that particular part of the country. It's important to have people from there speaking at the committee. I think they would generally be concerned about what is going on. One way to find out, obviously, is by inviting them. I think they would be concerned about the development of multiple pieces of substantive government legislation being ruled on and referred to as largely unconstitutional—in particular, the Impact Assessment Act and the way it's going to impact mining as we go forward. I think those mines, especially the ones Mr. Falk was mentioning, will play a big role in Canada going forward. I don't think it matters whether you think everybody should be mandated to drive an EV or not. We're going to need these resources one way or another.As we continue to develop new ways to generate power and new technology.... It goes outside energy production. It's just technology, generally speaking. The technological advances we have seen, certainly in my lifetime, have been remarkable. Sometimes it almost scares me when I think about the kinds of technologies we're going to come up with, which my kids are going to see as they grow up and enter the workforce—the kinds of things they're going to have at their disposal. The advances in things are going to be quite remarkable. Those minerals or elements will come from mines in Timmins—James Bay and lots of other places across the country. The problem we're seeing right now is that it will be pretty difficult to get more and more of these mines and projects built when we don't have laws that are constitutional. The certainty required for investors to make investments in Canadian energy, development and exploration.... I know the government said it made the IAA to create certainty, but the problem is that, practically, this has not been the case. It has not been the reality of the situation on the ground. Given the importance of mining to Canada's strategic positioning in the energy world, globally.... Again, the potential for our country, generally speaking, beyond what we have by possessing all these rare earth minerals here in Canada, which are still largely untapped and not being developed.... We're seeing investment fleeing Canada, or not even looking here at all, because they know they can build projects more quickly, get a return on investment faster and make more money elsewhere. That means jobs are elsewhere. The tax dollars needed to maintain, build and even create new communities are so important. I think we need to hear from these folks, because they're going to bring a valuable perspective.(73645) I was in a meeting the other day with some folks who were representing some of the port authorities on opposite sides of the country. One of the fundamental concerns they have, and part of their budget submissions, was to figure out a way to reduce timelines for major projects for approvals, because for them to expand their ports or to do any major projects, they have to wait a minimum of five years to get approval. I asked them if that was for the Impact Assessment Act, and they said yes. They had been waiting five years to get an approval.This is important because, as much as we would like to have all of our rare earth minerals mined in Canada and then turned into products in Canada, the reality is that we're going to be exporting a lot of them. We're going to be exporting them through our ports.The folks from Timmins—James Bay, much like the people from Cypress Hills—Grasslands, rely on those ports to be able to get our products, our commodities, out to the global marketplace. When we have largely unconstitutional laws in this country, it severely impacts what we're able to do and get done.I think it's important to note that on this side of the table we want to make sure that we're passing laws that are constitutional and will withstand that challenge. I think we have outlined previously some of the issues we have with the potential constitutionality issue of Bill C-49 because of its 33 references to the Impact Assessment Act and, in particular, the parts that were referenced as largely unconstitutional.It would be important to hear from these mining communities and the workers about how this has impacted them and their ability to do their jobs but also to have that certainty long-term knowing that their jobs are going to be there for them tomorrow, next year, and the year after that and make sure that there is a future for their jobs and for their communities. I think that's an important perspective that we will look forward to hearing from witnesses and, particularly, hopefully, from people from Timmins—James Bay.Part of that, too, is that, when you meet with people in mining and in construction, even at the ports and other places, they talk a lot about the layering on of regulations, and the layering on of costs that continue to pile up and create problems for them. They are just looking for a streamlined process. I know that the people in Timmins—James Bay would benefit from having a streamlined process, the un-layering and unpacking of all of these layers upon layers of regulations and costs.We know that Canada has some of the highest standards for how we develop our resources. We know that if the rest of the world adopted our standards, the world would have a much lower greenhouse gas emission footprint, yet we still seem to see the need from this government to continue to layer and pancake on regulations rather than trust the process and trust the industries that have really been world leaders at the forefront of the development of this to do what they do, rather than putting them through the gauntlet of regulatory death, basically.(73650) We've seen that multiple times on multiple projects, where they're waiting for approval, waiting for approval, and it's delay, delay, delay. Then, finally, the proponent withdraws the proposal because they know they're either not going to get the approval or the uncertainty and the delays have cost them so much money they'd be better off to cut their losses at that point and run. That's not a situation we want Canada to be in, particularly as we have all the resources in this country that the world wants and needs. I think we need to make sure that we are prioritizing people who can speak well to these things. That's going to be people who are working in the industry in Timmins—James Bay. They're going to want that certainty. When Mr. Angus was still here.... He likes to talk a lot about the union jobs, which is fine. It's good that he does that, but what's important is that there will be no union jobs if there are no new projects, if there is no certainty, if there's no investment, if there's no streamlining of regulations or even just making them compliant with our constitution. I think that's of utmost importance. Part of the reality with rural and remote communities, and with our indigenous communities as well, is that sometimes the only source of jobs is just resource development. That's the opportunity for them. That's where they see the ability for them to have self-determination, to have fair and equal economic participation in the economy. It comes from resource extraction and development and refining. They also want certainty. They want to know that when a project that's going to be good for their people is proposed, it's not going to take 10 years to get approvals or to finally get a shovel in the ground and start building something or developing a mine or developing the resources they have available to them. That's why Conservatives want to see some witnesses from Timmins—James Bay who can bring that perspective. I think that would be very valuable. I think part of what's going on with this committee, with this government, with the policy objectives and the multiple court rulings that have gone against the government in recent weeks.... Part of what the government is supposed to do is set the tone for how industry is going to be, set the tone so that there is a sense of optimism. That's what Brad Wall did so well in Saskatchewan, to turn Saskatchewan from a have-not province to a have province. He set the tone by saying it's good to be from Saskatchewan. We don't need to apologize for being from Saskatchewan. He set the tone because he knew that Saskatchewan had the potential to be so much more than what it was under the NDP for years and years. Many people who left Saskatchewan found a home in Alberta, next door. You're welcome, Mr. Chair. They all came back to Saskatchewan because they saw the opportunity because of the tone that was set by the premier. That started in the mid-2000s with him saying that it was good to be from Saskatchewan, that Saskatchewan had what the world needed. It had what our country needed, and we were going to do what we could to provide the goods and services that were needed, both here and across the world. For the next number of years, we developed our resources in a sustainable, environmentally friendly and beneficial way. That has allowed economic participation by people from all across our province. (73655) We have uranium developments in the north. We have potash developments all across the province. We have a lot of oil and gas extraction and development, quite frankly, all across the province, as well, particularly a lot in my riding. That comes because the government set the tone. It set out a framework for how it was going to be done, and we got things done. The federal government then decided it was going to put a stick in the spokes, with policies like the carbon tax and the Impact Assessment Act, and really gummed up the system in the process. All of it was done under the guise that it was going to save the environment from these crazy people who were developing resources. It's really unfair to the provinces and the industry, which have done a great job of trying to make the processes better. They have quite often done that without the government stepping in saying, “This needs to happen, that needs to happen, and that needs to be done, or else.” Definitely, taking a sledgehammer and holding it over an industry is not the way to work collaboratively, as we hear from the government a lot. Rather than working with industry to figure out how it can best figure this out, there's the stick approach instead of the carrot approach. The folks in Timmins—James Bay would agree with that, as well. As they do a lot of resource development and extraction there, it would be important to hear their views and perspectives on that, as well.We're starting to see the provinces take matters into their own hands, yet again. That's because of the way the government has decided to set the tone. It has decided to set the tone in a way that is combative, oversteps boundaries and oversteps jurisdiction. We now see multiple provinces telling it to back off, because it is their jurisdiction, their area, and they are doing the best they can. That is why the provinces are passing a Sovereignty Act and the Saskatchewan First Act. I think our colleague, Mr. Simard, could tell us about the viewpoints of some people in Quebec about how they feel, especially regarding provincial jurisdiction. Our provinces shouldn't have to constantly be putting the shields up and drawing their swords against the federal government, one that talks about collaboration. It says it's going to work collaboratively, and then it dumps burdensome, unconstitutional regulations and laws on top of the provinces. It then acts all surprised when the provinces are all of a sudden saying, “Excuse me”, and, like porcupines, they get their quills up, and their tails are ready to swing. That's where the provinces are at right now. They have their quills up, because they know they are being threatened by the federal government with regulations, laws, and the tone that's coming from Ottawa toward them. It is harmful to the provinces. It is harmful to their objectives and what they are trying to do.(73700) We know the folks in Atlantic Canada want to develop their resources. Obviously, this is why the government prioritized it first in the House of Commons and passed it first. That's something we would like to see, the Atlantic provinces having the ability to develop their resources, and we're looking forward to getting to Bill C-49 first, hopefully. At that point, we will also be able to have a good, fulsome conversation and discussion around the former bill, Bill C-69, which has caused large amounts of investment to leave Canada. It's a healthy part of the job losses that have impacted non-unionized and unionized labour. It's impacted our indigenous communities, our rural and remote communities, from being able to develop their resources and being able to offer jobs and employment to their people and their residents.It's important that the federal government deal with matters that are deemed unconstitutional. That, you would think, would be priority one, trying to resolve that. That would be my hope, that it would be resolved, and there has been no indication that will actually be the case. There were some soft words that it would work to make those sections compliant, but we've heard nothing. We haven't seen any urgency to try to get that done and get that dealt with. Certainly, on our side, we would like nothing more than to get that sorted out and dealt with. That's part of the main motion—sorry, the main amendment to the motion that we have put forward. Of course, we're on the subamendment for members to hear from people from Timmins—James Bay, and I think they would also like to see the certainty that prioritizing the Impact Assessment Act and fixing that would bring for them, for their jobs, for their industries, for their communities. I think they would really appreciate that, so I hope the government will take that seriously and actually consider what it is that Conservatives are trying to work on when it comes to the Impact Assessment Act, and what industry has been saying and what community leaders have been saying on this. It would be a great way to do something that's good for the entirety of the country, for once. I don't think that's asking too much.I know that our provincial counterparts would appreciate it as well, as they are looking at how best to provide more affordable, more reliable power and energy for their citizens, as that is their provincial responsibility, and having the certainty within the Impact Assessment Act would help bring that for them. I know that in Saskatchewan, for example, there's a lot of conversation happening now around identifying sites where we could build small modular reactors. They would definitely appreciate having an approval process in place that is going to be expeditious and fast, and there will be some certainty provided in it. We know the province wants to do this because they want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but they also want to make sure that we have reliable power that's generated right in Saskatchewan. We have some nice inner ties with Alberta, Manitoba and Montana. (73705) When you look at the SaskPower website, you can see which direction power is flowing—if we are sending power out of province, or if we are bringing power into the province through the interties—but the Saskatchewan government wants to be able to develop uranium deposits further. Certainly, our rural and remote indigenous communities in northern Saskatchewan want to see that development as well, because it means jobs and opportunities for them, much like it would mean jobs and opportunities for the folks in Timmins—James Bay. I think across the country, there will be a lot of demand for Saskatchewan uranium. I think these are the SMRs. Even if they were to build another CANDU reactor, for example, if somebody were to do that one day, it would be beneficial, and Saskatchewan uranium could be the ticket for that, to be able to get it done. It's a good Saskatchewan resource for good, truly clean, zero-emitting power that for years the current government has said it doesn't want and we can't have, but we know it's up to the provinces how they are going to develop their resources and provide power for their citizens. Getting this right would be the least this committee could do.The former member for Sudbury, when we talked about this in a previous Parliament, was adamant: “No. We fixed the assessment. It was your process that was flawed. That was the problem. Ours is perfect. Ours is good. It's not the problem.” We have been hearing—and we've done multiple studies across multiple committees—that this is just not the case, and the Impact Assessment Act has caused extra delays, extra uncertainty and problems for getting projects developed. I'm sure Mr. Lefebvre would agree that getting the process right this time around would be a good thing, after his assertions in the previous Parliament that everything was fine and that wasn't the problem. Now that it's been proven that it is unconstitutional and creates problems, I think he would agree that we should make sure we get it right this time around. I won't put words in his mouth. I know he is not here to defend himself on that, so I won't do that to him. However, the reason why I said that is that I think it's worth noting the position over multiple Parliaments that the government has had on this particular issue and its refusal to admit that there are problems.That's what brings us to where we are today, once again talking about the Impact Assessment Act, how it's going to be a problem for Bill C-49 and how it will absolutely be a problem for Bill C-50. This is because, again, the whole just transition plan by the government is to transition workers out of the.... For sure, it's to make sure that there's no more coal in this country, but for the oil and gas sector, it would be a supposed just transition or, as we call it, an unjust transition for these workers that's going to happen.If the government is successful in ramming this unjust transition down the provinces' and the unionized and non-unionized workers' throats.... They're not going to be okay with being janitors, as some of the briefing notes that have come to light have indicated or hinted at, and they're certainly not going to be okay with a 34% pay cut to go and work in the renewables sector right now. We heard that witness testimony a little while back. That's not to mention the fuel, the energy and the power that will have to be developed to replace the losses from those plants being shut down. That will be of the utmost importance.(73710)It's interesting to note that in the so-called clean electricity regulations from this government, a power plant could operate for 450 hours if it's emitting after the deadline comes and goes. That amounts to less than 18 days. It's around 18 days. My quick math might have me off by a day or two. Forgive me for that. If somebody decides to fact-check me, I admit that I might be off by a day or two.The point is that in Saskatchewan, for close to seven months of the year, it's below zero degrees. A large amount of our power in Saskatchewan comes from coal and from natural gas. It's about 73%, on average, on a daily basis. In Alberta, I think it's 85%, or somewhere around there, largely in natural gas.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: Alberta is the country's leader in renewable energy.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: It is the leader in renewable energy. That is absolutely right. It has the most wind capacity as well, I believe, as a province, with lots of solar developments and a few other things going on there. It's worth noting that a couple of days ago, when it was a cold day in Alberta, the total net-to-grid for wind and solar was basically a couple of megawatts, out of the thousands of gigawatts of capacity that they have. Without the reliability and certainty of the grid that you have with natural gas...and even right now with coal, although I recognize that coal is on track to be phased out by 2023. There is an amount of reliability and affordability that you get from coal and natural gas. Saskatchewan in particular has done a lot to develop natural gas alongside Alberta. If this government is going to transition everybody to powering their grids with wind and solar, it doesn't matter how much capacity you build: If the turbine isn't spinning, the sun isn't shining, and you have next to nothing for total net-to-grid, there will be some huge problems. We saw the devastation in Texas when they had a little bit of snow and cold weather. They were totally unprepared for it because of their pursuit of trying to run their grid on renewables. I don't say this lightly. People died. This past summer, we had a billet who played with the Swift Current 57's. He was from Texas. We talked with him about what was happening down there. He talked about that particular week when that happened and how crazy it was—the blackouts, the devastation in communities with no power, the pipes that were bursting, the issues from the cleanup after the fact, and the disaster in people's homes, let alone the devastation it brought when people were literally freezing to death. That was in Texas, where it's usually a lot warmer 12 months of the year than it is in Saskatchewan. That's a shocker, I know, but seven months out of the year we are below zero, on average, below freezing.(73715)I drive to Regina to fly out to Ottawa. I drive down Highway 1. I drive past some of the most recent wind turbines that have been put up in Saskatchewan. Even on days when there is a good wind, and when I have a nice tailwind pushing me into the Queen City, it's amazing how many turbines aren't spinning. To be fair—I don't know—maybe they haven't been fully commissioned yet, but I know I've seen most of them, at very different times, in operation.The fact is that if they're not spinning, they're not producing. It's usually pretty windy in Saskatchewan, but there are a lot of days when there's not enough wind to generate wind power reliably. There are days when it's cloudy. In the winter, the days are shorter. You only have a couple of hours of peak power-producing sunlight to generate the power you need to keep the lights on and furnaces running. That creates problems. If you start to think about the amount of capacity it will take, we know we're going to have to increase the grid capacity by two and a half times at least and probably to well over that. You'd have to times it by three at least. That's the route this government wants to go on. How much land is going to be taken out of production to build more and more wind- and solar-chasing capacity? How many tax dollars are going to be spent subsidizing the development of this in the pursuit of an unattainable mandate from this government?If we're going to be powering mines in Timmins—James Bay, they want reliability. They want certainty. They want affordability as well, because powering these mines is not cheap at the best of times. To massively increase the costs and uncertainty for these companies, which are doing the best they can in the circumstances they find themselves in, wouldn't be fair. It wouldn't be right.I'll go back to my point about setting the tone. At the very least, the Impact Assessment Act needs to be prioritized and fixed before anything else can proceed. I hope that somewhere in the nation's capital here, whether it's the minister, his staff or all the people who work in those offices, somebody is working on that, because we haven't heard anything since the brief statement about making sure it is compliant. We haven't heard anything, so what's happening? How are we going to provide certainty for people if we're not doing that?I think our committee has a great chance to be the ones who set the tone for that. However, if we're just going to have a seven-to-four vote on whether or not we do anything with the Impact Assessment Act, this committee will rob itself of the potential to set the tone on this, to make sure we get it right and to make sure we provide certainty, clarity and reduced timelines for proponents who want to develop our resources—develop the goods and things we have in this country and can offer the world. The good folks of Timmins—James Bay would surely appreciate that as well, I would imagine.(73720)I really hope we'll be able to get to a point where that can be the priority for this committee, because we know that there are going to be some problems with Bill C-49 if we don't address it and deal with it. We want the good folks in Atlantic Canada to develop their resources as best they see fit. We know that Bill C-49 is the tool they need to do that, but imagine giving somebody the tool they need to do their job but it's completely disassembled and you took a few components out of it and said, “Here you go. This will work.”That's basically what's happening here by sending out a bill that has no less than 33 references to the unconstitutional part of the Impact Assessment Act. That's going to be a problem, and it will be a problem for the folks in Atlantic Canada to have the certainty they need to get this done. The last thing they want to see are court challenges arising from a piece of legislation that could end up being deemed unconstitutional because of certain elements in it and because of its affiliation to the Impact Assessment Act. The government is on a bit of a losing streak with court challenges lately too, which also doesn't set a very good tone. What we are finding out is that—Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73725)[English]Thank you.What I am doing is talking about the importance of setting the tone for the workers and the employers in Timmins—James Bay and why this matters.The subamendment is to call people from Timmins—James Bay on the amendment to the motion, which sets out the order in which we go here. If you follow the order, you'll understand why all this is relevant and why it matters. If we don't have certainty for our producers and for our workers, there will be nothing but problems for the people in Timmins—James Bay.I would humbly suggest that, for the number of times that I have said “Timmins—James Bay”, I think my Open Parliament web page is probably going to have “Timmins—James Bay” creeping up as one of my commonly used words.I would obviously rather be talking about all the amazing things that happen in Cypress Hills—Grasslands, but that would be off topic. That's why I'm talking about all the things here that will be important for the folks of Timmins—James Bay. I sometimes wander down the path of some of the good things that we do in Cypress Hills—Grasslands because I think there are a lot of similarities between the people of Timmins—James Bay and the people of Cypress Hills—Grasslands. In my neck of the woods in southwest Saskatchewan, our industries are very similar to those in parts of Timmins—James Bay.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: It's like a message of unity.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: It's a message of unity, of national unity, of what it could truly look like when we have multiple regions of the country all being treated fairly at the table. Whether you're trying to develop resources in northern Ontario, in northern Saskatchewan, in southern Saskatchewan, in central Alberta or in Atlantic Canada, you need some certainty. You certainly need the federal government to be working with you and working for you, not making unrealistic, unattainable demands, with the pancaking of regulations and costs on top of all of these projects.I think there are currently seven advanced exploration projects in the Timmins district. Four of them are for critical minerals. The seven projects in the Timmins district include three gold projects. There are four that fall under the critical minerals list: the Canada Nickel Company's Crawford nickel project, EV Nickel's Shaw Dome project, Fox River Resources Corporation's Martison phosphate project and—I hope I'm saying this right—Niobay Metals' James Bay niobium project. A couple of the gold projects will be going into production shortly.There's a lot of good work happening and looking to be done in those areas. If we want more projects like those to happen, they're going to be looking for improved, expedited timelines. That way, they will be able to increase the output of our minerals and resources in Canada, whether it's in Timmins—James Bay, in Cypress Hills—Grasslands, in Lakeland or in Newfoundland and Labrador. It doesn't matter where you are; you need the certainty for these projects. Whichever province and whichever riding it's in, that certainty needs to be there. I would like to see more projects like these seven that I listed here in development across this great country.(73730)It's definitely worth noting that our indigenous communities are looking for partnerships. They're looking for equity in these projects. They've been denied equity in these projects—not these ones in particular. I'm not speaking about these seven that I listed but other projects that have been cancelled in the past. They're looking for economic reconciliation. They're looking for self-determination. They are looking for opportunities for their residents, for their people, and that's what natural resources can bring.That's where having a partner in the federal government that works with and for the people to make sure they can achieve their outcomes.... Let the provinces and the first nations set and determine what their outcomes are going to be, and the federal government should work alongside them to attain that. Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73735)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate you reminding colleagues to stick to the subamendment and talk to the subamendment. I would love to learn and hear more about this project in Alberta, but unfortunately Alberta is not in Timmins—James Bay, so we'll have to save that for another motion maybe on another day or in another study. I guess we'll get there at a different point in time.This kind of gets to a point that I find kind of ironic and funny. Over the last several meetings, we had the member for Timmins—James Bay whining and complaining about not being able to speak. He wanted to speak, and his allegations that—Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73735)[English]That was an interesting intervention, because over the last four or five meetings, again, it was the member from Timmins—James Bay who kept on saying, no less than 15 times—actually, I think it was closer to 20 times—that he was being abused by Conservative members. I didn't hear a single objection from anybody on that side of the committee room to him using that kind of language, which was very unparliamentary, not to mention the fact that it completely undermines people who are legitimately, this very second, experiencing abuse. There was no objection to that, and that's disgusting.The fact that Mr. Angus went on and on about not being allowed to speak means that saying he was whining fits. It was appropriate. When he finally did speak, he didn't even talk about Timmins—James Bay. He didn't talk about the motion either. He spent his whole 45 minutes not even talking about it.I spent my whole hour and a bit talking about how this is going to impact projects in Timmins—James Bay. I listed seven projects that are currently under way in Timmins—James Bay, not one in Alberta. That was brought up by somebody else. I've been speaking about the projects in Timmins—James Bay and how the Impact Assessment Act is going to be, if it's not fixed, a problem for them. That's what I've been talking about. That's what I spent my time talking about.I've been telling you why we need to prioritize the Impact Assessment Act so these projects in Timmins—James Bay can continue to go ahead and so more projects like them can be proposed in Timmins—James Bay and in other parts of the country. That's what I've been talking about for over an hour and a half and that's what Mr. Angus was not bothering to talk about for the hour that he had the floor—nor were any other members who were saying they were not being allowed to speak. When they finally got the floor, they didn't even bother to speak to the subamendment either. I am speaking to the subamendment and I am using and will continue to use language that is parliamentary. It's important that the federal government set the tone. The point I was about to make before the last couple of points of order was that the rules matter. Whether it's the rules of this committee, the laws of this land or our Constitution and the way it's set out for the provinces within Confederation, rules matter. I mentioned earlier that the federal government is on a bit of a losing streak in the courts as of late. Most recently, it was the plastics ban and the regulations around it that were unconstitutional. In particular, the Impact Assessment Act was ruled largely unconstitutional. When the government deliberately sets rules and laws that are unconstitutional, it creates disorder and issues.We've seen the provinces, as I mentioned earlier, draft legislation to shield themselves from overreach in the federal government and to reassert that they have jurisdictional authority over provinces. By the way, I'll make note that in Saskatchewan it was supported unanimously by the NDP. It's because they know what's happening with this federal government. Even the provincial NDP in Saskatchewan know the federal government in Ottawa is overstepping its bounds. Generally, they are quite aligned with the federal government, but even they are starting to see that the federal government is offside. (73740)It's true of the NDP in Alberta too. They're starting to wise up to that as well. Despite their desire to try to please the federal government, even they are now starting to see and realize that was probably not the best idea. Now we also have the UCP government in Alberta and the Saskatchewan Party government in Saskatchewan actively working to shield themselves from the overstepping of the government.That's the tone this government has decided to set. It's decided to say, “This is the way we're going to go. We don't care what you think. You're going to have to do this.” Not only do the provinces say no, but the Supreme Court did too, and here we wait for the government to act, to do something and to remedy the situation.We know it is a usual practice for the government to create a problem for people and at the same time think it's creating the solution. This is one of those few times when we say the government has to provide the solution, but the solution is going to be undoing the disaster it created in the first place. That's what we are hoping to get to, start with and prioritize in this committee. That way, more projects in Timmins—James Bay can happen and more projects across the country can happen.Again, we have the Atlantic accord legislation, Bill C-49, here with us as well. That needs to be done and dealt with, and the government prioritized that over Bill C-50. For some reason, the minister decided to wait over a year to do anything with it. We've also seen Auditor General reports talk about how the government has basically done nothing, particularly over the COVID years. For two years, it did absolutely nothing to get people and communities ready for 2030. They are still waiting for the coal transition funding they were promised by the government.Over 3,400 or 3,500 workers were impacted by the microtransition that happened in coal in Alberta. Entire communities were devastated. Who knows? Maybe the Liberals will put forward a subamendment to hear from people from Hanna, Alberta. I think they would probably want an opportunity to speak to this as well and how the just transition worked for them. However, we're talking about Timmins—James Bay, so we'll see if the Liberals want to move that subamendment later.Just looking at the list of the projects going on in Timmins—James Bay, I see that one of them is a phosphate project.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: It's not even on the critical minerals list.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Yes, that's another point. It's not even on the critical minerals list, but it should be added. My colleague has been out at the front asking for that for months. Mining and developing phosphate in northern Ontario is a nation-building project, with the applications that phosphate can be used for in agriculture, for example. There are lots of opportunities there. Going forward, for food production in this country and around the world, there will be a need for more and more phosphate. It's going to be needed but it's going to be tough to develop more projects in Timmins—James Bay or wherever else it might be if we don't fix the Impact Assessment Act.(73745)If we don't deal with it, we're not going to see the proper development of resources in Atlantic Canada. They're not going to do the things they need to do, which, by the way, support the industries in my riding, Cypress Hills—Grasslands. They rely on the Atlantic provinces to either import or export agricultural commodities. Right now we have to import certain things for agriculture that we could probably develop and do in our own country, but because of regulatory uncertainty we don't because it's cheaper for companies to do it elsewhere around the world. We could change that if we prioritized the Impact Assessment Act. We could change it so that we are world leaders in some of these projects involving critical minerals and other items that should be added to the critical minerals list. We could be world leaders if the government got out of the way and respected the fact that we already have some of the best and highest standards for environmental responsibility in this country. It's the multiple layering that continues to suffocate jobs and development in all parts of this country but particularly in Timmins—James Bay.I hope I have been clear that we need to do the Impact Assessment Act, because it will directly benefit the people and the projects in Timmins—James Bay. I strongly feel that the committee should be prioritizing the Impact Assessment Act. We could come to a position where we do Bill C-49 quickly and pass it and then fix the Impact Assessment Act after. Maybe we could do that, but if the government isn't giving any indication that they want to fix the Impact Assessment Act, then, as I said, I'm worried there would be a seven-to-four vote in committee on prioritizing the Impact Assessment Act. That just leaves us at square one, or square zero, as it may even be behind square one with the way things are going.I think we have an opportunity as a committee to do the right thing and fix the Impact Assessment Act. That way the Atlantic provinces get the certainty they need to develop their resources, whether it be renewables or oil and gas, whatever they want to do. If it's tidal power, they should have the freedom to do that. I recognize that we need to pass Bill C-49 for that to happen, but passing an unconstitutional bill would be problematic. That's why we need to prioritize the Impact Assessment Act. Mr. Chair, I think that I am coming toward the end of my remarks. Do you want me to keep going? Okay, I'll keep going. I can't believe you shook your head. I know Mario would have a problem if projects were being delayed and denied in Quebec and if there were issues with companies getting the certainty they need with the Impact Assessment Act, so—Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewMarioSimardJonquière//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73755)[English]Thank you very much for that point of order, Mr. Simard. I will be mindful of how I say this, because sovereignty can be used in a few different ways. I firmly believe the provinces should be allowed to develop their resources the way they see fit. Quebec has developed a lot of hydro power. They have an abundance of that power, which is fantastic. They've been able to utilize a resource they have because the province prioritized that. They've been successful as a province because of that, within Confederation. Manitoba is much the same with their hydro, and Ontario obviously has hydro. Ontario has been successful in developing nuclear power too.The Impact Assessment Act, I suggest, should not be a barrier for a company in Quebec to develop LNG. As I understand it, Quebec has some of the largest reserves of natural gas in Canada. Heck, they could almost be part of the conversation around who the world leaders are in developing this valuable resource. I will concede that it's up to the provinces to decide whether they want to do that. As far as I know, I don't think Quebec at this point has an interest in doing that. That's their prerogative. In the interest of provincial autonomy, I disagree with their decision, but I support their right to make that decision. I think that's an important distinction to make. When provinces such as Alberta and Saskatchewan decide natural gas should be developed as a way to provide reliable, affordable and clean energy to their people, the federal government shouldn't be a barrier with its regulations to them being able to do that.In particular, these mining projects in Timmins—James Bay are going to need a lot of power. Our grid needs to more than double in the next 10 years I think, or maybe by 2035. Our grid is going to have to more than double its capacity. To hamstring provinces with the Impact Assessment Act.... Who knows? Maybe Quebec will one day decide they're going to develop all that potential LNG in their province. If they do, it would be a shame if the federal government were the barrier that stood in their way. It stands to reason that, if Quebec wants to do that, they should be able to do that. I would support them wanting to do that. If they don't, they don't.As I said, they have a lot of hydro power available to them, which is phenomenal. When you look at some of the potential for utilizing that hydro power for other means, boy, that's a good nation-building project in and of itself right there. I think there is some joint interest between Saskatchewan and Quebec and Alberta and Quebec to get some manufacturing. Raw goods and products that are harvested in the Prairies could be sent out east to Quebec or the Atlantic region, where there's existing infrastructure in place, to be refined or developed. That's a great idea.(73800)One of the mines I was talking about in Timmins—James Bay is going to be developing 900 jobs during early operating years. Construction jobs last a certain period of time. Then they start the actual long-term jobs, the number of which is a bit lower. It looks as though we're levelling out at about 400 to 500 jobs down the line on that.They applied, under the Impact Assessment Act, in March of this year. The timelines are going to be problematic for them. They're trying to figure this process out, and now all of a sudden the act that governs this is unconstitutional or largely unconstitutional. What does that do for their certainty when they've applied in March, and how is that going to work out for them? That means there are going to be more delays. That means more timelines aren't going to be favourable for the development of this project. The Canada Nickel Company has proposed the construction, operation, decommissioning and abandonment for this mine. It's an open-pit nickel-cobalt mine and on-site metal mill.We're talking about the need for nickel-cobalt for electric vehicles. Electric vehicles are going to need a lot of these materials. It would be a shame if the Impact Assessment Act stood in the way of the expeditious development of this project. The Crawford nickel project would have a mine ore production capacity of 275,000 tonnes per day and a mill ore input capacity of 120,000 tonnes per day. This is a project that will operate for 43 years. That will be huge for the region, for jobs. That's how you keep communities, cities and towns viable. That is why the Impact Assessment Act is important.We've heard from people, from a witness actually, that we would be lucky if that were to get from conception to operation—and I'm glad you're all sitting down—within 25 years. We have an EV mandate in this country. If it's going to take 25 years to get a project developed and producing to the point where things can be going, how are you going to hit that mandate? How are you going to hit that target? Where are you going to get the resources from?That's the problem. Nobody is against EV vehicles. Give me a superior vehicle and I'll drive it. That's what I want. I just want a vehicle that will perform better. If my internal combustion engine vehicle is going to perform better, then I'm going to drive that. However, if a battery-powered vehicle performs better and it's more affordable without the government—the taxpayer—having to subsidize it to make it more affordable, I'm probably going to stick with what I have, to be honest.We can see this project operating for 43 years. It's amazing how sometimes projects like this mine, which is in the heart of Timmins—James Bay, will go longer than what the prescribed timeline is. It says it would operate for about 43 years. There are mines in Flin Flon, for example, that were mining this resource and then all of a sudden it was discovered that they were right next to a deposit for something else. Once they exhausted the one resource, they switched to mining for other resources in the shame shafts, or maybe they had to make a new shaft. They were doing that and were able to develop new resources. They discovered that throughout the process. All of a sudden, you now have mines that have long exceeded their expected end-of-life date.(73805)These are jobs and certainties for people for decades and decades to come. This Crawford project is accessible from provincial Highway 655. A 13.2-kilometre section of the highway will need to be realigned, as it passes across the pit envelope. Phase one development will include a processing capacity of 42,500 tonnes per day, which will be increased to 85,000 tonnes per day in phase two. I'm going to read those job numbers again. There will be 900 jobs during the early operating years, levelling out at 700 to 800, with 400 to 500 jobs created during the construction phase. That is a significant project for the area. An MOU has been signed as well, which is important for the other folks and first nations in the area. That's important too. This is about wanting to participate and wanting self-determination as well. That's important to note.One thing these projects also do is support our community. We have the jobs part, but I hope one day to drive through the riding of Timmins—James Bay, through some of these communities, to see the names of these companies on the community rinks and as sponsors of kids clubs. There is an oil company in my riding that recently sponsored a kids curling club. I think it was Kindersley. The kids curling program is free for these kids because this company sponsored the entire program. That's what oil and gas companies are actively doing. I would suspect that these companies operating in Timmins—James Bay and throughout all the communities there.... I'd be willing to bet that the names of these companies are all over that town and all over the community organizations.This Crawford nickel-cobalt mine is supported by the Taykwa Tagamou Nation. There are other first nations in the area that are part of it as well. It is of utmost importance for them that these projects have the certainty and clarity to be built and get done. That's why we have the subamendment for Timmins—James Bay. I don't have the number of first nations in the Timmins—James Bay riding in front of me. Charlie has mentioned the number once or twice in the past. I will bet there are others that would like to be partners on future projects as well, or maybe they are in the process of setting up companies to do this. There are indigenous-led businesses and corporations all across the country that are in development or already in existence and are actively contributing to mining projects, among other types of projects around the country.(73810)There's a good-news article from Timmins—James Bay in Northern Ontario Business. This is about the MOU. It says, “Agreement outlines exploration, development steps along with opportunities for Matachewan and Mattagami First Nations.” The Canada Nickel Company and these first nations have signed the MOU “establishing a guideline for exploration and development operations at the company’s Crawford nickel-cobalt sulphide project near Timmins.”The article goes on:Announced on Dec. 14, [2020], the MOU signifies a commitment by the company to consult with the First Nations and establish a mutually beneficial relationship during all stages of project development.The agreement also provides the communities with an opportunity to participate in the benefits of the Project through business opportunities, employment and training, financial compensation and consultation on environmental matters.Mark Selby, Canada Nickel’s chair and CEO, said the company is committed to “responsible development” of the project.This is his quote, per the article:“From the very beginning, our approach has been to work with First Nations and local stakeholders as partners in order to create shared value through economic opportunities, while also being respectful and responsible stewards of the natural environment,” Selby said in the release.“Canada Nickel acknowledges Matachewan and Mattagami First Nations in their commitment to protect and enhance the land and resource-based economy within their traditional territory.“We welcome their constructive approach and their support of our efforts to move forward on the development, permitting and construction of the project.”The articles goes on:Located 40 kilometres north of Timmins, the Crawford Project is considered among the world’s 10 biggest nickel deposits, and, according to Selby, has the potential to become world-class in scope.In October, the company was reporting Crawford's total measured and indicated resources at 657 million tonnes, grading 0.26 per cent nickel, with inferred resources of 646 million tonnes, grading 0.24 per cent nickel.Jason Batise, executive director of the Wabun Tribal Council, welcomed the opportunity to establish a “strong and mutually beneficial” relationship with the company.In his role with the regional chiefs organization – which represents five First Nations, including Matachewan and Mattagami – Batise has been integral to the development of the Wabun Method.This structured negotiating process between mining companies and member First Nations outlines how the First Nations will participate in resource activity within their traditional territory.“Mark is genuinely committed to responsible and sustainable development, and our community appreciates being engaged in the early planning stages of the project,” Mattagami First Nation Chief Chad Boissoneau said in the release.Canada Nickel is expected to release a preliminary economic assessment of the Main Zone by year’s end, followed by a more detailed feasibility study...[in] 2021.That article is from 2020 or maybe early 2021. I think that really outlines what they're doing for first nations. When you look at the timelines of things, the fact that the regulatory process is about three years later means it's only just beginning, as we have a largely unconstitutional Impact Assessment Act in place with no indication from the federal government that it will be remedied anytime soon.It would be in the best interests, you would think, of this government to make that priority number one, especially for a government that's been breathless in their support of reconciliation and in supporting not only the self-autonomy of first nations, self-determination and economic reconciliation but also the local knowledge they bring. I was grateful for the article and how it spoke about them being part of the consultation process, because you can't ever go wrong with local knowledge, especially from those good folks.(73815)That's where the government has a responsibility, I think, to set the tone for how this will go. We're still waiting. That speaks to the tone being set, in and of itself. Will this project and others like it get the certainty they need? Mr. Chair, do you hear a buzzing sound? I hear a high-pitched buzzing sound. Are the interpreters hearing that noise? They're not. Okay.Mr. John Aldag: It probably blended into your voice.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Well, I gave you that one on a tee, didn't I? I have a lot of catching up to do with Mr. Lamoureux, speaking of extra emissions and hot air. He's not here, actually. That's not fair to him.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewMarioSimardJonquière//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73815)[English]I am doing the best I can to try to be respectful to the interpreters, because I could bring a little more fire and brimstone, but I like to keep things on a bit more of a calm, even keel. That's more my demeanor. I'll leave it to my friend and colleague from Battle River—Crowfoot to bring the gusto. There are other colleagues who can do that. That's not me. This is more my pace. I'm more of a laid-back guy. I know that might make it hard to sit and listen for this long, but I have my points to make and I will continue to make them.On the point of relevance, the news article was from Timmins, actually. As far as relevance goes, it was from the riding that the subamendment we are debating today is about. I think I've done a pretty good job of staying on point the entire time, although we went here and there a bit on a few things.I'm not sure what that noise is, but that's okay.There are lots of other good mining projects in the region that are still going through the assessment process. For this other project, the initial capital cost was $972 million. They're putting a ton of money on the line for this project and they're looking for some certainty. They want certainty. They want to know that when they apply—actually, they did apply—the assessment is going to come to a rapid conclusion.There's a time extension. There's been an extension to 2025 on the Springpole gold project. Something we've seen quite regularly from the government is extending deadlines on their end of things and taking as long as possible to complete the assessment. We have seen companies back out of projects. Teck famously did that after multiple delays. After they sank millions of dollars into the whole process, they just walked away from it. That doesn't send a very good signal to industry that this country is open for business. Unconstitutional acts don't send a signal to investors to come and invest in Timmins—James Bay. When we have an issue with an Impact Assessment Act that is unconstitutional, that's a problem.(73820)There's another gold mine project in the region of Timmins—James Bay. We're talking of 400 to 600 operational jobs. If these projects can't get the certainty they need to proceed.... These are big projects that will be of the utmost importance to our country becoming the world leader it should be in the development of resources and the export of resources. We can and we should lead the world. We have that opportunity. We should take that advantage. We should use it to our advantage. We should take control of that.Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73825)[English]I mean, I'm still waiting—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73825)[English]Now, if you'd come bringing some AAA grade beef or something like that, some steaks, maybe we would have a conversation.TedFalkProvencherJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73825)[English] Absolutely. I've been asking the chair to bring Alberta beef, because he's from Calgary, Alberta. I think committee members would appreciate that.Chair, just quickly, I think it would be beneficial to know, if you would indulge me, what the speaking list is.JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73825)[English]Okay. Are we done at 6:30 p.m.? GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (73825)[English]It's a great subamendment, because, again, the number of projects going on in the riding of Timmins—James Bay is quite remarkable.We can look at the strategic advantage that we should have in this country. It's quite remarkable to think that the United States' military is investing in Canada for our resources, because we have the critical minerals the world wants and needs. When the U.S. military wants to invest in Canada, I'm sure a philosophical debate could be had by everybody on that. We'll maybe leave that one for another day, possibly another committee. Who knows?It really shows what we have in this country. I think it would be extremely frustrating to them to know that it could take 25 years to get a project producing. Again, that leads to the question of where else they might go to invest. What other countries around the world are trying to produce lots of the same minerals, trying to mine the same minerals we are or that we possess in this country?Certainly when you look at the human rights atrocities of some of these countries around the world and the lack of good working conditions, I can guarantee you there's no unionized labour in some of those countries with the way these folks are treated. That's not to mention that they do not have the environmental regulations and sustainability initiatives we have in Canada. They also don't have an unconstitutional Impact Assessment Act. They wouldn't have an Impact Assessment Act to begin with, but the point is that we have a former bill from this government, Bill C-69, that's now a law and it's largely unconstitutional. Of all the things in the way of getting projects built so that good, sustainable Canadian projects can supersede and replace—Amendments and subamendmentsAtlantic CanadaC-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other ActsC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyC-69, 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 ActsEmployment opportunitiesEnergy and fuelGovernment billsGreen economyMotionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90640)[English]I have a point of order, Chair. [Technical difficulty—Editor] next.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90640)[English]Yes, but it's on that point of order, though, Chair. There are precedents from many other committees that when the committee starts late due to technical difficulties, as you allege, the committee is extended. I'm generally curious to know whether you'll afford that same luxury here. As Mr. Genuis clearly stated, the order from the House to start at 6:30 doesn't say, “try to start at 6:30”. It says, “start at 6:30”. Because of technical difficulties, we started later. It gives us two hours, so will you give us the full two hours, or will you not give us the full two hours?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90650)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.At the start of the meeting you were already giving us a little bit of grief, supposedly, about not interrupting other members when they're speaking, yet when the bonus NDP member over there jumped in right away, there was no chiding of sorts from the chair as to that. I'm just wondering if you're going to apply the rules equally or how this is going to work.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90705)[English]The chair's light is on.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90710)[English] Thank you.It is that Bill C-50, in clause 3, be amended by replacing lines 3 and 4 on page 5 with the following:3 The purpose of this Act is to improve affordability and to facilitate and promote economic growth, private sector investment, the creation of sustainable jobs andC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90715)[English]I believe I still have the floor.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90715)[English] I think it probably goes without saying, but just in case it doesn't I thought it would be good to just make the point. The reason I want to see the improvement of affordability is that we've definitely seen, after eight years, that affordability has become an issue for the overwhelming majority of Canadians. Certainly, economic growth and private sector investment is of utmost importance to natural resource development in this country. We've seen a fleeing of private sector investment from this country over the last eight years, so I just think it's important that we make sure there's language in this bill that would be supportive of affordability and of facilitating and promoting economic growth.Certainly in my region.... I'm sure many members around the table here would be willing to support this amendment, because they also have natural resource development happening in their riding.You know, it's interesting. We had a subamendment previously, as you'll recall, about the need to have people come from Timmins—James Bay to speak at committee. Unfortunately, the member from Timmins—James Bay was missing for three meetings and wasn't able to speak to it. When he did—actually, at the meeting prior to his being subbed out of the committee—he didn't even spend time to talk about projects in Timmins—James Bay, but—C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90715)[English]—we spoke at length, as Conservatives, about what's happening in Timmins—James Bay.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90715)[English]For sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair.Actually, I spoke for two hours straight about the great projects and the great work that is going on in Timmins—James Bay.Mr. Charlie Angus: Did I miss that?Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Actually, yes, you did, for some reason. I wasn't sure why you missed the last three meetings. Maybe it had to do with the fact that the last week was a week to acknowledge survivors of domestic abuse. Given what had happened in committee prior to your being subbed out, I think that had something to do with your being removed from the committee. Anyway, I digress.I think it's important, though, that we talk about affordability, Mr. Chair—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90720)[English]Thank you.I was talking about affordability, economic growth and private sector investment, which we know are going to be of utmost importance to the people of Timmins—James Bay. I think they would definitely be concerned about the fact that their member missed my two-hour intervention previously, as there are many great points and projects that we spoke about. We spoke at length about what's going in natural resource development up in Timmins—James Bay. It was unfortunate that Mr. Angus wasn't there. I trust that he will go back to read through all of the fantastic things that are happening in his riding, so he can refresh his own memory for when he goes back there, maybe over the Christmas break.C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90720)[English]It's on his point of order, as I was saying.For him to come in here and to allege that Conservatives are a bunch of European soccer players.... In the context of what he is actually saying, he's alleging that we're all a bunch of flopping, whining and crying...like, “Oh, Mr. Chair, oh, oh.”Mr. Charlie Angus: I have a point of order.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: That's not what's going on, but that's what he's alleging.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90725)[English]This is not a point of order. That is a point of debate. It's a point of debate.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90725)[English]The procedural question I was getting to in my point of order, Mr. Chair, was about deliberately inflammatory language by members of this committee. Mr. Angus has egregiously breached that numerous times in the past. I would expect, Mr. Chair, that you would be judicious in the way that you handle the conduct and behaviour of members of this committee and that the rules would apply fairly and equally to all parties.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90725)[English]I didn't say I was on a point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90725)[English]Yes. I was making sure that I finished that thought for everybody here, especially for you, Mr. Chair, because I do think it would be helpful. I was getting to the point of the private sector investment in the many great projects that are happening in Timmins—James Bay. As I was saying, it was a shame that he wasn't here to hear my intervention and the interventions of many of my colleagues, as he missed three meetings. When he did speak, you know.... We have the transcripts available. We can actually see what he was talking about, and there was very little that actually was directly related to the subamendment. He was talking about all kinds of things all across the country, but on the—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90725)[English] As I was saying before I was interrupted again, it was about the private sector investment in Timmins-James Bay. We would hope you would see that anyway, but, you know, after eight years of this government, we have seen a lot of that flee the country, for sure.I think making sure that at the very least there's language that will provide some certainty around whether or not the government's actually serious about promoting economic growth, or private sector investment, would definitely be good to see. But we all know that the way this bill will go, it will crush any opportunity for the type of economic growth that the current natural resource industries provide; the private sector investment that at one point it did, prior to this government's getting into power eight years ago and the chaos that, along with the NDP, it has invoked upon the provinces and on the sector at large.I do think this is a good amendment for us to be able to start this debate off on. As I say, it's to improve affordability. That's what this gets to at its very heart and core. We know that affordability in our small towns and communities like Coronach and Rockglen and Willow Bunch will suffer when this bill gets rammed through, much like it did in the town of Hanna, Alberta. That's why we're making sure that we have some language like this. We want to make sure the government is actually accountable for what it is going to be trying to do for our communities.Now, in terms of the creation of sustainable jobs, I'm of the opinion that the jobs people currently have are quite sustainable and in fact should be prioritized and not just thrown by the wayside. We know that these current jobs lead to the revenue that these companies make, which allows them to make the private sector investment that we were talking about earlier, which leads to economic growth. Sustainable jobs already exist. There might be some ideologically driven folks around the table who think otherwise, but we know that sustainable jobs do exist. There are private sector investments from these companies. They are the ones who are largely investing in, say, wind power or solar. They want to be investing in some of the other emerging things that have come and will be available.For example, in my neck of the woods—Mr. Aldag has family in that neck of the woods, which I've talked about before—is the SunBridge wind farm. Suncor invested in wind, one of the very first companies in Saskatchewan, and I would suggest probably in other provinces as well, to do so. They were one of the early investors in wind. Enbridge partnered with them to be able to build that wind farm to provide power for the power utility in Saskatchewan, which is SaskPower. That's why it's called the “SunBridge” wind farm, because it was Suncor and Enbridge. They are oil and gas companies. Over 20 years ago they made the decision that they were going to become energy companies, because they saw that there was the opportunity for expanded economic growth and the opportunity to grow the types of services or I guess the type of power and type of energy they were going to provide to people. They wanted to make sure they were involved in that. It created jobs. It created wealth for communities. It expanded the tax bases of some communities in the area.Unfortunately, what's happening now, because of what's going on with this government, is that the wind farm is being decommissioned. It's not going to be replaced because of the lack of certainty that comes from this government. Bill C-50 will only create further issues for the types of companies that want to invest in energy production in this country.(90730) I think it's important to acknowledge what the private sector can do, the role they actually have to play in energy production across the country and what that means for sustainable jobs. Those are jobs that actually already exist. It's not some new concept that this government is going to pretend to invent and take credit for. These sustainable jobs already exist. They do exist in the oil and gas industry. They do exist in all parts of the economy and in all sectors.To make sure that we prioritize will mean an effort to see more affordability for Canadians, because Canada's strategic advantage for years and years and years has been affordable, reliable energy. That's in large part due to our oil and gas companies, which have provided reliable, affordable, environmentally sustainable sources as well. That's not to mention the indigenous partnerships that have come from these resource companies and the fact that they are continuing to work toward economic participation and self-determination for first nations. As such, there are companies like Natural Law Energy. This government has actually denied this company the ability to participate in the economy, by getting rid of things like Keystone XL, not bothering to put any effort into having any advocacy on that to make sure that those projects, which were good for Canada and good for our energy security and our future going forward.... There were good opportunities there that were lost. This type of bill will make absolutely sure that those folks don't have that opportunity.At the very least, we could put in some friendly language around affordability and prioritizing economic growth, private sector investment and the creation of...well, sustainable jobs, because a “just transition” bill is what this is. We could say that this bill is not going to do anything about sustainable jobs, but we're still going to put the reference in there, because we think those jobs already exist and that the government should prioritize those jobs.I hope colleagues all around this table will be voting for this amendment. I know I'm excited for it. I'm looking forward to seeing what other people think. C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90750)[English]This is not a point of order, Chair.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90820)[English]That is not a point of order.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90900)[English]Wow. This is unreal.DamienKurekBattle River—CrowfootGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English] Yes, I do, actually.Is this BQ-6 or BQ-4?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]We had sent a subamendment, because we are allowed to do that. The subamendment I sent to the clerk said that BQ-6 should be subamended by deleting the word “legislative”.C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]It's important that we acknowledge that there have been subamendments submitted to the clerk. The problem is that, even when it's quiet in here, we still can't hear what we're voting on, because you haven't made it abundantly clear to the committee which ones we're voting on here. We didn't even know what we were on. Therefore, there is no queue to try to get your attention to make doubly sure you received the subamendments we submitted.I read through the motion order as provided by the House of Commons. It does not say anything about subamendments, which would therefore imply that we have the full right and ability to move them.GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]It doesn't say that. Where does it say that?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]Where does it say that?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]Yes, I know—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]I proposed the subamendment. I just did.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]No. Tell me where it—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]I challenge the chair.C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90925)[English]It's not debate. It's a subamendment. The House order says nothing about moving subamendments. Please point to the spot in here where it says we cannot move a subamendment.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90930)[English]I have a point of order, Chair.GarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort SaskatchewanGarnettGenuisSherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (90945)[English] There is a subamendment for the next one. It was submitted.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91040)[English]I have a point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91045)[English]You ruled that a bunch of our amendments were out of order, so I challenge your ruling. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91115)[English]Chair, I have a point of order to raise.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91205)[English] I have a point of order. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91230)[English]I challenge your ruling—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91230)[English]I challenge you. I challenge your ruling. It's pretty straightforward. It's a dilatory motion, which means there's no debate and you immediately have to proceed to a vote, because it's a dilatory motion.It was in between the vote calls, so you can't say that a vote was going on. It's a dilatory motion. You have to recognize it—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91230)[English]I've challenged you. You cannot proceed when there's a dilatory motion on the floor.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91230)[English]I challenge the chair. It's a dilatory motion.Chair, you have to acknowledge that there is a dilatory motion on the floor.ShannonStubbsLakelandShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91230)[English]Because there's a dilatory motion, all things have to stop and you proceed with the dilatory motion until it's done. We're between votes, so you can't just ignore me, Mr. Chair. This is the time that I was instructed by you earlier this evening to raise points of order. This is supposed to be the time for me to challenge the chair.Earlier today in this meeting, you actually instructed us to challenge you, and I am doing so. If you want to be consistent with your words and your rulings, Mr. Chair, you should accept this challenge—this dilatory motion—and we should proceed with the challenge to the chair over the ruling you made with regard to the CPC amendments.ShannonStubbsLakelandShelbyKramp-NeumanHastings—Lennox and Addington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91230)[English]There's a dilatory motion, Mr. Chair.Since there seems to be a pause, I think we should proceed with the vote on the challenge to the chair, because it's—MarioSimardJonquièreGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91240)[English] We gave notice of a subamendment for this one, to strike “obligations and” from paragraph (a). Assuming that we are voting for that, because that was what the subamendment to this one was, I would have voted in favour of it. Since I don't know what's happening, I'm going to say....GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewVanceBadaweyNiagara Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91240)[English]Are we going to do a subamendment? Is that—VanceBadaweyNiagara CentreGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91240)[English]I challenge your ruling, Chair.C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91240)[English]Thank you, Chair. Obviously, we disagree that this is a substantive amendment. I mean, this is definitely—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91250)[English]I challenge your declaration. Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91250)[English]I challenge your declaration.Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91255)[English]I challenge those rulings again, Mr. Chair. Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91255)[English] I also challenge that ruling. Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91255)[English]I challenge the chair.Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91305)[English] I challenge the chair.Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewMikeLakeHon.Edmonton—Wetaskiwin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91315)[English]We challenge the ruling. (Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4) Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsShannonStubbsLakelandGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91315)[English]On a point of order, can you explain why?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91315)[English]I'm offended on his behalf, so I challenge the chair. (Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4) Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]On a point of order, Chair, we just want to know who the voting members of the committee are at this moment, please.Thank you.ShannonStubbsLakelandThomasBigelow//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]If the official member of the committee is in the room, that's the person who gets the vote, not the substitute. That last vote was a void vote.C-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyThomasBigelowCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]It's in the room. The rule says in the room, not at the table.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]I challenge that ruling, Chair. It's inadmissible.Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]I challenge this ruling as well.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: What is happening?ShannonStubbsLakelandGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I challenge your ruling on the eligible member from the NDP.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91320)[English]This was the challenge, Mr. Chair, on the ruling of whether or not the member from Timmins—James Bay was around the table or in the room. That's what the challenge was. It's pretty obvious.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewThomasBigelow//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91325)[English]I challenge you. (Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91330)[English]I have a point of order. It's for what? I'm sorry.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91330)[English]We challenge the chair.(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 6; nays 5)Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewMikeLakeHon.Edmonton—Wetaskiwin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91330)[English]I challenge the chair.(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91335)[English]I challenge your ruling, Chair.Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91335)[English]I challenge the chair.(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91340)[English]I have a point of order.I'm just curious as to why the previous preamble wasn't ruled inadmissible because it didn't have another amendment needed to make the amendment admissible, but yet every other one that has “CPC” in front of it seems to be inadmissible. Why is that?GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91340)[English]It depends on how you answer the question.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91340)[English]I challenge the chair.(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4) Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91350)[English]I challenge the chair.(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 3)Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (91355)[English] I have a point of order first.An hon. member: I challenge the chair.(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)Appeal of the decision of the Committee ChairC-50, An Act respecting accountability, transparency and engagement to support the creation of sustainable jobs for workers and economic growth in a net-zero economyClause-by-clause studyDecisions in committeeDecisions of Committee ChairsEmployment opportunitiesGovernment billsGreen economyRecorded divisionsGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1720)[English]There are multiple points of order here. Charlie, you're about fourth on the list, so just hang on. CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]It doesn't matter. You don't have the floor, so just wait your turn. CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]I also had a point of order on that already, Charlie. So did Mr. Aldag, I think. There is a pecking order here, so don't worry about it. An hon. member: Shh.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Don't shush me.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]Excuse me. There are multiple people who have raised points of order before Mr. Angus, so he doesn't get to jump the queue. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]I think his point of order was on the previous point of order, though. GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]He wanted to speak to the motion on the list. There is a speaking list for the motion. He raised it after. He didn't say “point of order” until after—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English] Point of order, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]I'm raising a point of order on his comments here, Mr. Chair.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]It was to Mr. Simard first and foremost, before Mr. Angus—GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Yes, I do have a point of order.It goes to the conduct of the member: using words like “rat pack”, thinking that it's okay to be all belittling and saying “shh” to different members. In a previous meeting, he told my colleague here to grow up—a very strong, competent woman who's also been very accomplished in public policy on natural resources for a very long time. That's not to mention that last week, when my colleague here moved her motion, somebody from that end of the table used an expletive, which started with “f” and rhymed with “yuck”. I'll let you figure out what word was uttered. I know that it was not the member from the Bloc because of the language it was spoken in—we can rule him out—so we know where it came from.There's a pattern of conduct from the member from the NDP that is very unbecoming. I wouldn't say the entire committee...but we have members from the other parties who are enabling this kind of behaviour for him. I think it's extremely ridiculous. Given that this is supposed to be the most feminist Prime Minister ever, we have a party sitting over there that is doing absolutely nothing to try to prevent this from happening.Committee businessGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]No, it's about the way he is conducting himself here. He wants this committee to try to be all cordial and whatever, but it's his behaviour and his tone and the language he has chosen to use to belittle and berate my colleague over here, and other people are aiding and abetting that. I've just had it up to here with that. I would ask you, Mr. Chair, to please make sure.... I know we all disagree and we all get a little bit animated from time to time, but there is still a certain level of respect. The way he has treated several members, especially my colleague from Lakeland, is extremely inappropriate and very unprofessional. I would ask, Mr. Chair, that you would, now and in the future, do something about it.GeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1205)[English]Thank you, Chair.Just quickly, to the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, could you clarify whether in your previous comments it was the Alberta TIER system that you said you preferred?Canada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewHeatherExner-Pirot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English]Perfect. Thank you.I want to follow up on another point. You mentioned something about energy security as well. When we look at what is happening around the world, is there a moral case to be made for Canadian LNG around the world?Canada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyHeatherExner-PirotHeatherExner-Pirot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English]Yes. It seems like the only one who doesn't think there's a business case is the Prime Minister of Canada, obviously. These other jurisdictions.... It's obviously reliable and it's affordable, but it's also clean, right? It's clean energy.Canada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyHeatherExner-PirotHeatherExner-Pirot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English] Thank you very much.With that, Chair, I am going to move the motion that I put on notice:That, in light of multiple news outlets reporting that Qatar is housing the leadership of Hamas; and given the fact that Qatar is now the preferred choice to supply liquefied natural gas (LNG) to our G7 allies in Germany, France, and Japan; and given the fact that Qatar and Shell plc have signed a supply deal for the Netherlands, the committee recognize that there is not only a business case for Canadian LNG but a moral case as well; and that this committee report to the House its recommendation that the Liberal Government champion the export of Canadian LNG.This is important because there was a CBC article that came out the other day highlighting this. We raised it here in committee last week. I raised it on the floor of the House of Commons in question period, and it was dismissed as being a conspiracy theory by the parliamentary secretary. The CBC article says:On October 7, as Hamas gunmen rampaged across southern Israel, a group of middle-aged men in a luxury suite in Doha, Qatar gathered in front of a camera.Hamas leaders...recorded themselves showing surprise about the attacks from the news on a large-screen television, and then kneeling to give thanks...[for what had happened there.]On the one hand, they're trying to talk out of both sides of their mouth, but it doesn't change the point that Qatar is supplying the world with LNG while also housing the leadership team of Hamas. I think it's important to show that we take this issue very seriously because this is an energy security issue, and Canada has the opportunity to play a role here. We have heard over and over that Canada has the capacity to be the global supplier for LNG, but the government has left multiple countries in the dark on this. In fact, we had the German Chancellor come over to Canada asking for LNG, and that's the famous quote we got when the Prime Minister said that there was not a business case for it, despite the fact that Germany came specifically saying that Canada would be the best and most preferred option for LNG around the world. After that, we had Japan come, and Japan was also asking for Canadian LNG. The Prime Minister once again declined that as well. Now we start to see how the world market is shaping up. There are five countries, because this morning, Italy was another one to join the mix and sign a 27-year agreement with Qatar to supply their LNG. As of this morning, you have Italy. Over the weekend I think the Netherlands also signed a big agreement as well. The three that I just listed there are Japan, France—that was the fifth one that I didn't mention—and Germany. Multiple countries came to Canada offering the business case for it. They were told that there was, in fact, not a business case, but now we're up to five countries around the world that have signed 27-year agreements with Qatar to supply them.When you look at the future of it here, QatarEnergy will contribute 40% of all new LNG to the market by 2029. This is the same Qatar that.... I have an executive summary from a human rights report here. I'm going to read this: Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: serious restrictions on free expression, including the existence of criminal libel laws; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including overly restrictive laws on the organization, funding, or operation of nongovernmental organizations and civil society organizations; restrictions on migrant workers’ freedom of movement, access to justice, and vulnerability to abuses, including forced labor; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully in free and fair elections; serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation, including a complete prohibition on political parties; lack of investigation and accountability for gender-based violence; existence of laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct; and prohibitions on independent trade unions.Mr. Charlie Angus: [Inaudible—Editor]Mr. Jeremy Patzer: That's pretty damning right there, I would suggest, and I have the floor right now, Mr. Angus, so you can just wait. (1210) There's another good report here that talks about—I hope I'll say this right—the Nepalese, people from the country of Nepal. I probably got that wrong.It reads:This summer Nepalese workers died at a rate of almost one a day in Qatar, many of them young men who had sudden heart attacks. The investigation found evidence to suggest that thousands of Nepalese, who make up the single largest group of labourers in Qatar, face exploitation and abuses that amount to modern-day slavery, as defined by the International Labour OrganisationThat was from the buildup to the World Cup. There are multiple reports of abuses of human rights in that country in the buildup to it. There were many people who died in the buildup to that event, but as we look at who's providing energy for the world, it's going to be Qatar. Qatar is providing the LNG for the world, for Europe, for Asia. We have heard that LNG would be the preferred product to be able to get countries off coal. That would have a very substantive effect on reducing greenhouse gas emissions around the world, which I think is what the goal is overall, right?Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: It's supposed to be.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: It's supposed to be.Right here we're talking about what Canada can do. Let's remember that Canada produces only 1.6% of global emissions, but Canadian LNG could help bring global emissions down. We hear so often that it's a global issue, that climate change knows no borders. We have the product and the solution that could be helping the world right here in our country, and we are told there is no business case.Committee businessHeatherExner-PirotShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]Yes, there were 18 LNG proposals—Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: —and not a single one is built or operating.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Not a single one has been built or is operating. There's one that might in a few years be able to put out some LNG, but there were 18 proposed, and not one of them is operational right now—Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: Unbelievable.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: —after eight years.I think it's important to note we could have been in a position to be able to do this if it would have been prioritized, but it definitely wasn't.That's why I think this motion is important. It's a way for us to signal that the natural resources committee actually does care about resource development and that we do support what the private sector can do and should be doing in this country. I think we have a golden opportunity to send a signal here together as a committee that Canada does support LNG and that there is a case for it, and the House of Commons would recognize that. I think our committee should be taking this motion seriously and be looking to pass that along.I touched on a few very important points, such as human rights, such as the moral case that Canadian energy can and should play around the world, but also there's the business case as well. We like to talk a lot about the social programs we have here in the country. One of the best ways to fund them is through development of our natural resource sector. We definitely know the benefits the oil and gas sector has provided to this country in terms of taxation and royalties so that people are able to have these valued social programs, both on a big scale and a small scale. On a small scale, for example, an energy company, an oil and gas company, was sponsoring an event at one of the local curling clubs so that kids could have their curling fees paid so they could enjoy and learn a new sport. That's coming from an oil and gas company. It's just a small token item, but it's an important one. If we look at our community rinks, our community buildings, our schools, our hospitals, our long-term care centres, we see that some of the major funding partners are oil and gas companies.Committee businessShannonStubbsLakelandShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]A lot of them fit the small business model. That's exactly right, and a lot of them are non-unionized as well. I think it's important to note that while there are unionized employees, there are several businesses that aren't necessarily unionized, because there is that trickle-down effect because there are all the support businesses that go alongside of it. I mean, yes, it's important to have these good-paying union jobs that we talk about, but not everybody works for a union. In fact, there have been some communities where upwards of 90% of the jobs in the industry aren't unionized, and they're still good-paying jobs with good value.Committee businessShannonStubbsLakelandShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]That's exactly right.ShannonStubbsLakelandCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English] I have the floor.The Chair: Thank you—Mr. Jeremy Patzer: I have the floor, Charlie.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]No, I have the floor.Mr. Charlie Angus: Are you going to have two at the same time?Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: Chair, if my colleague is worried about me, he'll tell me.CharlieAngusTimmins—James BayGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English] Oh no, I have lots of things here that I can keep going with. I've actually had the floor all along, in fact.It's nice to have multiple colleagues with me around the table, though. It sure is nice. I respect all of the things my colleagues have to say and I appreciate the input that I get, but let's get back to the business case. I think that's of utmost importance. That was supposedly the biggest thing that was going to prevent Canada from being the LNG provider around the world.As recently as May, Canada said it was in talks with two companies to possibly accelerate LNG projects there that could ship gas to Europe within a few years. We've heard multiple people, though, talking about some of the timeline issues. We've heard that throughout this study as well. I mean, the business case is right there. There are some good numbers. I was talking about the million tonnes per annum that are going to be provided by Qatar. There's a lot going on. I'm just trying to get the right numbers for everybody. It's right here....QatarEnergy's efforts to address energy security and transition towards renewables. “In Qatar, we are increasing production to 126 million tons per annum, and we have another 16–18 MPTA out of the US next year. We are doing it in the most responsible way as far as emissions are concerned with [carbon dioxide] CO₂ sequestration”. There's a business case being made elsewhere around the world for two very important things that we have in Saskatchewan and Alberta. That would be carbon capture as well. They're talking about using that over in Qatar. They're using it in the United States. That's part of the IRA as well.We're looking at emissions reduction, the business case and good jobs. That's what we're looking at here.I would appreciate the committee's support for this motion. There's clearly a moral case for this around the world. I've laid out some of the human rights issues with Qatar. I think it would resonate with my friend Mr. Angus that people in Qatar are not allowed to be part of a union. We talked about that. “Prohibitions on independent trade unions” is the exact term from the report. We're talking about good union jobs, but also human rights workers who are being forced in there from other countries as well. Canada has a great workforce. We have the highest standards for human rights around the world. We have a fairly robust regulatory environment, but we've heard about the pancaking of regulations too. It would be nice to be able to unpack some of that.We have a business case. Let's get the business case. Let's get the business rolling. Then we can fix some of the regulatory issues that have come up, as we've seen with Bill C-69 being ruled largely unconstitutional as well. I think we're going to get a chance, hopefully, to address that in the near future. I think that will play a part in Canada being able to be a global LNG supplier.There is a proposal now for a new plant in northern B.C. Tourmaline, I think, is the name of the company. They're looking to have an LNG export facility off the coast of B.C. just south of Alaska. Of course, that would be the opportunity to supply Asia with LNG. When we look at where Japan is located—one of our allies—we see that we're the closest route to Japan. We also have the strategic advantage of our winters being a natural advantage in making LNG because of the temperatures we have. That's a strategic advantage that Qatar does not have in making the production of LNG more economic. Again, that goes to the business case that exists for LNG here in Canada.I think I've made my point clear. I hope that I can count on my colleagues across this committee to support this motion. It sends a message that Canada has all of the things the world needs when it comes to energy production, and also human rights. The business case exists, so I think we should get this done. Yes, there is a moral case and there's a business case. Let's do this.C-69, 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 ActsCommittee businessGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]I have a point of order.I want to clarify whether that would have to be unanimous or whether it's a vote of the majority. I would suggest that it is not the will of the committee, but I want to clarify that.MarioSimardJonquièreGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1815)[English]Thank you.I want to thank my colleague for moving this motion, because given all the events that have gone on around the world in the last couple of weeks, this is of utmost importance. There's a sense of urgency that I think everyone around this table would agree needs to be met. It's definitely within the purview of our committee as it's dealing with the development of natural resources within our country. It's definitely federal policy that has prevented a lot of this. Decisions at the federal level have blocked and stopped LNG production in Canada for the last eight years.The way I look at it, not only do we have the conflict that's going on, and my colleague laid that out very well, but let's also look at the context of the study we have here today. Let's look at that context as well. We know what the rest of the world is looking for: They're looking for clean, reliable energy. We know that Canada has that. We produce that. We've heard from witnesses previously that the Canadian grid is already 84% non-emitting or renewable. The Americans are only at 40%. The rest of the world would love to have what we already have. We have this resource that's just sitting here that the rest of the world is looking for so that they can get to a place where we're already at. Why we're not developing it and getting it out there to these folks is absolutely beyond me. Getting to this motion as quickly as we possibly can, I think, is of complete importance.Again, let's get back to the conflict at hand here. We're talking about the fact that a country that is housing terrorists, housing the head of Hamas, is the one that is going to be providing the world with LNG. The Prime Minister said there was no business case. Well, guess what? Qatar found the business case, and it's using it to fund terrorism. That's what we're faced with. That's what we're seeing. That's what we're dealing with here now. That's why this motion is of utmost importance, and we should be dealing with it.Mrs. Shannon Stubbs: It's gross.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: We've got people saying this is gross. Well, this is not gross; this is urgent. It's gross that there's no development being done on this and that people are dealing with a country that houses terrorists. That's what's gross. That's truly what's gross. An hon. member: The other country thought there was a business case.Mr. Jeremy Patzer: There was clearly a business case. Why were we not trying to figure out how we could fill the needs of that business case? That's what this is about. We have the potential. There were 18 proposals. After eight years, we're at zero. Why are we not prioritizing this, again given what's going on around the world? It extends beyond just what's going on in Israel right now. That's the issue of the day and it's very pertinent, but let's look at what's going on with the rest of Europe right now, with the invasion of Ukraine and what Russia has done with the energy markets across Europe. That's why Germany came here in the first place. That's why France came to us. That's why Japan has come to us. Now, here we are.I hope that the committee will take this motion and look at it with the urgency that it needs and deserves. It's too bad we have to wait for something to happen in the world, like what has happened in multiple countries now, for this to happen, and for us to get to the point where the committee will take this with the urgency that is required. Conservatives have always had a sense of urgency around getting our resources to market. We've always prioritized this. I hope the rest of the committee will do it now, but if what it takes is a global conflict for the committee to get on board with it, well, I guess, let's go.Committee businessGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1140)[English]Thank you very much for coming today, Mr. Kruger.Off the top, I'd like to apologize to you on behalf of Canadians for wasting some of your time here. We look at the motion that we have before us today, and we have these people over here bringing up issues that aren't even relevant to the motion at hand or what you were called for here today.On that fact, I would like to start, Mr. Kruger. You were asked a question, and you were starting to answer on the higher costs associated with producing oil and fuels in Canada, and you were cut off before you could finish that answer. I was wondering if you could lay out on the table for this committee what some of those higher costs are and maybe some costs we have here in Canada that other jurisdictions around the world you compete with don't have, so that we can get a good grasp and an understanding of what's happening so a company like yours, which is trying to be competitive today, can also be relevant in the future.Climate change and global warmingOil and gasGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewRichKruger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English]We heard earlier some of the numbers that you talked about for investments in new technologies. I think, at least on this side of the table, we all agree that it is the absolute appropriate approach to take: technology not taxes. That's a common tag line that you've probably heard us say over and over again on our side.I'm wondering if you wanted to tell us what some of these technologies are that you're operating and what you'd like to see going forward in order to make the investments in that technology actually work and be sustainable.Climate change and global warmingOil and gasRichKrugerRichKruger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English]It would be fair to say, then, that you've done a lot of this before the government mandates take effect. I'll preface that by saying Suncor built one of the first wind farms in Saskatchewan 20 years ago. You guys have been making these investments without the government mandating things or putting arbitrary targets in front of you. Is that correct?Climate change and global warmingOil and gasRichKrugerRichKruger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English] You guys are working to achieve net-zero GHG emissions from your operations by 2050. I'm wondering if you want to elaborate on that point here at the very end. You've made some statements on that to clarify what other people have said. Other people have made misleading statements about what you have said. I'm wondering if you have any more comments on that.Climate change and global warmingOil and gasRichKrugerRichKruger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]Thank you.RichKrugerGeorgeChahalCalgary Skyview//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1655)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Once again, I offer congratulations on your appointment to the chair. I look forward to seeing how your time as the chair goes from here. Thank you once again for taking the position.I'm going to start with Clean Energy Canada. We hear a lot about getting the last 14% of our grid clean, per se. You say we're at 84% and the Americans are only at 40%, which means we're already doing extremely well on this front. However, it's going to take a doubling of grid capacity at the very least—we've heard this from a few witnesses—to be able to do this last 15% to 16%. We keep hearing everybody say this is what we have to do to get off fossil fuels or oil and gas or however you want to say it, but no one has ever actually said how we're going to accomplish it. Maybe you can enlighten the committee on how we're actually going to provide that doubling of grid capacity in the next 12 years to meet that deadline of 2035.Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyGeorgeChahalCalgary SkyviewRachelDoran//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]I'm sorry to cut you off. We have limited time here.I'm trying to be a bit more specific. Historically, yes, we have benefited from things like hydro power. We're seeing investments in wind and solar. In Saskatchewan, solar doesn't even register 1%. It's actually 0.002% of grid capacity. Wind consistently runs at about 7%, and we had 191 megawatts of output on Monday, September 25. Just today in Alberta, there are about 3.8 gigawatts of wind capacity, yet only 512 megawatts were produced. Alberta is actually the leader in wind power in this country and has the most capacity. It's been investing in it and building it for years, to the point where it's decommissioning farms that have been built. It's the same in Saskatchewan. Suncor actually built the first wind farm in my riding in Saskatchewan.We still haven't heard which technology's going to be used to replace the coal that's being shuttered and the natural gas the government wants to eliminate. No one's bothered to say how we're going to replace that and what technology we're going to use. I'm curious. If you could break it down quickly, what technology is going to have to be used and how many of each unit are we going to need to be able to meet the demand, which is going to be a doubling of the grid capacity?Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyRachelDoranRachelDoran//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]We're still going to need to double capacity. That doesn't tell us how we're going to double our capacity. For example, again, hydro has been a fantastic thing for this country, but how many more hydro dams is it going to take to double our grid, and can we do that in 12 years? How many wind turbines is it going to take to double our grid? I drive past all the new wind farms on my way to the airport every single week, and more times than not, there's not a single one of them producing power. It's going to be -30°C to -35°C in a couple of months, when people want to heat their homes, and during the summer it's +30°C or +35°C, and people want to cool their homes. How are we going to be able to make sure that we have the actual base level of power we need? People don't want to rely on plugging their car into their house to heat their home when it's -35°C. We know of the issues EVs have when it's extremely cold out, and we happen to live in a country where that is a regular occurrence. How are we realistically going to do this?Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyRachelDoranJamesMeadowcroft//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1125)[English]Thank you very much to all the witnesses for coming.Thank you, Mr. Chair, for hosting the meeting.Mr. Friesen, in your opening remarks, you talked about how ATCO has some equity partnerships with indigenous communities across Alberta. I'm just wondering if you can help explain what these equity partnerships entail and why they are so important for Canada's natural resource industry and indigenous communities.Business partnershipsCanada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyIndigenous peoplesShannonStubbsLakelandDaleFriesen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1125)[English] What challenges do Canada's ITCs, or investment tax credits, and the supports from budget 2023 pose to these equity partnerships? How could they be changed to further support indigenous partnerships?Business partnershipsCanada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyIndigenous peoplesInvestment tax creditDaleFriesenDaleFriesen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1130)[English]You touched on one of the final points I was hoping to talk to you about. That's permitting, red tape reduction and issues like that. When you said it's tied to the clean electricity regulations but you're not going to have the information until at least 2024, that means there are basically only 11 years to be able to do that. We've already heard various reports that it will be a doubling, maybe even a tripling, of grid capacity to be able to do that.However, what the IRA is also focusing heavily on doing is reducing permitting times and the regulatory burden for natural resources projects. How do regulations in Canada put our economy and investments at a disadvantage above and beyond what you've already outlined, especially when the U.S. IRA is focusing on reducing regulations?BureaucracyCanada-United States relationsCompetitionEnergy transitionGreen economyDaleFriesenDaleFriesen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1130)[English]Wow. Thank you.DaleFriesenJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1705)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thanks to all of our witnesses for being here today.Mr. Mousseau, I just want to ask you quickly.... You were talking about how the grid capacity would have to increase. I'm wondering if you have a number for the committee of by how much our grid capacity would have to increase in order to electrify the grid.Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityNormandMousseau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Okay.We know that the federal government is moving towards a net-zero electricity grid by 2035, which gives us only less than 12 years. Do you think it's possible to accomplish that in as short a period of time as 12 years?Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyNormandMousseauNormandMousseau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Okay.I've seen some research and some studies done that would indicate that we need another 119 Site C hydro dams like the one that's being built in B.C. in order to double our grid capacity or else a large number of CANDU nuclear reactors. Part of the reason I'm asking this is that, if we look at our regulatory timelines to get projects approved and then built, it seems like that 12-year window might be a little bit narrow here. Would you agree?Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyNormandMousseauNormandMousseau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]I saw the other day that Ørsted, which is one of the global leaders in offshore wind, said that U.S. projects no longer make financial sense. I'm just curious. We're seeing some of the big players saying that there are problems with trying to do that. Even if we look at the onshore side, we see that there have been wind farms in Saskatchewan and Alberta for so long that they're now decommissioning them and taking them down because they've already exceeded their lifetimes. I mean, we've already been investing in renewables out in the Prairies here.When I look at the demand that's going to be needed to double the grid, I just don't see the timeline as being able to be met. Are you concerned that more big players in the wind industry, for example, are going to...? Are you concerned that they're going to back out if they look at the rising costs?Canada-United States relationsElectric powerElectrical gridsEnergy transitionGreen economyNormandMousseauNormandMousseau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]Thank you for that.Mr. Lashof, you made a quick comment about being interested in residuals but not in crops. I'm just wondering. Is that residuals from biofuels, or are you just saying that we shouldn't be getting biofuels from crops—period? I'm just looking for some clarity on that comment.BiofuelsCanada-United States relationsCrop productionEnergy transitionGreen economyNormandMousseauDanielLashof//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1800)[English]Thanks again.Mr. Gaudreault, just quickly, what are the challenges your project faces with regulatory assessment and approval? How long has it taken to get the approval to do your project?Business developmentCanada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyGreenhouse gasesRegulationJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityRaphaelGaudreault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1800)[English]Okay. What is the potential for Canadian industry to take advantage of phosphate for domestic battery production?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsEnergy transitionGreen economyPhosphatesRaphaelGaudreaultRaphaelGaudreault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1805)[English]Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you mention in your opening remarks that lithium is another element that's needed in order to make those batteries?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsCritical mineralsEnergy transitionGreen economyRaphaelGaudreaultRaphaelGaudreault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1805)[English]At present, in order to get the lithium required, where is that coming from? Is there any potential that you see to get that lithium from somewhere domestically, rather than internationally?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsCritical mineralsEnergy transitionGreen economyRaphaelGaudreaultRaphaelGaudreault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1805)[English]To scale it up to the rate that's needed, how long is that going to take to get this battery production? How long does it take to scale it to where it needs to be?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsCritical mineralsEnergy transitionGreen economyRaphaelGaudreaultRaphaelGaudreault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1805)[English]That's good. Thanks.RaphaelGaudreaultJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1810)[English]I have a point of order, Chair, really quickly.JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1810)[English]Mr. Gaudreault, you made a statement that there was.... I ran out of time to get clarification on lithium-ion production in Quebec. I'm not aware of any active production in Canada at all. There are a couple of mines that are owned by China. I'm just curious if you would be able to table to the committee a list of those in production.BatteriesCanada-United States relationsCritical mineralsEnergy transitionGreen economyJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1230)[English]I'm going to let Shannon take the questions.JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityShannonStubbsLakeland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1615)[English]Fantastic, thank you.Thank you, everybody, for coming. It's much appreciated. I will obviously go to you, Mr. Commissioner. On page 15 of report 5, it mentions how the phase-out of coal is on track by 2030, but I also know that in another one of your reports in regard to the just transition—we had it when we were on public accounts—it talked about the complete failure of the government to support the communities who were going to be phased out by this. In fact, the government lost two years. It did nothing for two years on this. I'm just wondering if you considered looking at that as well while you were going through this and looking at it and seeing that the government is still on track for that, but not making any mention of the communities affected.Climate change and global warmingEnergy transitionSustainable developmentWorkersJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityJerry V.DeMarco//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]It's pretty ironic that the only thing they seem to be on track for is shutting down those plants, which is going to devastate those communities. To the point that you just made, there is no framework yet for those communities and what they're going to do, and yet the clock is ticking. I want to pick up quickly on a point you made earlier on tree planting. You referenced agreements with provinces for planting. I'm just wondering which provinces those are.Climate change and global warmingEnergy transitionSustainable developmentWorkersJerry V.DeMarcoJerry V.DeMarco//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Okay. We'll look forward to doing that.Paragraph 5.24 states the following: “For the coal-fired regulations, the sensitivity analysis was not extensive and did not report estimated greenhouse gas emission reductions.”Can you elaborate on that a little bit? I think that's a pretty damning statement. Can you just elaborate on what that means?Climate change and global warmingGovernment policyGreenhouse gas emissions inventoriesRegulationSustainable developmentJerry V.DeMarcoJerry V.DeMarco//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Okay. I have only 30 seconds left here, so I'll ask you one last question. With regard to clean fuel regulations, you mentioned earlier that the other crisis is the loss of biodiversity. Have you looked into the amount of loss of grasslands and forest lands that will be attributed to pursuing growing more biofuels rather than focusing on growing food—or even preserving those grasslands for agricultural purposes?BiofuelsClimate change and global warmingNature conservationSustainable developmentJerry V.DeMarcoJerry V.DeMarco//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1700)[English]Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you very much to the officials for being here.There's a specific line item in both grants and contributions called “Grants in support of Clean Energy for Rural and Remote Communities”. I wonder if you could just take a couple of seconds to maybe highlight a couple of projects. What specifically is the government targeting with those line items?Department of Natural ResourcesIndigenous peoplesMain estimates 2023-2024Remote communitiesRenewable energy and fuelRural communitiesJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityMollieJohnson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Thank you.I'm just curious, too, if somebody has a definition for “rural”, quickly? What are you using for that definition? What does “rural” mean to the department when we talk about that?Department of Natural ResourcesMain estimates 2023-2024Renewable energy and fuelRural communitiesMollieJohnsonMollieJohnson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]If there's a person on the line, sure. If somebody can answer that in about 10 seconds, that would be great. Department of Natural ResourcesMain estimates 2023-2024MollieJohnsonMollieJohnson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]That's good. I will take that. If you could follow up in writing, I would greatly appreciate that. Thank you very much.A problem that I have.... This is the main estimates and we had the same issue with the supplementary estimates. Granted, it's the minister and the Prime Minister who set objectives and different things like that here, but there's no funding allocated for the just transition. I have a letter here—and I've received many of these letters— from people from Willow Bunch, Rockglen, Coronach and people who are working at the Westmoreland coal power station and the mine there. Their concern is that the region is losing $30 million in annual payroll with the phase-out. COVID wiped out two years of government planning. Since COVID, we've had about two years and there's still nothing, so we've lost four years. Timelines aren't moving up. From your viewpoints and perspectives—I recognize that you work within the department and you're not the ones setting the obvious objectives—as far as being the ones who are delivering a lot of the programs and things like that, why is the just transition not being prioritized when there's a hard and fast timeline and we've lost four years? Why is it not being prioritized?CoalDepartment of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionGreen collar workersMain estimates 2023-2024ChristinaParadisoMollieJohnson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English] Okay. Thank you.When it comes to the Inflation Reduction Act in the United States, obviously the American Treasury has access to a lot of money that, obviously, Canada does not. We cannot beat the Americans when it comes to money, but the one thing that we could do to be competitive with them—and quite frankly, we should aspire to beat them in this—is streamlining regulations to be able to get projects built and accomplished.I'm just wondering if the department is working to streamline regulations, so that way.... The minister said, we had an approval of under three years on a project. Wow, three years, really? That's fantastic.If we want to be serious and try to beat the Americans, what is being done, throughout the department, to try to make sure that we have the regulatory certainty, so that we're not celebrating its just being under three years. We should be having projects completed in under three years, not just approved in under three years.What's being done to make sure that we can get that done and accomplished?Department of Natural ResourcesMain estimates 2023-2024RegulationSustainable developmentMollieJohnsonMollieJohnson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1555)[English] I think that “lawfully obtained” shortens and, as you say, broadens the definition. There is still the practical barrier around how that's all obtained. I'm just going to get right into the specifics of it. The John Deere X9 combine, for example, is set up so that part of the controller is on a header and part of it is now in the combine itself. Normally the controller is all in the combine, and then you have a cable running out through the feeder house to the front end, where the header would attach. Then the header manufacturer has their interface with the cabling that goes out to make the connection, and away it goes. The interface does the talking with the controller, and it's done. However, the way that John Deere is now manufacturing products is that you have part of it here and part of it there. It's now a technical or physical lock as well that is now in between there, but through the Copyright Act, they're still able to hide and be able to lock John Deere off the platform, because they still can.... Honey Bee, for example, is not going to buy 70 different models from all the different manufacturers across the world. They testified about how they sell to 27 countries around the world. Some of those machines never make it to North America, so they're not actually going to be able to have the machine come to their shop and to reverse engineer it and do the thing.A lot of it is dependent on companies just having a standardized electrical cabling system, but now you have a company that has gone beyond that and has reinvented the wheel, per se, and nobody else is allowed to have access to the reinvented wheel. This is what's happening, both physically and digitally. That's the barrier we're trying to prevent from becoming a more common practice, because as the rest of the OEMs see that John Deere can get away with it, they are going to start doing the same thing—monkey see, monkey do.Again, whether it's Honey Bee or the tow-behind implements for planting and seeding, there are lots more short lines in the industry. The impacts are going to be realized by them in the not too distant future as well. Then the other industries, like mining and forestry, are going to see the impacts as well, as companies go to both physically and digitally locking out these other companies.The reason we had the very specific exemption for manufacturers was that we think that under (a) we would be able to get somebody who is maybe not necessarily a manufacturer but is still trying to make a product. They would fall under proposed paragraph 41.12(1)(a), whereas proposed paragraph (b) would be very specific. The dictionary references a manufacturer as a corporate entity that makes a product. It's very specific about what they're talking about. It also recognizes that what we're trying to accomplish with some of the new wording that has been added to the other portions of the act is the aftermarket product that we're talking about here and being specific to.I definitely appreciate the language that has been recommended through G-1. I just don't know that it's actually going to provide the certainty and clarity that industry is looking for, especially since a lot of this will be settled in court. That's the way a lot of this will work. At the end of the day, some of these big OEMs have a lot of power behind them, and nobody can withstand that legal challenge. We want to make sure we have absolute certainty and clarity within the act so that it's abundantly clear to the people who are trying to make these short-line products. Again, there was a good study done by Western Economic Diversification Canada that speaks to the impacts that it has across the country. It's about making sure that those people have the jobs, but also the innovation that goes along with it, and about the benefit to small town and rural Canada all across this country.(1600) I worry that by removing some of the specifics on the manufacturers exemption that we put in there, we're removing the clarity and certainty we were trying to achieve and obtain by putting forward the bill. I agree with the language in proposed paragraph 41.12(1)(a). The way (a) and (b) are written, they make sense, but again, steering away from the actual intent of (b), as it was written in the draft of Bill C-294 originally, waters it down. It makes it a bit ambiguous, which opens the door for litigation to be levied against people who are trying to innovate.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Clause-by-clause studyPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1610)[English]Those innovators wouldn't be captured by proposed paragraph 41.12(1)(a) in Bill C-294 as written.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Clause-by-clause studyPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresPatrickBlanarPatrickBlanar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1610)[English] Specific to a combine—a harvesting machine—you have anywhere from 10 to 15 brands globally, if not more. Some brands have 10 different models and some have five different models. These machines are running at about a million dollars apiece now, so for a company like Honey Bee to go out and purchase every single machine and every single model of that machine within the model year, but then also be at the mercy of a software update to void the licence that they have to use the software in the machine.... They don't own the software in the machine. They buy the machine, but they don't own the software, right? When you go to fire up your machine, you have to accept the terms and conditions, which state clearly that you do not even own the software in the machine. You don't actually own it, but you get a presumed licence as the operator of the machine and the software.The problem for manufacturers is that they're not going to go out and buy all of these machines. Honey Bee sells to 27 different countries around the world, which means that many of these machines are never even made available in North America, but it still exports its product overseas.For example, it has a rice belt header that's widely used over in other parts of the world. There might be a few people who use it in North America, but generally speaking, it's a specialty header for a machine that's used in other parts of the world.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Clause-by-clause studyPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English] I'll jump in quickly.They are not looking to modify software at any point. All they are looking for from the OEMs is the information to make their product work. In the case of Honey Bee, they don't necessarily need the software; they just need access to the information to make their product work. If they can't get that.... They can't buy a copy of the software to be able to find that information. John Deere now has that proprietary physical connector. It's illegal for them to reverse-engineer it. John Deere is not selling an adapter to all the other competitors to be able to make their product connect.Some of that is competition. Some of that is taken care of by Brian's bill, which, hopefully, he can bring forward down the road. It's a multi-faceted issue, but a lot of it comes down to certainty within the Copyright Act. In order for them be able to circumvent a TPM to get the information they need, they need the clarity within the act.In the United States, the exemption has existed for 10 or 11 years to be able to circumvent a TPM to access information to make a product interoperable. We don't have that in Canada. That's what we try to.... We kind of do, but not to the extent the Americans do. That's what we're trying to accomplish with this bill. It's to match what the Americans have by what the end result is. It's not the same mechanism. Their system is different, obviously, in how they achieve it, but we're trying to get the same level of exemption that the Americans have so that we're on a level playing field with them. We're also trying to be able to encourage industry to continue to innovate.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Clause-by-clause studyPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresPatrickBlanarPatrickBlanar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1615)[English] Yes. I guess it's that barrier that's blocking the handshake right now that we're trying to get around. That is the topic du jour.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Clause-by-clause studyPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresPatrickBlanarNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English] There seems to be.... I'm trying to make sure that we have as much certainty and clarity as possible for these guys. Yes, it's big money, but it's entire communities being wiped off the map too if these industries all disappear from their towns.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Clause-by-clause studyPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1640)[English]Thank you.Quickly, Minister, again, where in Saskatchewan are you from?Department of Natural ResourcesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]Okay. Right on. I thought that's what it was, but I just couldn't.... You kind of piqued my curiosity—JonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]There we go.With your idea of a just transition, do you agree that it's important to help communities survive, along with keeping people employed?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionLabour forceSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]Yes, absolutely.I was reading through some of the language used in the report that was put out by the government. It talks about moving people to jobs. Now we know that jobs don't just naturally come to rural Saskatchewan of all places. It's difficult to create a lot of jobs in those areas. I'm just wondering how you're actually going to go about making sure that these communities are able to retain the people by keeping jobs right there, and that it's not “here's a new opportunity for you to move” from Coronach or Rockglen to Saskatoon, Regina, Calgary or wherever. These people, they don't want to move. They want to stay where they are. They love their communities. They love their small towns. They love the way of life that they have in rural Saskatchewan.That's the fundamental concern that people are talking to me about, whether it's people who are on the lobbying side or people who are working in these industries. It's some of the spinoffs from this. It's the people who run the grocery stores. It's the people who have the local coffee shops. It's people who are working in health care in the region. How do we prevent the centralization of all of these industries into other communities, basically wiping these communities off the map? That's what they're concerned about.If you have more clarity for these people right now, I'd appreciate your putting that on the record.Department of Natural ResourcesJob securityRural communitiesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]With due respect, though, Federated Co-op is based in Regina. They're not based Coronach, three hours—Department of Natural ResourcesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]It sure is, but it doesn't mean that 300 jobs in Coronach can be replaced unless Federated Co-op is going to build that refinery in Coronach. They already have the facility in Regina. That's the discrepancy we're seeing and that we're concerned with. Yes, it's great that there's more opportunity down the road for our producers, but they're already growing those crops. That's not a brand new concept to them. These are things they've been doing for years.How do we make sure these people don't lose their jobs and lose their communities and their way of life?Department of Natural ResourcesLabour forceRural developmentSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]The next part of it all is that the Auditor General said that you guys have already basically failed with the implementation of your plan. There are 14 objectives. Only about four of them have been implemented. You guys also lost and wrote off two years because of COVID. Everybody just sat on their hands for two years and did nothing, yet you're not bumping up the two-year timeline for those communities. When you have the independent auditor already saying that you guys have failed, how are you going to make up for that lost time? How are you going to make up those gaps? There's been a ton of money already spent to accomplish nothing, so how are you going to make that up?Department of Natural ResourcesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English] Thank you very much to the officials for sticking around. I really appreciate that.There was one question I wanted to follow up on. It goes back to a report from the Auditor General's office. It was in regard to the just transition task force, where 10 commitments were made and only four of them were met. The four that were met were actually met through the regional development agencies, not even by the department. One in particular...because the just transition is going to be all about workers but also about communities. I found it very telling that one of the recommendations at the end said this:The Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and Prairies Economic Development Canada delivered coal‑transition programs but could not demonstrate that all of the projects they funded supported a just transition for the affected communities.Again, you guys are going to be the ones who are going to be working extensively on this, hopefully for the next seven years, and hopefully you've been working on it for many years prior to now as well. How do we make sure that we're focusing on communities when the Auditor General is telling us that, so far, we've missed the boat?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityJohnHannaford//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]The sustainable jobs plan, as it's now being called by the government, is basically right now a plan to make a plan in 2025. How are we going to make sure that there actually is a plan that's going to be implemented and that will start in 2025? Again, these communities, they don't have long to wait. If there's no hope on the horizon for them, right away it's going to be completely demoralizing to thousands of people, not just in my riding but in Earl's riding and other ridings all across this country. This is devastating. To the point I made to the minister, we lost two years because of COVID. The Auditor General's report also referenced that there were two years of nothing done on this file. We've lost time. How are you guys making up for that lost time? How are you going to make sure that these communities aren't devastated and wiped off the map?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionLabour forceRural communitiesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JohnHannafordJohnHannaford//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English] That's great. Critical minerals are important. That's a whole separate issue and story because in Coronach and Rockglen, critical minerals aren't necessarily where there's going to be the development there. What are you guys actively doing to identify what the next drivers of the economy are going to be? We're looking for specifics. You've already had a couple of years to build up into this, even with the two years lost to COVID. How are you going to identify the sectors that are going to be driving the future of the economy for Coronach, Rockglen, Willow Bunch, Bengough and all these communities? It's easy to talk about Estevan and Weyburn. They're bigger communities and they have a few other things going on. For towns of 400 or 500 people, when you remove the main driver of the economy outside of agriculture, which can't pick up the jobs that are going to be lost in these other sectors, how are you going to make sure you identify only the sectors that will work in those communities specifically? Those are the communities that are being transitioned.Department of Natural ResourcesSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023JohnHannafordJohnHannaford//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]One issue that sometimes comes up when we talk about just transition stuff is the number of unionized to non-unionized workers in the energy sector. We hear a lot of talk around well-paid unionized jobs and protecting unionized jobs. The reality is that in a lot of these industries only one-tenth of the jobs are actually in the sector or are maybe in a spinoff of the sector.What are you guys doing to engage and promote the other 90% of the workforce that aren't in unionized jobs and that are going to be directly impacted by this sustainable job transition?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionLabour forceSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023TedFalkProvencherJohnHannaford//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1735)[English]Do you guys have a comparative analysis of the unionized versus non-unionized jobs that are going to be affected by this? Do you have the raw numbers?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionLabour forceSupplementary Estimates (C) 2022-2023DebbieScharfJohnHannaford//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1720)[English]Thank you very much, everybody, for coming today. I really appreciate it, and all the testimony we've heard.I'm going to begin with Honey Bee.Can you give us the background for how you're seeking an equivalent exemption for interoperability as it exists in the United States?C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertScottSmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]Thank you.Can you elaborate more on the unintended consequences for you and other industries of not being able to circumvent TPMs for the legitimate reasons outlined in your statements?C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresScottSmithScottSmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Thank you.Mr. Dade, could you talk a little bit more about trade agreements—for example, CUSMA—as this one is where this originally came from?Could you elaborate further on the importance that making these changes has in making sure that we're matched up with our counterparts both in the States and around the world?C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresScottSmithCarloDade//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English] Thank you very much. I have about 30 seconds left.Can you elaborate really briefly on the importance of innovation, maybe from an environmental context? The header that we had growing up was a 42-footer. How big are headers now? That means fewer passes down the field. Can you elaborate on that quickly?C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresCarloDadeScottSmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1840)[English]Thank you very much.I'm going to go back to the folks from Honey Bee. We heard comments earlier about an industry incentive for interoperability. In your view as innovators, is there an industry incentive for interoperability that currently exists?C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertScottSmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1840)[English]As far as some of the barriers go, the Copyright Act is premised on the whole point of ownership and/or licence. We don't own the software of any of the OEM machines. In fact, as a farmer, if I buy a combine right now, I don't own the software inside the machine I own. Is that not part of the issue for you guys as well?C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Computer softwarePrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresScottSmithScottSmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1840)[English]Maybe just keep elaborating on that, because I think we need to get a very clear and plain picture of what that is. You can use the rest of my time on that if you want.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Computer softwarePrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresScottSmithScottSmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1635)[English]Thank you very much. Thank you to all of our witnesses for coming today. I definitely appreciate what all of you had to say. I'm going to start with Public Services and Procurement. I'm wondering if the department is capable of making the right decision to build with wood products.Government billsGovernment contractsS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsWoodJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityStéphanDéry//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1635)[English]Thank you for that.In considering this movement towards building with wood products, has your department recommended a flexible approach to these projects?Government billsGovernment contractsS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsWoodStéphanDéryStéphanDéry//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]How will your department measure the environmental impact of using wood products? There were some numbers thrown around in the opening remarks, but I'm curious about how you guys are going to measure the actual impact that we're going to have by using wood products.Government billsGovernment contractsGreenhouse gasesS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsWoodStéphanDéryStéphanDéry//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]That's good to hear.Will it be considered only before the project begins or is this going to be an ongoing process as we look at the entirety of the project, from the time it begins to maybe the time that the building is finished? I would assume that there would have to be a stamp of approval before things begin. Is it going to be through the entirety of the process or only at the beginning ?Government billsGovernment contractsGreenhouse gasesS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsWoodJean-RockTourignyJean-RockTourigny//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]Okay.Also, then, are you comparing the life-cycle emissions between different products, whether it be wood, steel, concrete or otherwise, and other technologies as well? I'm just trying to get a glimpse of the entire process here.Government billsGovernment contractsGreenhouse gasesS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsWoodJean-RockTourignyJean-RockTourigny//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]Okay. Right on. Thank you. For either department, have either of you identified a potential impact of this bill on our softwood lumber dispute with the U.S.? I'm just wondering if there would be any potential ramifications from that or from the lack thereof.Government billsGovernment contractsS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsSoftwood lumber industryUnited States of AmericaWoodJean-RockTourignyGregorySmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]Okay.My last question is this: Is it possible for there to be a negative environmental impact if more trees are harvested due to the higher demand for wood products? I understand, obviously, that by building it, you're going to store it long term, but by eliminating trees from the forests, I'm just wondering if there are any negative impacts we might be overlooking here.Forest policyGovernment billsGovernment contractsS-222, An Act to amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (use of wood)Senate billsWoodGregorySmithGregorySmith//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]Thank you.GregorySmithJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1630)[English]Thank you very much, Chair.Thank you very much to the members of the committee.It's an honour to be here. I was a member of the committee previously, so it's fun to be back here and, in particular, to talk about a bill that I think we have all already found some semblance of agreement on.The House of Commons already voted unanimously to pass this bill at second reading, and I believe there is good reason and enough public support as well to keep the momentum going through the remaining stages ahead.Many people are not familiar with the concept of interoperability, but it is fairly easy to understand the problem we have right now in Canada. It’s the result of rapid technological changes, especially over the last few years.The federal government updated the Copyright Act 10 years ago in response to new developments back then, which gave us the current version of Canadian copyright law. Since 2012, the act includes a new section for the enforcement of technological protection measures, or TPMs for short.At the time, there was a clear need to better protect the copyrighted works of artists and entertainers. That is why there is language that specifically mentions “performers” and “sound recordings”. Digital locks and similar technology were created to combat piracy and related issues, and the Copyright Act backs them up with enforcement and legal penalties.The wording of section 41 made sense for what was happening 10 years ago, but we all know that has a lot has changed since then.Now there are other industries that have incorporated digital features and software into their products. This has allowed digital locks to appear in places that were unimaginable when the law was put in place. It has opened our eyes to how common something like interoperability is.For the benefit of the committee, and for anybody who might be listening online today, when we think of the concept of interoperability, one of the simplest forms to describe it.... For those of you who have Surface Pros, if you use an external mouse and you plug it in via USB, it just works. It doesn't matter what brand your mouse is. You plug it in, it downloads the driver and it interoperates. It's basically a plug-and-play concept. That's one of the simplest ways to describe what interoperability is and how it should seamlessly work.For something like computer hardware, though, there hasn’t been as much of an issue. The market incentive favours allowing interoperability between different brands, and everyone is better off for it. However, other industries are starting to lose ground with letting people enjoy interoperability.I have already said a lot—in my speech, back at second reading—about how there are problems with using agricultural machinery for farmers and short-line manufacturers, and I would be happy to talk about more of the details during your rounds of questions. Obviously, machinery for farming and heavy construction is not the same thing as copyright for music or movies. The nature of the business and products involved are quite different. Restricting interoperability in these areas has more practical consequences because there is more at stake with these sectors.It is also important to remember that interoperability existed and was practised before these new conditions came along. What Bill C-294 proposes to do is not anything new. Instead, it is trying to close a loophole and bring back what farmers and manufacturers were always allowed to do. It's an acceptable and perfectly normal thing that should not be treated as if it were part of a black market. Until we return to the clarity of a simpler time, we are leaving people in an awkward, arbitrary and inconsistent position.Bill C-294 is our opportunity to update the Copyright Act with a small, limited amendment. As far as I’m concerned, it’s just common sense. With your support, and that of the rest of our colleagues in the House, we can make a simple fix that will support Canadian consumers and industry.I look forward to responding to your questions.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1635)[English] The concept definitely applies broadly to many different industries and interested groups. Whether it be manufacturing groups and companies or different sectors like forestry or heavy construction, they are definitely interested in what this bill has to offer.When you're looking for the best product to do the best work for whatever your specific industry is, that's where interoperability is important. You might have a main OEM machine or piece of equipment, and then you might have a specialty attachment that you want to use, whether it be for mining, forestry or agriculture, depending on what season you're in or what type product you're trying to harvest or mine.We had some good conversations with heavy construction and with some of the forestry and mining folks as well.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. MargaretsRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]One main component of the bill is to redefine what interoperability means. The reason we're doing that is that right now, the Copyright Act envisions interoperability as being simply between two computer programs. Think about even the example I gave in my opening remarks about a computer mouse. Your computer mouse itself doesn't have a computer program inside of it. When you plug it in, your computer recognizes an interface inside of it, so it downloads the appropriate software to the computer. It doesn't download it the mouse; it downloads it to the computer. You have a software program and then you have a mouse with a little interface or a little chip inside of it.Then you make that comparative analysis on larger scale. In agriculture, the prime example came from a combine header. You have your main combine and then you have the header that you attach to the front of it to harvest your grain. There are many short-line manufacturers out there that only make the header. They don't make the combine, so they're looking for some certainty to be able to operate on the platform of the main OEMs. Again, they don't put computer software into their header. There might be an interface. It is an attachment.That's why we're redefining what interoperability means. We're also adding in the provision that's going to allow a manufacturer to circumvent a TPM for the sole purpose of making that product interoperate.The reason the language is so important there is...obviously there is proprietary software. The manufacturers don't want access to the proprietary software. They just want to know what information—basically what ones and zeros—they are going to need to make the reel on the header turn or make the knives go back and forth to cut the crop. It's being able to send those signals. That's the information that they are looking for—what the signals are. They are not worried about the proprietary side. The protection still exists so that even if someone were to be adversarial and try to access that proprietary software, they would be in violation of the act.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. MargaretsRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]It makes sure that something physical can be realized in the term of what interoperability means. By adding in the term “attachment” or “interface”, generally that is a more physical thing as compared to software. While it wouldn't explicitly be a phone plug, it does still deal with and reference something that is a little bit more physical.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. MargaretsRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]Yes, I'd definitely be happy to consider some amendments if there are issues that have arisen with some trade deals. We definitely looked at that right from the very beginning, though, because some of the people who reached out to me about looking to do the private member's bill on this actually came from witness testimony at the CUSMA hearings. Part of what was acknowledged then and is still the case now is that Canada lags behind what the Americans are doing. We're also behind the European Union. Australia has been very progressive on this as well. I think that even France has more progressive language on interoperability. This bill will basically put us back up onto a level playing field with our international competitors.When we worked with the analysts of the Library of Parliament on this, we did a lot of extensive research as to how it would impact our trade deals. At the time, we found there didn't appear to be any issues, but if there is more legal analysis out there that would suggest there are some tweaks to be made, I'd be happy to entertain those tweaks. C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Canada-United States-Mexico AgreementPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresTrade agreementsAndyFillmoreHalifaxAndyFillmoreHalifax//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]Right to repair and interoperability are similar, yet they're different in a lot of different ways. What this does is help to drive innovation. We kind of dubbed the bill “the right to innovate”. For example, when you dropped your sander and broke it, you might not have been able to get the exact part from the original manufacturer, but you might have been able to get an aftermarket piece that would work. What we're working on here.... Again, I'm coming at it more so from an agricultural background. We're looking to create—or to preserve, I guess—a situation where these manufacturers can drive innovation so that we have better products that are going to work longer, hopefully, and so we just continue to drive that innovation. That way, we're not left with a situation where maybe a monopoly takes over and the quality of the product deteriorates.When we create an environment that allows these short-line manufacturers to innovate and to make these products, it keeps the quality of the products higher, which is going to make those products last longer. People could use them for much longer than they would if that same quality weren't being driven by the short-line manufacturers. C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsRight to repairTechnological protection measuresAndyFillmoreHalifaxAndyFillmoreHalifax//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]I've had a few conversations with some of the provincial governments as well, just around what their thoughts were on this. Being that some of the issues we broadly see with industry fall more into the competition side, that's where some of the provincial angles might come into play. I know there is a federal framework, but a lot of it can be enforced on the provincial side of things.By putting this framework into place, it does create a bit more room and an ecosystem out there where, again, innovation can be driven by our provincial partners. It will give MLAs and provincial governments a bit more certainty, I think, to be able to make sure their laws also work alongside and similar to this to protect that.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Federal-provincial-territorial relationsPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresAndyFillmoreHalifaxAndyFillmoreHalifax//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]When I look at the general economy in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and every province, manufacturing is a very big part of the local economies and—this gets a bit more to what Mr. Fillmore was getting at—each province might have a different sector or a different part of the economy that they are manufacturing for particularly. In the small town my parents farmed around, Frontier, for example, there is a business called Honey Bee Manufacturing. I spoke about it at length in my speech. Were it not for Honey Bee, the big source of employment for the region would be gone. In many small towns all throughout the country, that is what the jobs are.If you look at Quebec, you guys produce some fantastic aluminum there. There are other aspects of manufacturing that are going to be beneficial to that. This is providing more opportunity for more Quebec aluminum, per se, across the country to be utilized and used, but predominantly, it's about choice.It comes down to the end user. We have innovation from our manufacturers. They are world class on that side, but when it comes down to choice for the consumer, for the farmer or for the companies in forestry and mining to be able to have the products that they need to do the best job that they can do, that's what this is all about. It's giving them the tools they need to succeed.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Maintenance, repair and renovation servicesPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresSébastienLemireAbitibi—TémiscamingueSébastienLemireAbitibi—Témiscamingue//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]As far as the issue of planned obsolescence is concerned, the more competition you have in the marketplace, the better the product you're going to get, so hopefully, those products are going to last longer.One of the key drivers to this is innovation. If we want to avoid things like planned obsolescence, there are a couple of things. There's being able to get the parts you need to make repairs. At the end of the day, hopefully, we can just buy products that are initially going to last longer, so that you don't have to buy parts to repair every year. It would be even better if the original pieces lasted longer.Think of a deep-freeze, for example. Technologies change and the way they are made or manufactured is very different. My parents bought a house that was built in the seventies that still had a deep-freeze. I swear the house had been built around the deep-freeze, because we couldn't get it out of the basement, but it was still running and it was 40 or 45 years old. I wish you good luck buying a deep-freeze today that will last 40 or 45 years.When you look at some of the names of the companies back then that were making these things, there was lots of competition. Now it seems to have dwindled. There might be a few different names, but when you look at the back, it's the same parent company that's manufacturing under a few different names. We don't really have as great competition as we would need to help push some of these products to be made better than they are right now.We can address the issue of planned obsolescence in part by driving innovation. That's what this bill will hopefully do.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Maintenance, repair and renovation servicesPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresSébastienLemireAbitibi—TémiscamingueSébastienLemireAbitibi—Témiscamingue//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English] Yes, I would say so. There are definitely environmental benefits to this—for sure. Again, you want to have an environment that exists where, yes, you can make those repairs but you can also get the parts you're going to need to do that.On the one hand, the committee is already dealing with the right to repair legislation as put forward. My bill is going to be more so about making sure there's innovation in the sector to make sure that for the original piece that you're going to have, there will be innovation to grow and push the development of those products that are going to last longer and be better going forward.Generally when you provide consumers with the option to buy a couple of different objects of the same kind, yes, they're going to buy a cheaper one sometimes, just simply because it's cheaper, but the reality is that you're going to buy the same thing three times, whereas if you would have paid a bit more for the higher-quality, quality-built product, it would have lasted longer. If there's more competition, if there are more people pushing and driving that innovation, we should, hopefully, have more high-quality pieces that people can buy, but that also bring down the cost of purchasing. That way, the people who are buying the cheaper pieces could afford to buy the higher-quality ones because there are just more pieces available. They would be more apt to buy something that lasts longer at a better price.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresSébastienLemireAbitibi—TémiscamingueSébastienLemireAbitibi—Témiscamingue//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English] I definitely appreciate that.In looking at the trade, again the big thing is that we're playing catch-up here because our laws are behind and outdated. When we have a 10-year review for copyright and then it takes a few years to implement and make those changes, it puts us at risk of being a little bit further behind. I think that's why the committee is seeing Bill C-244, why we're seeing my bill.... I know you drafted one on similar issues around copyright as well. We need to have a bit more agile legislation now as technology grows and advances, and we have to do so in line with our trade agreements. When we look at CASIS, it's good to get that sharing of information, but when it's voluntary, it makes it tough. That's why we have to do something like this. That way, the manufacturer is trying to build those pieces and have the certainty they need to go forward and get the information they need to just make their product work, and nothing more than that.I think what this bill does is that it provides certainty for the main OEMs. Again, they can develop proprietary software that's going to work, yet they can't block out the short-line manufacturers from being able to access the information they need to make other products that will work on their platform.When it comes to the trade side of things, I think this bill is in a good position.... Again, as I alluded to earlier, I am willing to make amendments if there are things that need to be done to make it more compliant when it comes to trade deals and agreements. This bill came out of a need for change, which we saw in the CUSMA negotiations anyway. Again, we're playing catch-up here to what the U.S. is doing. There shouldn't be an issue, but that's....C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresBrianMasseWindsor WestBrianMasseWindsor West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Absolutely. We have an opportunity to do what's right by consumers and what's right by business. We need innovation, which is the best way to get products built and made and developed here. It can help on all of those fronts. If it's the forestry sector, it's going to benefit from this bill. Until we can get the softwood lumber agreement dealt with, this will give the industry extra products that they need to continue to make the world-class products we make here in Canada, in every province. What we're going to continue to focus on with this bill is driving that innovation. You're right. We want to make sure that the good actors get rewarded, get what they need. There's the enforcement side for the bad actors out there as well. We're focused on creating a framework. That way, the good actors can continue to do what they do best and that's innovate. It will prevent them from being squeezed out by other people who are trying to eliminate the competition from the workplace.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresBrianMasseWindsor WestBrianMasseWindsor West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English] They definitely are. Again, just the way they're defined under the Copyright Act, where it's between two computer programs, doesn't necessarily allow the flexibility and certainty they need. That's allowed some of the big OEMs to hide behind the Copyright Act, in part because of the definition of “interoperate” within the frame of the Copyright Act. But also, when we look at TPMs and the different exemptions that are out there to circumvent, it has to be more agile to better reflect how technology has changed and advanced.It used to be that what was thought of as a written work was a play or a novel or music, but now, in the digital world, we're seeing that it is also code written for how machines are going to operate. The first thing you do when you hop into a tractor or combine now is to accept the user terms and conditions. You don't just turn a key and go anymore, right? You have to accept what it says. When you hit that “accept” in the machine, it says that you acknowledge that you do not own the software inside that machine. Therein lies part of the problem because copyright is based on ownership. If you don't own the software, you don't own a copy of it, and therefore basically you do not have the right to make a product interoperate. That's why we got the exemption included in this bill: to allow people to circumvent a TPM for the sole purpose of making a product interoperate with another product.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresBradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser CanyonBradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Again, in their original form, the original goal of TPMs was to provide certainty for artists but also to help make sure there were more products, more written works available to the general public. That is, in essence, the goal of both copyright law and TPMs.Again, it just comes to those aftermarket pieces, right? Those don't necessarily have to be on the agricultural side. They can be in any industry you look at. If you have a tractor, a piece of mining equipment or a piece that might be used on the forestry side of things, that's where you're going to buy those other products to do your work because they're more specialized to the industry you're working in. When you look at it from the technological side, there's the simple analogy to a computer mouse or other pieces you're trying to put together to build something, and quite often there can be a barrier there, too.For all intents and purposes with this particular bill, our focus is the agricultural side, but the benefits do definitely exist for many other industries as well.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Copyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresBradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser CanyonBradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Exactly. Basically, right now, in order to make products interoperate, you have to get over a whole separate hurdle. You have to have a digital box that's going to do the work for you, because you can't access that software since right now the act doesn't allow you to do that. Again, you're just trying to get the signalling information you need to send signals back and forth. That's all these people are looking for. But you can't get that information easily. If things are based on getting licences, you're always at the whim of a software update and a software upgrade, and then you have to repurchase or reapply to get those licences and those agreements. That's where creating a system and an environment in which people have that ability and regardless of how many software updates come out they can access that information by circumventing the TPM becomes important. That's what we're trying to create here.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Computer softwarePrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresBradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser CanyonBradVisMission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English] Yes, for sure. I can't pull a company name off the top of my head right at the moment. You think about attachments that would be needed for say, road construction. If you are looking at the mining industry, there are going to be different components and pieces that you might be able to get. People are always selling different teeth, for example, for mining. There might be a different piece that they're going to be able to attach to a machine that would use that.It's making sure that there's innovation in different sectors. That's where it matters. There are different loader attachments, for example, for forestry, with grappling hooks, different things like that, which would provide a better function. It's more geared towards a specific use. The main OEMs don't always have that niche or specific thing in mind. They make a general product and try to use that for other purposes. When you have these short-line companies that specialize in making just mining equipment or agricultural attachments or road construction equipment or attachments that are going to help with road construction...that's what this bill is aimed at trying to do.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresVivianeLapointeSudburyVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Part of it is the right to innovate...or the safety concerns. A lot of that comes down to enforcement in other jurisdictions. It's not copyright that would be the enforcement mechanism for a lot of those things. Safety isn't copyright. When you're talking about motor vehicle safety acts or environmental protection, that's not the Copyright Act.Both Bill C-244 and my bill, Bill C-294, which we're talking about today, are not going to allow people to alter or make substantive changes to an already existing piece of equipment. When you look at the very definitions of “diagnose”, “maintenance” or “repair”, you're maintaining it to what the original state was or you're repairing it to the original state. In order to do that safely, you have to be able to access information to restore it to the original state.What we're trying to do with my bill is to make more products available to the consumer to use, to have the choice and the options for what they want. Again, that's not going to violate environmental protection laws. It's not going to alter motor vehicle safety. There are standards in place that still have to be respected. All of these companies are certified companies; they're making good products. Are there going to be some bad actors or other people who are black market or whatever? Yes. With or without this, that's going to exist.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)C-40, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to repeal a regulation (miscarriage of justice reviews)Private Members' BillsRight to repairTechnological protection measuresVivianeLapointeSudburyVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]No, I don't. I think the bill respects the protections that people would have, again, for developing proprietary software. When you look at various industries, part of what makes one product possibly superior to another is that they might have some cutting-edge software that they use to operate a machine, or how it calculates things or does things for them. It's not about providing access to that proprietary software. It's more about making sure that people have the information they need to build the attachment that is required for that machine anyway. Going back to my farming example, John Deere makes a John Deere header, but you can also buy a Honey Bee, a MacDon, a New Holland. You could buy lots of different types of headers that are going to attach to the front of it.Exempting one group over the other, I don't think is what we're looking at. We're trying to create an ecosystem where people can innovate and do so without fear of having the Copyright Act chasing them down because they unlawfully circumvented TPM. This provides the protection that the big companies want and need, but it still also provides a certainty for the short-line guys to do the work that they want to do.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresVivianeLapointeSudburyVivianeLapointeSudbury//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English] What this does is get towards the manufacturers. This bill is about allowing manufacturers to access the information they need to make a product for the end consumer.If our innovators don't have an environment in which they can do what they do best, which is to innovate and drive that innovation level higher, that will reduce the amount of choice that consumers have. We want more and more choice. We want more products available for consumers, so we need to create an ecosystem in which they can do that. Again, when the Copyright Act was implemented in 2012, it met the needs and the demands of the day, but as we all know, the minute you buy a phone, it's obsolete. The Copyright Act also needs to recognize that things have changed since 2012. The review is under way. There are going to be changes coming, and this is one of many things that need to be done to update the Copyright Act. Hopefully we can get this done before the updates are done. C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Consumers and consumer protectionPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresVivianeLapointeSudburyJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1710)[English]Interoperability, interoperability, interoperability. Mr. Sébastien Lemire: Non—en français!Some hon. members: Hear, hear!SébastienLemireAbitibi—TémiscamingueSébastienLemireAbitibi—Témiscamingue//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Yes, as industry grows and develops, changes do happen. This bill is hopefully going to help industry and manufacturers to be a little bit more nimble, a bit more agile.That being said, this will happen, and then a year or two down the road, something else will happen, and then more changes will be required.I do feel that my bill is a good start to getting the Copyright Act and just technology in general on a better path to being able to better change and adapt to technology as it changes and emerges. You're right: as artificial intelligence becomes more prominent and has a bigger role to play, our existing framework isn't going to match that, so we are going to have to make some changes. My bill is one step of many steps that I think are going to be needed to properly address that, so there is definitely more that can and should be done when it comes to changes. If we try to do them all in one private member's bill, it probably will never pass. That's why with our private members' bills we chip away a little bit at a time to hopefully get us into a better spot so we can be more agile and respond better to changes like that.AI is definitely going to present a very unique and interesting twist and challenge to all of this, but I think my bill puts us into a better position to be able to respond to that. C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)New technologiesPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresSébastienLemireAbitibi—TémiscamingueSébastienLemireAbitibi—Témiscamingue//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English] Thank you for that.Yes, you're right. When we get these bills early in the draw, or when people use motions, sometimes motions and even private members' bills are used for partisan reasons. This bill is non-partisan. It doesn't matter what party you're from or what part or region of the country you're from. It's a concept that I think we can all get behind, because it doesn't benefit one region over another.I did have a study done on the benefits of interoperability, with an overview of the western perspective, but when we looked at it, we also looked at the financial implications that it has not just for Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba, but also for Ontario and Quebec. We looked at where all these small manufacturing companies exist. They're all across the country. When you're looking at agricultural manufacturing companies, there are physically more of them in Ontario per capita. Most are in the Prairies, for sure, but there are more companies in existence in Ontario. There are some in existence in Quebec. There are some—not very many—in existence in the Atlantic provinces as well. When you look at how big and vast agriculture is, for example, you see that it touches every province and every province uses it. For this bill, again, I come at it from an agricultural perspective, so it has that benefit for ag, but it's going to have that benefit whether you're in the fishery, in forestry or in mining. The benefits are there. For technology in general, the benefits are going to be there and realized with this bill. We tried to design it in a way so that it didn't matter what party you're from, you could support it, because at the end of the day, this bill is about trying to do what's right not just for one industry but for all of industry and for the entire country. It's born from people who live in my riding, but at the end of the day, it's geared towards the entire country. I view it as a nation-building project, right? When you look at manufacturing products in Saskatchewan, you see that we have a use for Quebec aluminum and we have a use for components that are manufactured in the Windsor area and are going to be used to build the greater piece that you're going to be attaching. This is a good way and, post COVID as well, this is a regulation that's going to help to drive the economy back into full force and help us fulfill the potential we have here in Canada for a more active and robust manufacturing sector. This helps us to support the key industries we have in this country.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresBrianMasseWindsor WestJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]As for the mechanism of what the two bills are doing, they're very similar. The concept is definitely a lot different, but the mechanism for how both are going to be achieved is very similar, right? With regard to interoperability, it's driving innovation. It's driving competition going forward. The right to repair bill is more so about a product that's already in existence and about making sure that people have the choice to repair where they need to. I'm going to focus on my bill in a sense, though, when we look at our rural communities and at what this means to all the small towns all across this country that have these small manufacturing shops in existence. It might be a town of 200 people, but that shop might employ half the town, and because it employs half the town, the benefits to the rest of the community are there, because you have people buying groceries in the grocery store.In Frontier, the town I grew up in, there were 300 people, but we had two independent grocery stores. The Co-op had just a gas station. That was it. Now, in lots of places, the Co-op is your grocery store, your gas station and your lumberyard. It's everything.In Frontier, because we have a company like Honey Bee in existence and had Friggstad Manufacturing prior to that, it allowed private industry to grow and to thrive. For a lot of our small towns, it's fantastic that we have the Co-op to keep things going, but these other companies do exist. Other private industries do succeed and do thrive. That's what we want to focus on with this bill, because it helps to preserve those companies and those businesses that exist in the small towns and also incentivizes new ones to open up. Hopefully, they'll do so. If they're going to be in a city, great, but if they want to be out in a small town somewhere, where they can have the room to operate, yes, there's a need for them in the small towns too. Hopefully, this will keep the ones that are there but also incentivize more to want to join the market.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsRight to repairTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English] The Americans have a completely different mechanism for how they would get an exemption from a TPM. There's a copyright librarian in the U.S. that has already carved out an exemption for agricultural manufacturers to be able to circumvent TPMs to make their products interoperate. There is an atmosphere in the United States for some manufacturers to be able to do what we're trying to do with this bill here. It's a different mechanism, but it puts us at the same capacity as what the U.S. has in terms of getting that exemption to circumvent the TPMs.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]I believe in the U.S. it's every three years. Every three years you have to go back and reapply or prove your case as to why you still need to be able to circumvent that TPM.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]I don't know if we have a comparable thing, but maybe through an order in council they might be able to do something to that effect. I'm not entirely sure. I think that would be where they might be able to have something similar.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]In the European Union, I don't know how fully integrated it is at this point, but yes, they're continuing to push the issue on it. France has a framework they're working on, as does Australia. There are other places that are working on this and pushing beyond even what my bill would do.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]Yes. I don't know their mechanism off the top of my head. I'd have to go back through my documents and see what they did, but yes. C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]I think the words we use when we draft legislation are extremely important. When we say that the sole purpose for this bill is to interoperate, it respects that there are certain parts of software that aren't going to be accessible to the short-line manufacturer. It does ensure that there's still that privacy component, but it will still protect the end-user's privacy too. Again, this is more so around manufacturing, so it shouldn't be as much of an issue. The general privacy concerns that would arise from this are going to be around the proprietary software that OEMs do have. Because of the wording we're using in this bill to make sure that it's the sole purpose to make a product interoperate, it will protect certain data.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Privacy and data protectionPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteRyanWilliamsBay of Quinte//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Of the ones that are looking at it, yes, they're looking to figure out how they can be more open with this. Yes, it's been approved in most places that have done it. I'm not aware of anybody who's looked at it and said no thanks. I think everywhere it's been looked at, they've implemented something or are actively moving to implement something.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresRyanWilliamsBay of QuinteJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Yes. Bill C-244 allows you to circumvent a TPM for the purpose of a product that would make something...or allow you to have a device that would diagnose, maintain and repair. There's an ability to circumvent a TPM to accomplish that. With my bill, the circumvention of the TPM is so that you can access the information you need to make your product interoperate. The information you would be getting to make your product interoperate wouldn't be used for right to repair. It would only be to make your product interoperate with another. Again, it's trying to get the signalling information from a combine to make all the components on your header work. That way, you can change the speeds. Just the way technology has changed, a header is a lot more complex than it used to be. You need that signalling information. That's what these companies are looking for. This bill enables them to circumvent a TPM to get the signalling information they need to make their product work, whereas right to repair is to get the data you need to be able to diagnose, maintain or repair a product.C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Copyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresHanDongDon Valley NorthHanDongDon Valley North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English] It's similar but quite different in the same breath.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresHanDongDon Valley NorthHanDongDon Valley North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Well, there are a few issues there. Obviously, if somebody tells you that you can only repair here, that's anti-competitive. Tied selling is also not allowed. There's already a framework against tied selling. If you're going to say that if you buy this machine, you can only use this product on it, that's tied selling. You're technically not allowed to do that in this country.It's the same with warranty. As a consumer, when you buy a product, you have the right to get that fixed wherever is suitable for you. Now, whether you're going to your local repair shop or to the OEM repair shop, both technicians are going to be certified technicians. They know how to work with individual components, right?When you're innovating, when you're building something, innovation is quite often born from necessity. Many farmers are the ones who have developed and built a product because they realize, in using other products, that, boy, those don't actually match the needs of what they need on their farms.Again, going back to the example of Honey Bee, the company started in two brothers' shop on their farm in Bracken, Saskatchewan. They wanted to build a product that actually worked better for what the growing conditions were. They had many other products that they built just out of their shop, too.Many companies have that same start, where it's like, “This issue isn't.... I can't do this, or I can't do that.” Then it's like, “Okay, well, I'm going to make the product that is going to do that.”My bill is about allowing people like that who think like that to have the capacity to be able to identify a problem and make a product that's going to fill the gap. It allows them to do that. With their being able to do that, it also pushes the big guys to make better products, as well, because people are going to buy other products. Everybody starts making better products because you get the small guy making a product that is superior to the big guy's. Then the big guy has to step his game up, too.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsRight to repairTechnological protection measuresHanDongDon Valley NorthHanDongDon Valley North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]In the digital world, I mean, interoperating.... Take your phone and see how many devices you can connect to with your phone. Make your phone do work on something else. That in and of itself is interoperability right there.When you look at the digital scape, there are a lot of different things out there. This would help drive innovation in the digital sense, as well. Smart homes, making your home more efficient....C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresHanDongDon Valley NorthHanDongDon Valley North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]Yes, the Internet of things. There are definitely benefits there to be had.You know, at the end of the day, if you're in an urban riding like yours, basically all of the products that the people in your riding have came from rural Canada or rural somewhere because the food had to be produced somewhere. The products used to build their homes didn't just come from the hardware store; they, obviously, came from out in the forest somewhere. It's about enabling industry outside of the city to do what needs to be done to allow those products to flow into the city, into the urban areas. That way consumers and users have products. They have choice. They have innovation that can be utilized. Again, it's not always going to be combines and headers. It might be your phone and the way it airplays to your TV, the way that it connects to your Chromecast. It might be different things like that.Again, this bill is just about driving innovation. It's making sure that if you want to have a product that's on here that's going to work on a completely different brand name.... It might help and aid with that because that's interoperability. It let's you get the information you need from that product to make your product work with that product.C-294, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (interoperability)Private Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresHanDongDon Valley NorthHanDongDon Valley North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1815)[English]I have listened to many of the same concerns, and I've read through all the briefs that the committee has received as well. I don't think it's in the right spirit of the bill to start installing goalposts or setting markers down on certain industries, because then the next industry is going to come in and say they need this, and then the next one is going to come in.Who else are we going to have to prescribe this for right now if we start picking favourites as to who is and who isn't going to be allowed and exempted from this?To Brian's point, I see the danger of what adding little bits in like this is going to do the bill. I'm afraid that, yes, it would gut the bill.C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Clause-by-clause studyCopyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1825)[English] From what I understand, the original intent of Bill C-244 was to somewhat broaden how the Copyright Act applies. Just from reading amendment G-1, it talks a lot more about “performer's performance fixed in a sound recording”. Again, it's talking a lot more about musical works. It's not recognizing or realizing that that's not necessarily what we're talking about here.The vagueness of the Copyright Act is that a work can be anything. It can be computer code. It can be a musical piece. It can be a book. It can be a museum and archives. That's the vagueness issue with the term “work”.I think the original intent of Bill C-244 was to try to address that vagueness. I feel that this amendment doesn't fix that problem with regard to what Sébastien was just asking about: “Does this enable somebody to fix a John Deere tractor?” I mentioned this earlier. When you hop in that John Deere tractor and hit “start” on the screen, it's expressly written right there that you do not own a copy of the software. You have a licence to operate it, but that licence does not give you the ability to access that software. What this bill was originally intended to do was to allow a repair shop the ability to import a device that would allow somebody to get the information they'd need to complete the repair on that tractor.The amendment that's been provided here by Mr. Fillmore.... I feel like it's completely gutting the entire purpose of trying to get a right-to-repair bill because, again, it doesn't address the vagueness of the term “work”.I'll leave my comments there for now. I guess the only other thing I would add is this—and this would be my question: Do you, as the experts, have any comments on that? Would you like to comment on that?The second point I'd like to touch base on is that, obviously, there are 14 or 15 states in the United States that have already passed and implemented right-to-repair legislation. What's stopping those states from...? They're obviously not concerned about CUSMA. Is that because it's done at the state level and not the federal level? If it were a province doing this, would it be at risk of violating the trade deal? If so, what's the difference between an individual state's doing it versus what we're doing here today?C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Clause-by-clause studyCopyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertPatrickBlanar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]We heard from Mr. Fillmore about putting this in. If the original one was going to put us offside with our trade deal, my question is on what the States is doing.Now that the barrier is removed at the federal level in the U.S., are the individual states in contravention of CUSMA, or is what they're doing perfectly allowable? What makes what we're doing here not allowable in contrast to what the States is doing?C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Clause-by-clause studyCopyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1700)[English]Thank you very much to all the witnesses for being here. I really appreciate all the perspectives that everybody brings, and the way you all presented here today. I'm going to start with Mr. Rosborough. I like the fact that you have talked about possible specific amendments to the bill. Could you elaborate on what amendments you would like to see? Could you delve into how specifically that would provide a better solution for achieving a right to repair? If you want to preface it with the way the Americans do their copyright exemptions, maybe that would be beneficial as well. C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Copyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsRight to repairTechnological protection measuresJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertAnthony D.Rosborough//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Thank you very much for that. I think we're all trying to find some good solutions for various industries.Ms. Sereda, I grew up on a grain farm just shy of 8,000 acres. Whenever I talk to people about the right to repair, it's based on the premise....For us, we were sometimes four hours from the closest place that would either have parts for us, or have somebody who could come out and do the service. We talk about how much it costs to have a truck roll, and to have someone to drive out there and say, “I don't have the right part,” or that maybe the computer doesn't have the right software on it. You're paying that cost to drive back and forth all the time, whereas if you could fix it yourself that would be hugely beneficial. Can you talk a bit more about what some of your members are saying?C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Copyright and copyright lawFarm equipmentMaintenance, repair and renovation servicesPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresAnthony D.RosboroughShannonSereda//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English] Thank you very much for that.Mrs. Centivany, I appreciate your intervention as well. Could you talk briefly on the dynamics between federal and provincial jurisdiction when it comes to copyright law, and how that plays a role in the right to repair?C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Copyright and copyright lawFederal-provincial-territorial relationsPrivate Members' BillsRight to repairTechnological protection measuresShannonSeredaAlissaCentivany//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1825)[English]Thank you very much. I want to touch on a point that has come up in many of the briefings sent to the committee. A few of the witnesses have touched on it. Because of how technical the conversation is around technological protection measures—even the implementation of the Copyright Act—there seems to be this general misunderstanding about what the act does, what it would mean and how it's interpreted. When I read the bill and when I read other bills similar to it, there's a lot of very specific language in it. This one in particular says, “circumvention is solely for the purpose of the diagnosis, maintenance or repair of a product”.I guess this question is for Mr. Rosborough and Ms. Centivany. In law, how important is it that we have very specific language around what the intent is with these bills?C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Copyright and copyright lawPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresTerminologyJoëlLightboundLouis-HébertAlissaCentivany//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]Thank you.Ms. Rosborough, do you have anything you want to add to that or does that sum it up?AlissaCentivanyAnthony D.Rosborough//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]Thank you very much.I have a question for Mr. Bernard. I did a tour of an auto body shop back home in my riding. One thing they were talking about in terms of why the right to repair is an important thing to them was completing the repair of a vehicle after it's been in an accident. They're trying to return the vehicle to its original state. They're not trying to modify it. They're not trying to make it greater than or less than it was. They are trying to get it as close to the exact state it was in before it was in the accident. A barrier for them is access to certain datasets from certain manufacturers, although certainly not all of them. The issue still exists that they cannot complete their repair, which then has an impact on insurance and on who's liable if an owner drives that vehicle off the parking lot and something fails on the vehicle. It's going to fall back on the auto body shop, but it's not technically their fault, because they couldn't get the information. I'm just wondering what you would have to say in regard to that.C-244, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (diagnosis, maintenance and repair)Copyright and copyright lawMaintenance, repair and renovation servicesPrivate Members' BillsTechnological protection measuresAnthony D.RosboroughCharlesBernard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]No, all I would say is thank you so much to all the witnesses. I really appreciate it. It's a highly technical and complex issue, and I appreciate how eloquently everybody has spoken on the issue today.JoëlLightboundLouis-HébertJoëlLightboundLouis-Hébert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1150)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thank you for coming, Minister.I'm going to start with a quick question. Can you let me know what definition of “rural” you use?JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1150)[English]How do you define what a rural community is?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1150)[English]Would you agree that a rural economy is a lot different from an urban economy?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1150)[English]I'm just trying to gauge whether you understand the impact of rural communities and what they mean to the national economy.I'm looking at this through the lens of a just transition, Minister. I think there's about $4.8 million in the supplementaries towards a just transition. It goes through the development agencies. I'm wondering what your department's plan is to administer the just transition.Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1150)[English]Did you read the environment commissioner's report on the just transition and how it's going so far?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1150)[English]One thing that stood out to me was the portion that alluded to two years of nothing being done on the file because of COVID. I like to think the department can walk and chew gum at the same time, so I'm wondering about that.These communities are not getting those two years added on the back end of the timeline. What's going to be done to make up for the two years that were lost?CoalDepartment of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]As an aside, the carbon tax might force some of these places to shut down a lot more quickly because the costs of running them are going rampant.The commissioner also concluded that “in the absence of a federal approach for a just transition”, the agencies did not adequately design programs or benefits to support the transition.Just quickly, what's the new plan? Is there a concrete plan now or are you working on one? I'm kind of wondering where that's at.Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Okay. I look forward to seeing that.Your mandate letter says you're going to create economic opportunities for all of these communities. You alluded to Coronach. There's also Rockglen and Willow Bunch. They have economic modelling for what they want to do for their communities. There's been a lot of stonewalling in trying to get the funding out so they can get their new modelling physically going. There have been a lot of studies and consultations, but not a lot of actual work to give them the opportunity to start building this model. Is this legislation going to allow these communities to get certainty so they can start as soon as possible?Department of Natural ResourcesEnergy transitionRural communitiesSupplementary estimates (B) 2022-2023Sustainable developmentJonathanWilkinsonHon.North VancouverJonathanWilkinsonHon.North Vancouver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1215)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thanks, everybody, for coming today. Mr. Brooks, I'm going to start with you. If a company were a net-negative emitter, is that a good thing?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesGreenhouse gasesOil and gasJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityKeithBrooks//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]Would it matter which section or segment of the economy it came from?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesGreenhouse gasesOil and gasKeithBrooksKeithBrooks//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]If we're looking at the production side, though, there's already a company that's largely net-negative in Saskatchewan. There is another one in Alberta that's net-negative. The one in Alberta is net-negative at stages one, two and three, which is not just the production side but also the usage side. Again, does it matter what sector is doing it?What I'm trying to get at here is, if the goal is ultimately emissions reduction and these companies are doing it to the point where they are actually net-negative, is that a good thing or is that not allowed?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesGreenhouse gasesOil and gasKeithBrooksKeithBrooks//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1220)[English]Whitecap Resources, in southeastern Saskatchewan, for stages 1 and 2 combined, in their 2021 report, were at about negative 740,000 tonnes. That is for scope 1 and scope 2. It is possible. It does happen. They use enhanced oil recovery for it, which is something that the Americans have included in their plan. This government doesn't have it in its plan. If we get to negative emissions, does it really matter? I appreciate your input on this. Mr. Muir, you were talking about American subsidies, what they are doing and what we are doing here in Canada. I'm just wondering if you want to elaborate a little further on what we should be doing with the carbon capture, utilization and storage to make it more competitive with what other countries are doing.Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesKeithBrooksStewartMuir//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1220)[English]Yes, exactly. Thank you.If any of you have more that you want to add to any of these issues, could you submit a brief to the committee as quickly as possible? We would appreciate that.Mr. Helin, I'm just wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the importance of natural resource projects for indigenous communities and their ability for self-determination. Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentIndigenous peoplesOil and gasStewartMuirCalvinHelin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1655)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thanks to all the witnesses for being here today.Mr. Samray, I'm just wondering if you could pick up on a theme you had in one of your previous interventions.Would it be safe to say—and maybe you could just elaborate on the point you're making—that there's some confusion around what actually constitutes a subsidy?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesForestryGovernment assistanceJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityJean-FrançoisSamray//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Thank you for that. I appreciate that.I'm just wondering, for any of the witnesses who are here from the forestry side, if you guys have any comments around that. We've heard there are some misinformation campaigns towards the industry. I'm just wondering if you have any thoughts on that or could maybe just elaborate on what that misinformation is. Maybe it's on whether or not you are subsidized or what that might look like.Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesCanada-United States relationsForestryGovernment assistanceJean-FrançoisSamrayDerekNighbor//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Okay.Is there anybody else?We have about 30 seconds.Is there anybody else who would like to comment on that at all?DerekNighborLindaCoady//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1210)[English]Thank you very much.Thank you to all the witnesses. It's great to see Abdul Jalil here today as well. You did some great work on a document on agriculture manufacturing and its importance to western Canada a couple of years ago.I'm just going to ask you this, Mr. Jalil. Do you have a definition for “subsidy” that your department uses?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityAbdulJalil//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]I'm just wondering if you have a definition that you use. What defines a “subsidy” for your department? Do you consider the money that your department puts out as a subsidy, or do you consider that just as a loan? What's the nature of it?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentAbdulJalilAbdulJalil//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]Yes, thank you very much. I appreciate that.I'm just wondering what kind of a return on investment Natural Resources Canada—for you, I guess, it would be PrairiesCan—getting from the infrastructure funding provided to coal transition communities.Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesCoalEnergy transitionAbdulJalilAbdulJalil//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]There was a two-year time frame when the government did nothing on the just transition, on coal transition. It was in a report by the Auditor General to the environment commissioner, so two years was completely lost to it.Are you concerned about the impact that it is going to have on the communities that will be impacted by the coal transition?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesCoalEnergy transitionAbdulJalilAbdulJalil//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]Okay. Thank you.To the Canada Energy Regulator, what is Canada's baseload rate of energy that is required to get through a given year, say for 2023, and then what's the projection for 2030?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentEnergy and fuelJoannePawlukJean-DenisCharlebois//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]Yes, if you could submit to us what is currently required and if you have a projection number for 2030, that would be great.Do you have a definition that you use for “subsidy” as a regulator?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentJean-DenisCharleboisJean-DenisCharlebois//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]Okay. That's okay. I just thought I would ask, just to see.When it comes to the energy industry as a whole, how is Canada doing on checking out the life-cycle emissions of projects, both for the oil and gas side but also for the green sector?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentGreenhouse gasesOil and gasJean-DenisCharleboisJean-DenisCharlebois//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]This question is for the Canada Energy Regulator.Do you have an update on the numbers for Canada's baseload energy?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentEnergy and fuelRandyHobackPrince AlbertJean-DenisCharlebois//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]With the government's announcement that it is planning to get rid of natural gas by 2035, have you done any studies or analysis on what that's going to mean for Canada's baseload energy that is required going forward?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesEconomic developmentEnergy and fuelEnergy transitionJean-DenisCharleboisJean-DenisCharlebois//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]We're out of time, I guess. Sorry.Jean-DenisCharleboisJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1725)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thanks, everyone, for being here.To the Department of Finance, can you confirm the amount of total tax revenue from the oil and gas sector to the federal government in 2021?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesOil and gasTax revenuesJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityMiodragJovanovic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Maybe, then, you could add the five years prior to that as well. I just want the total revenue to the federal government. I would greatly appreciate that. Can you tell us what effect the tax revenue from the oil and gas sector had on the federal budget and deficit over the last year? Do you know?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesOil and gasTax revenuesMiodragJovanovicMiodragJovanovic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]We're looking at how much revenue came in.When you consider what the budget projections were, and then we see how much revenue came in from the oil and gas sector, what impact did that have on the projected deficits the government is running?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesOil and gasTax revenuesMiodragJovanovicMiodragJovanovic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Okay. If you could get us a report on those numbers, that would be fantastic.I have another quick question for you since you're a tax policy guy.I've previously asked the finance department for the specific amount of tax that's collected on the carbon tax. Do you have a number for how much GST is collected on the carbon tax?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesCarbon taxOil and gasTax revenuesMiodragJovanovicMiodragJovanovic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]Okay. It is an individual line item when people are paying their energy bills and paying their power bills. They are individual lines, so I think it wouldn't be that hard to track, honestly, but maybe on your end it's not part of the program.Anyway, thank you very much. I will move on.I have a question for BDC. We were talking about environmental social governance. I'm curious about that. Do you look at the life-cycle emissions of a project before you finance it, rather than just...? For example, people say that wind and solar are these amazing green energy sources, but when you look at the life cycle, do you look at what the total footprint is, from the construction to the tear-down of these projects?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesClimate change and global warmingSustainable developmentMiodragJovanovicShannonGlenn//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1730)[English]Right. I'm just curious about that, because several yards and tonnages of concrete go into every wind turbine tower. The amount of steel that goes into them is massive. We know that concrete is one of the largest GHG emitters in the world. I was just curious to know whether you guys bothered to put that into your analysis. I guess not.My last question is for Natural Resources.There was a two-year delay in developing the just transition policy because of COVID, yet we're not seeing the timelines moved by two years for all of these towns, for all of these communities and for these sectors that are going to be obliterated by the just transition, especially in the coal industry. I'm just wondering how you can justify a two-year delay without actually giving a two-year reprieve to these communities.Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesClimate change and global warmingEnergy transitionSustainable developmentShannonGlennJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley City//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1745)[English]I'm going to start with Natural Resources Canada. Finance, you might want to jump in on this one as well. It kind of touches on both of your departments.How much of the equalization formula payment from the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta has been based on natural resource revenues from oil and gas?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesClimate change and global warmingEqualization paymentsOil and gasShannonStubbsLakelandDanielDufour//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1745)[English]If you could get them to table a document for the committee with that information, it would be extremely helpful. Thank you.This is more for the environment team. It touches on agriculture, but it comes through environment. For the agricultural clean technology program, I understand the funding for the adoption stream has gone out. On the recipient list, 139 projects were approved. Only five of them were for Saskatchewan. This program was for grain dryers and basically for the agricultural sector to be able to transition, but from an environmental lens. I'm just wondering if finance or environment have any insight as to how this program decided which projects to fund. Was the criteria based on environmental or economic impact?Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesClimate change and global warmingEcotechnologyFarming and farmersSustainable developmentMiodragJovanovicJesseFleming//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1750)[English]Lastly, for environment, I represent a few communities that are definitely impacted by the just transition. There's an economic development group called South Saskatchewan Ready. They've come up with a very detailed plan and some feasibility studies for the entire south region of Saskatchewan and for what they're going to do after the government eliminates their sole and main driver of the local economy.We've seen audits from the Auditor General talking about how the program's been an absolute failure so far. I'm just wondering what your department's going to do to make sure that these communities are not left behind, as it's being indicated they are. Agriculture, environment, fisheries and natural resourcesClimate change and global warmingEnergy transitionSustainable developmentJesseFlemingDanielDufour//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1650)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thank you to all of the witnesses for coming today. It's certainly great to hear your thoughts; each of you provides a unique perspective.I'm going to start with a basic question on the issue of rail transportation, and all three of you can answer it—or if one of you wants to answer it, it doesn't really matter. Maybe, Mr. Jochum, you can start with it. As we're coming into winter, what concerns does your industry have with rail in this country?Food supplyRail transportation and railwaysKodyBloisKings—HantsGunterJochum//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Mr. Orb, do you have anything you want to add to that?GunterJochumRaymondOrb//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Thank you very much.When we talk about the issues for farmers, we were talking about the tariff relief, for example. That's a cost that gets passed down to the producer. It's the same with the carbon tax; it's a cost that gets passed down to the producer. I'm wondering, Mr. Orb, if you want to finish your statement on the tariff relief on fertilizer. Fertilizer is a very important aspect of farming, so if you want, you can spend 30 seconds to a minute finishing that statement quickly.Customs tariff and customs dutiesFertilizersFood supplyRaymondOrbRaymondOrb//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Mr. Jochum, would it be fair to say that your carbon tax rebate does not match how much you pay in carbon taxes?Carbon taxFood supplyFuel tax rebateRaymondOrbGunterJochum//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English] Thank you.I have only about 30 seconds left here.I was on a previous study on biofuels. We were told that they could increase yield production, so they could get more tonnage without adding more land usage. However, now, as we're hearing about the potential for fertilizer usage being reduced, is that even possible to do?Farming and farmersFertilizersFood supplyGunterJochumGunterJochum//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1230)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I'm just going to start with Infrastructure Canada here. You claim that you have improved the reporting cycle, so with that improvement were you able to clarify and collect data that was previously missing from, say, 2016 to 2020?8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"AccountabilityInfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]Thank you.Part of the justification for the massive programming was that it claimed that it would create 100,000 jobs per year. The last time you were here you couldn't confirm that this happened because of poor data. Now that you guys have improved your system, I'm just wondering, again, if the programming has created 100,000 jobs each year.8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"InfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanJob creationReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanKellyGillisKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English] Over the last couple of years, though, based on the data.... You talked about 2022 and 2023, and you used some forecasting numbers to suggest 120,000 jobs, but looking back, was it 100,000 jobs per year?8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"InfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanJob creationReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanKellyGillisKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]But how many jobs?8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"InfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanJob creationReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanKellyGillisKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]Thank you.Now that time has passed and we've gone through COVID-19 and the whole thing, does the department have any statistics that they can share on the impact the slow rollout of certain funding programming had over the last couple of years? Were there delays, and things like that, that were faced?8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"COVID-19InfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanPandemicReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanKellyGillisKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]I'm going to cut you off there because I have a short bit of time left.I have two really quick questions, so I'd appreciate quick answers. What is the department's approval rate for those applying to the investing in Canada plan? Give a 10-second answer, please.8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"COVID-19InfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanPandemicReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanKellyGillisKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]Okay. Thank you.Last, how much money was given to people who did not actually qualify for funding?8510-441-21 "Report 9, Investing in Canada Plan, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"InfrastructureInvesting in Canada PlanReport 9, Investing in Canada PlanKellyGillisKellyGillis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1200)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thanks to everyone for being here.Getting back to the issue of short-term advisories, are there some that are more likely than others to become long-term advisories?8510-441-15 "Report 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities—Indigenous Services Canada, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"Drinking waterIndigenous reservesReport 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English]Okay. How many short-term advisories.... I guess maybe you just have a percentage, but if you have the total number, that would be great. How many short-term advisories that are lifted are put back on again? How often are they recurring, these short-term advisories?8510-441-15 "Report 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities—Indigenous Services Canada, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"Drinking waterIndigenous reservesReport 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaChristianeFoxChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English]Yes, I think that would be very helpful for sure, if you could follow up with that.8510-441-15 "Report 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities—Indigenous Services Canada, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"Drinking waterIndigenous reservesReport 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaChristianeFoxChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English]I'll move on to another issue. It would be on training. You referenced one first nation, for example, that only had one operator. I've worked in jobs previously where I was working on reserve and saw the same experience at other first nations as well, where there's only one guy operating.What is being done to attract and get more people from the local communities engaged and trained in these jobs to make sure there's not just one person, or that there is a contingency plan for retirements or somebody moving on, etc.?8510-441-15 "Report 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities—Indigenous Services Canada, of the 2021 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada"Adult education and trainingDrinking waterIndigenous reservesLabour forceReport 3, Access to Safe Drinking Water in First Nations Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaWater treatmentChristianeFoxChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English] Thank you.Ms. Hogan, you identified the workforce in your report. I'm wondering if you have any further comments on the workforce side of things.ChristianeFoxKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English]If you can, say something in 15 seconds, Mr. Wheeler.KarenHoganGlennWheeler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1625)[English]Thank you very much.I think, with a bill like this, obviously, it's very important to hear from as many witnesses as possible. We have a few more yet to go. I would like to see a copy of the motion. I don't have one. There are a few people who are newer to the committee here, so it would be nice to have a copy of the motion in both languages before us. I realize there are probably multiple motions out there and it would be nice to have copies of the motion in both official languages, so it's clear exactly what it is we are considering here, and potentially voting on. I'm wondering if it would be possible to get that done.Committee businessHedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Yes, that's the one.HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]I'm sorry. I appreciate that Mr. Bittle spoke the record, but I was hoping he would take two seconds to send an email, so I would have it in front of me.I see that the minister is here now. I'm wondering if we should proceed to hearing from the minister, at this point in time—that we move to adjourn this debate so we can hear from the minister.HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1745)[English]This is debate, Madam Chair. He is debating what is going on here. PeterJulianNew Westminster—BurnabyHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1750)[English]I have a point of order.PeterJulianNew Westminster—BurnabyHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1750)[English]I have a point of order.HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1750)[English]Madam Chair, I just feel that because there were multiple points of order on my colleague and was continually cut off, she was unable to establish what she was actually trying to say. I think she was just trying to establish the reasoning and the rationale for the subamendment, which is perfectly in order. She was speaking to the reasoning for the subamendment and why the subamendment is important. I do think that it would be inappropriate to end her chance to speak at this point in time because she was speaking to the relevance of the subamendment. I think Mrs. Thomas should be able to continue to speak.HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1825)[English]I have a point of order.HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreRickPerkinsSouth Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]I have a point of order, Madam Chair.HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreHedyFryHon.Vancouver Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]I think, for the benefit of the committee, I would like to just add in that Mr. Perkins had started his deliberations. There was some confusion because he had thought he had talked about a specific part of the subamendment that was different from what it was. We got that clarified. Then he started again into it. Then that's when the points of order happened. It was very clear that the debate had begun and then there were points of order. Then Mr. Housefather brought his point in.Mr. Perkins, and again, I'm sitting right beside him so I heard him, he did in fact start debate on his subamendment. As he started—HedyFryHon.Vancouver CentreAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1830)[English]—I then turned to the clerk to make sure I could get on the speaking list as well. Mr. Perkins did, in fact, begin his debate on this subamendment.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1840)[English]This is debate, Madam Chair. PeterJulianNew Westminster—BurnabyPeterJulianNew Westminster—Burnaby//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1140)[English]Thank you very much.I'm just going to pick up on a theme that's developing here. There are four reports here. This binder is just full of reports. All of them say the same thing. You have recommendations. The department responds. They say, agreed, agreed, agreed. Nothing happens. We do a report on the report. There are more recommendations, and agreed, agreed, agreed. Nothing happens. You alluded to it in Blake's round of questioning, but how can we break the cycle? That's where this is at. You alluded to it, but maybe just elaborate and expand on that.8560-441-64-02 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2022)Correctional Service of CanadaCorrectional servicesGender-based Analysis PlusReport 1, Access to Benefits for Hard-to-Reach PopulationsReport 2, Processing Disability Benefits for VeteransReport 3, Follow-up on Gender-Based Analysis PlusReport 4, Systemic Barriers - Correctional Service CanadaSocial benefitsVeterans benefitsJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]Thank you for that insight. Yesterday the Minister of Veterans Affairs claimed they had taken significant action to reduce wait times and painted a picture very different from the one though that you've given us here today. How do you respond to that? Do you believe that this is just another example of the government not taking an issue seriously enough and just saying they're doing something, developing an action plan, but not actually really addressing the problem?8560-441-64-02 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2022)BacklogsDisabled veteransReport 2, Processing Disability Benefits for VeteransVeteransVeterans benefitsKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English] Yes. I had veterans prepandemic who were waiting over two years, sometimes, to get a decision, to get what they were applying for and what they were told they would be receiving. Giving them that would be really good.For the Veterans Affairs staff who are processing applications, you said half were temporary and that there was no long-term staffing plan. I think it would be helpful for us to hear from you and your team in a bit more detail about the findings and recommendations around that.8560-441-64-02 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2022)BacklogsDepartment of Veterans AffairsDisabled veteransReport 2, Processing Disability Benefits for VeteransStaffingVeteransVeterans benefitsKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]Thank you once again, Mr. Chair. I think I want to keep down this one path here, and that's talking about things like efficiencies. A theme that could be part of this report is that there are a lot of inefficiencies in government as well. My colleague Eric in his first round was talking about how there's more being spent but less service actually being delivered. By definition, that's inefficient.When you're doing your audits, are you making recommendations that are specific to how the government can be more efficient without having to spend millions and billions more dollars, focusing instead on how they can be more efficient with taxpayers' dollars? Perhaps you would like to elaborate on that.8560-441-64-02 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2022)Correctional Service of CanadaCorrectional servicesGender-based Analysis PlusReport 1, Access to Benefits for Hard-to-Reach PopulationsReport 2, Processing Disability Benefits for VeteransReport 3, Follow-up on Gender-Based Analysis PlusReport 4, Systemic Barriers - Correctional Service CanadaSocial benefitsVeterans benefitsJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English]Yes. That's exactly right. I think we need to talk about hard-to-reach populations as well, which you look at from many different perspectives. You touched on many of them here, such as serving a very large rural community, for example. That can sometimes be and quite often is forgotten as one of the harder-to-reach areas, just because of the fact that the distance between places is so vast and becomes problematic. Again, I think there are ways we can be more efficient in how government operates without it being more expensive, for sure.Building on that point, then, and looking at how the government works with hard-to-reach populations, I think it's fair to say.... I guess we touched already on the different groups, but it's also the case that anyone in a rural area generally has a harder time with accessing or navigating the services. Can you elaborate on the process for rural communities and how that could be more efficient or be better dealt with?8560-441-64-02 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2022)Report 1, Access to Benefits for Hard-to-Reach PopulationsRural communitiesSocial benefitsVulnerable personsKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1220)[English]Yes. Service Canada and all these different outfits quite often tend to be in the larger urban centres. Logistically it makes more sense, but sometimes the participation is a bit of a problem or a factor in terms of reaching out. Not everybody is going to go looking through a Government of Canada website to try to find where the feedback link is on a program or how to make something better.What more should be done? Do the audits reflect on what should be done in terms of improving that outreach to make sure that these disadvantaged communities are more adequately serviced?8560-441-64-02 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2022)Information disseminationReport 1, Access to Benefits for Hard-to-Reach PopulationsSocial benefitsVulnerable personsNicholasSwalesKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1220)[English]Thank you very much. It's great to be able to join the committee here today.I'm going to start with the Council of Canadian Innovators. I've seen you guys at committee a few times and from listening to you quite a bit I would say there has been a common theme that has emerged, which is that there is an issue with getting our start-ups to scale up. We've seen in provinces like Alberta, for example, that government reduction of red tape has encouraged even more start-ups to pop up and to be looking to grow. How can the federal government be more like Alberta and work with these companies in the private sector to be able to get them to not just to start but to scale up?Budget 2022 (April 7, 2022)Business developmentC-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measuresGovernment billsInnovationPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleDanaO'Born//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1220)[English] I have a two-part question for you. The first question is a pretty simple one, and that's how important is broadband to innovation? On the second one, we've seen multiple announcements of funding for broadband, which is fine. It seems that there are constant announcements over and over again, but in touring around rural Canada and talking to colleagues all across the country, it seems that we haven't really seen a lot of development of broadband access for people. In the last two years, we've really seen the exacerbation of the need for very strong and robust access to broadband.I wonder if you want to touch on that, because I think there's $2.75 billion available in the budget. What do we need to do to get out of the way so that the private sector can get these dollars into production so people can have broadband access?Broadband Internet servicesBudget 2022 (April 7, 2022)C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measuresGovernment billsInnovationDanaO'BornDanaO'Born//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Thank you very much.I have 30 seconds left, Chair. I'm going to cede my last 30 seconds because my next questions will take much longer than that.If Dan wants it, Dan can have it.DanaO'BornDanAlbasCentral Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1235)[English]Thank you very much.To the Auditor General, in your comments and in here, you talk a lot about the digital transformation that's ongoing in your office. I'm wondering if you can update the committee. When did the digital transformation begin? When do you project it to be completed?Audits and auditorsComputer systemsDepartmental results reportsMain estimates 2022-2023Office of the Auditor GeneralJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English] Do you think that this investment is going to help increase your productivity going forward so that we'll get more reports per dollar spent?Audits and auditorsComputer systemsDepartmental results reportsMain estimates 2022-2023Office of the Auditor GeneralKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]Thank you.In your new mission and vision statement from 2020, it states that you'll be building connections with stakeholders, and you say that the stakeholders are Parliament, the people of Canada and the entities that you audit.How do you plan to reach out and build those connections with each of these different stakeholders? We'll start with the people of Canada. How do you plan to make that connection?Audits and auditorsDepartmental results reportsMain estimates 2022-2023Office of the Auditor GeneralPublic consultationKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]I'm just going to quickly interject there. I want to go back to this digital transformation issue. We're seeing a lot of people right now working from home. Obviously people have had to do that over the last couple of years with the pandemic. We all get that and we understand that.I'm just wondering if you're going to be auditing the performance of the department, though, over those couple of years to determine how productive people were working from home and going forward, because we realize and know that a lot of people will continue to be working from home.Are you going to be focusing on the performance of people as they work from home versus working in the previous arrangements they had?Departmental results reportsMain estimates 2022-2023Office of the Auditor GeneralOperational reviewsPublic Service and public servantsTeleworkingKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]Do you think, for helping to make sure that we have more audits going forward...? You have the funding you were looking for, but as was alluded to earlier, the number of reports hasn't necessarily risen accordingly. I know you mentioned that, in a couple of years when you have the digital transformation completed, it will help your productivity and hopefully the department's productivity, but I'm just wondering. If we're not getting the bang for the buck with people working from home, I hope that's something we're going to consider looking at to make sure that we do get the best performance.Departmental results reportsMain estimates 2022-2023Office of the Auditor GeneralOperational reviewsPublic Service and public servantsTeleworkingKarenHoganJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick Southwest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1300)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.I'm going to start with the Department of Finance. Looking through the public accounts, it states that the government received over $4.3 billion in revenue from the carbon tax. I'm wondering if you can once again confirm if it's revenue-neutral or not.8555-441-347 2021 Public Accounts of CanadaCarbon pricingCarbon taxPublic accountsJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestMichaelSabia//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1300)[English]Okay.I'm just wondering, based on the figures here, how much of that $4.3 billion—or maybe it was above and beyond—did the GST that was collected on the carbon pricing account for?8555-441-347 2021 Public Accounts of CanadaCarbon pricingCarbon taxGoods and services taxPublic accountsMichaelSabiaMichaelSabia//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1300)[English]Do you have any idea, though? Is it more than that or would it be included within that number? It's kind of bizarre that it's not in here. It's a common question that we all get: why is it applied on top and how much is it worth? Nobody seems to know the answer to it.If you can get that number and table it with the committee, that would be very helpful. Do you have any inclination as to whether it's within that number or above and beyond it?8555-441-347 2021 Public Accounts of CanadaCarbon pricingCarbon taxGoods and services taxPublic accountsMichaelSabiaMichaelSabia//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1300)[English]It would be over and above. Thank you very much.I do have a bit more of a regionalized issue. There are two of them, really, but there's one in particular when you look at the overall phase-out not just of coal but also of fossil fuels in general and the impact it's going to have on the government's bottom line.I'm just wondering, as we go forward, what the projections for revenues are going to be like, given that one of the main drawers of income for the government is going to be systematically eliminated.8555-441-347 2021 Public Accounts of CanadaGovernment revenuesOil and gasPublic accountsMichaelSabiaMichaelSabia//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1305)[English]No, that's fair. There's money brought in as revenue from the energy sector, from the oil and gas industry. That revenue will not be replaced with revenue from alternative energy sources. What impact is this decision going to have on the financials of the country going forward when you look at the projections?8555-441-347 2021 Public Accounts of CanadaGovernment revenuesOil and gasPublic accountsMichaelSabiaMichaelSabia//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1305)[English]Thank you for that.In my last minute here, more locally, my riding and the riding next door to me in Saskatchewan are going to be two of the ridings hardest hit by the phase-out of coal. I understand that it's both provincial and federal. There is a line item, not so much in the public accounts but in budgets, that's been talked about a lot, and that's the coal transition fund. I'm hearing from the municipalities that will be affected that there's nothing coming their way.I'm just wondering if you have any comments or if there is anything you're aware of that will be done to support those communities that are hard hit by that. Why is there not a line item in the public accounts for that?8555-441-347 2021 Public Accounts of CanadaCoalPublic accountsMichaelSabiaMichaelSabia//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1155)[English]Yes, thank you very much. It's very much appreciated.Mr. Jones, I just want to start off by thanking you for recognizing that some ideologically driven decisions prior to the pandemic put western Canada into a precarious position and left a lot of these businesses in a vulnerable position when we entered the pandemic. The financial footing they had before was systemically erased. I have a question for you regarding access to community futures buildings. How many community futures offices are there under your watch? Given that you were WD before and that now you have the two organizations that you're responsible for, I'm just wondering how many offices you have under you.Community Futures ProgramRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesJeanYipScarborough—AgincourtDylanJones//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Yes. How many community futures offices are there?DylanJonesDylanJones//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Throughout the last couple of years, how many of those offices were closed to somebody coming in person to apply for these programs?HichamAitelmaalemHichamAitelmaalem//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Were any of these offices closed, so that the public was unable to come in person to apply for these programs? I'm curious because we had the issue at Service Canada, where all the offices were shut down and our constituency offices basically did all the work for Service Canada.I'm just wondering about community futures and all these organizations. Seeing as we have such a large number of applicants in western Canada, on the accessibility side of it, were there any issues with offices being shut down and people being unable to get help applying for programs?Closure of government operations and facilitiesRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesHichamAitelmaalemDylanJones//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]I'm curious, generally speaking, because of the area that I serve and our broadband access. I'm sure that all across the country people would say that broadband access is a problem. It's a barrier at times to applying for specific programs, because sometimes the file size is so large that it takes forever to download and upload, and there are issues generally with trying to apply. That's why I was curious if there were any issues.Ms. Hogan, did you find any issues, when you were auditing, with access to offices or with resources being unavailable?Closure of government operations and facilitiesRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesDylanJonesKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Thank you very much.I want to expand on a point that my colleague Eric Duncan was making with respect to paragraph 14.50. This is for the Auditor General.What was the total dollar amount of ineligible expenses that were approved?Application processRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English]Because those dollars were ineligible expenses, are they being recouped? Will the taxpayer get that money back?Regional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReimbursementReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesKarenHoganJeanYipScarborough—Agincourt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Thank you once again—JeanYipScarborough—AgincourtSébastienLemireAbitibi—Témiscamingue//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Thank you.I'll start with the Auditor General. The report says, “Members of Parliament and the public should have access to transparent, clear, and useful information on the results achieved by federal departments and agencies.” The data collection process throughout the program went back to ISED. For that reason, I find it interesting that they're not here today, so that we can ask them. Do you think it would be valuable to gather information from ISED that would be beneficial to this study?Department of IndustryInformation collectionRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesJeanYipScarborough—AgincourtKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Right, but they have all this data and information. Do you think it would be valuable to this committee if ISED were actually to come here and take questions from the committee?Department of IndustryInformation collectionRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Right on.I guess that would include the Privy Council Office as well, because they're quoted in 14.57 as having received information and data too. Do you think it would be beneficial to have the Privy Council come?Regional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Good answer.Elaborating on the point made by Mr. Lawrence to the different RDAs here, what were the specific criteria—I know Mr. Padfield alluded to it a little—you guys looked at when you were inviting specific non-profits to apply versus others who were not reached out to?Application processAssociations, institutions and organizationsRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesKarenHoganDylanJones//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]I appreciate that. That definitely helps.Lastly, we're talking about the number of people who applied to this program, particularly in western Canada. This was kind of a last resort program, but there were so many applicants. I'm just wondering, because there were so many applicants.... Was it also a contributing factor that they just didn't qualify for other programs, or maybe the other programs weren't targeted specifically for organizations in western Canada? Do you think there was a discrepancy between the east and the west on which programs worked and which ones didn't?Application processRegional developmentRegional Relief and Recovery FundReport 14, Regional Relief and Recovery FundSmall and medium-sized enterprisesDylanJonesJeanYipScarborough—Agincourt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1205)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm going to start with the Public Health Agency of Canada. I am wondering, can you give me a really quick definition of what you use to determine whether somebody is from a rural area?COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaRural communitiesTravel restrictionsJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestHarpreet S.Kochhar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English] That's great.Does your department have a uniform definition for rural?COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaRural communitiesTravel restrictionsHarpreet S.KochharBrigitteDiogo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1205)[English]Thank you.To the Auditor General, in this report I couldn't help but notice that, I think, not even once was any consideration given to people living in rural areas of Canada. I'm just wondering if you have anything to say to that, or if you want to elaborate on the lack of enforcement, or maybe just the issues of enforcement on rural Canadians.COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaRural communitiesTravel restrictionsBrigitteDiogoKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]It does, absolutely. I couldn't agree more with that statement. I'm just going to strengthen that by saying that in one of the largest rural ridings in Canada I had lots of ranchers calling my office and saying, “Hey, I just spoke to somebody from Public Health Canada, and they are telling me I can't leave my house to go look after my herd, to go look after my cattle.” That was in the middle of calving season. These people have jobs to do and they're out, literally living hundreds of miles away from any major centre. They're not going into town. They're literally going to look after their herd. It's their livelihood, but it's also, quite frankly, about our food security and looking after our supply chains. They were telling these people they couldn't leave their house.It was the same thing with our grain farmers. These people were told they couldn't leave their house, and yet their job by nature is isolating. They go sit in the tractor all day and then come back home. They're not at risk of spreading transmission, and yet there was no recognition of this. To public health, there seemed to be no flexibility. I even had a senior who had a pay-by-use phone. He ran out of minutes on about day three of his quarantine and lost contact because he couldn't call anybody for the next 11 days and couldn't leave his house to go buy more minutes for his cellphone. There seem to be all kinds of gaps like that. I'm just wondering what's being done to rectify those situations and to be willing to consider the fact that not everybody lives in downtown Toronto.COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaRural communitiesTravel restrictionsKarenHoganHarpreet S.Kochhar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]That sounds good. For the Auditor General, on page 24 at section 15.61, your first sentence says, “The agency did refer more travellers at high risk of not complying with quarantine orders to law enforcement for follow-up but did not know the outcome for 59% of these priority referrals.”I'm just curious. What were the factors that were used to determine what a “high risk of not complying” individual is?ComplianceCOVID-19Law enforcementPandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaTravel restrictionsJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]Dr. Kochhar, do you have a quick answer?KarenHoganHarpreet S.Kochhar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]That would be fantastic. If you could provide the criteria to this committee, I would greatly appreciate that, and that would allow me to move on to my next set of questions.For the Auditor General, I'm going up the dollar figures here, and $614 million was allocated for border measures and $342 million for testing orders. I had a constituent who was told that because there were no courier services to where they live, they were going to send a taxi out to where they are, out in the rural area, which would have been a four-hour, one-way taxi ride and an eight-hour round trip. Were those costs factored into the government's decision-making on how they were going to run these programs?COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaRural communitiesTravel restrictionsHarpreet S.KochharKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]In your auditing, though, you didn't find anything specific in the line items you looked at when you were looking at the costs? You didn't find anything specific on anything like that.COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaRural communitiesTravel restrictionsKarenHoganKarenHogan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1245)[English]Okay. I'll go to Dr. Kochhar.KarenHoganHarpreet S.Kochhar//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1250)[English] Okay, because there was an example—I think it was in the Winnipeg Free Press—of one such case. There was a 660-kilometre round trip and there was a taxi bill of over $1,000 simply to get the test in to be processed for this individual. We're talking about timelines and getting results for people in rural Canada. By the time they did their 10-day test, they still hadn't even gotten the results back from their first one because of the amount of time it takes to process these things. I think that's something that needs to be addressed going forward.I'm going to leave the rest of my time here for Mr. Lawrence. Thank you.COVID-19PandemicQuarantine of personsReport 15, Enforcement of Quarantine and COVID-19 Testing Orders - Public Health Agency of CanadaTravel restrictionsHarpreet S.KochharPhilipLawrenceNorthumberland—Peterborough South//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1140)[English]Thank you.I'm wondering if there's about a 30-second answer to the last statement that was made by my colleague from the NDP just to finish that point. Is there anything that you guys want to comment on about traditional medicines?Natural health productsReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestPamelaAung-Thin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English]Thank you.Go ahead, Dr. Lucas.PamelaAung-ThinStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English]Thank you for that.I guess this question is more for Health Canada. Over 70% of Canadians are regularly using natural health products. Why aren't the penalties higher on those manufacturers who fail to meet Health Canada's standards? Both you and the report have mentioned that you cannot force a recall of a product, and you are not notified when a new product enters the market. The maximum fine for violating the law is only $5,000. It just seems like it's not a large enough deterrent to stop the bad actors from violating the rules that have been imposed. What are your thoughts on that?C-17, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs ActNatural health productsReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentTherapeutic productsStephenLucasStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]You say that you will be asking for that. Are there any timelines for when that's actually going to happen? This report has identified many flaws, but one for sure is, how do you deter people from taking advantage of Canadians?You said you will, but when is that going to happen? Is there a timeline in place for when that's going to happen? What assurances do we have that this is actually going to take place?C-17, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs ActNatural health productsReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentTherapeutic productsStephenLucasStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]Okay. For lots of regulations, there's a mandatory review time frame. Is there one in place for Vanessa's Law, or is this something that is basically just left up to your department to do whenever it sees fit?C-17, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs ActNatural health productsReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentTherapeutic productsStephenLucasStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Commissioner, I'll get your response on this first, and then if Health Canada wants to respond, as well, you guys are free to do that.One thing I find really interesting is a bit of a theme throughout the report as follows. The end of paragraph 2.6 reads:However, the primary responsibility for the safety and efficacy of products and manufacturing sites rests with the industry.We start seeing other stats and information, like in paragraph 2.32, which reads:...88% of these products were advertised with misleading product information. Also, 56% of the products we examined were marketed with misleading label information...A lot of these products must have a Health Canada stamp of approval on them. Am I correct in saying that?To see that there's such a discrepancy between their advertised uses and what they actually accomplish despite having a Health Canada stamp of approval on them.... Are there any concerns from the department and from the commissioner on that?If the commissioner wants, he can go first.False advertisingNatural health productsPackaging and labellingReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentSafetyJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestJerry V.DeMarco//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English] Then, Health Canada, what are your thoughts on seeing that 88% of products advertised have misleading product information, yet had the Health Canada stamp on them? What do you think of that?False advertisingNatural health productsPackaging and labellingReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentSafetyJerry V.DeMarcoStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1200)[English]Okay. Thanks for that. To Health Canada as well, paragraph 2.23 of the report refers to trusting or working with inspections “performed by domestic and regulatory authorities from other countries when licensing these sites.” What assurances do Canadians have that the standards of these other countries are the same as Canada's? What work has been done to ensure that that level is there. The question for the commissioner is this: What needs to be done to ensure that those standards are met? Perhaps Health Canada wants to start with that one.Inspections and inspectorsManufacturing industryNatural health productsPermits and licencesReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentStephenLucasStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.My question is to Health Canada. How many people have you fined $5,000? Natural health productsPenaltiesReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestStephenLucas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1210)[English]Yes, we would definitely like that number, because the report points to it. You guys have acknowledged that changes are needed. We've had no assurances of when those changes are going to happen and we don't have any kind of sense of urgency on when this is going to happen.Again, when we're seeing things such as, literally, every single site had issues but it's only a $5,000 deterrent for having contaminants in your product, what is the level of the sense of urgency to actually get some real, strong deterrents and actual teeth that are going to prevent bad actors from taking advantage of Canadians, who quite frankly are having negative experiences? There are people who are taking products out that they're thinking are going to help them with cancer but in some cases aren't. What are you guys going to do and what is the level of urgency to make sure that we actually get real teeth to prevent these bad actors from taking advantage of vulnerable Canadians?C-17, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs ActNatural health productsReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentTherapeutic productsJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestPamelaAung-Thin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1215)[English] Really quickly to the commissioner, from your findings, is $5,000 enough of a fine or should it be higher?Natural health productsPenaltiesReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentLinseyHollettJerry V.DeMarco//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1240)[English]Thank you.I want to pick up on a theme I was working on earlier with regard to standardized regulations, because paragraph 2.23 references:Health Canada relied on inspections, such as drug inspections, performed by domestic and regulatory authorities from other countries when licensing these sites. However, we found that the department did not have assurance that 10 of these 13 sites followed good manufacturing practices because the department did not have evidence that these inspections included the natural health product lines.Going along with the theme of trying to make sure we have equal regulations and processes in place, Health Canada doesn't have a program to conduct routine on-site inspections for manufacturing sites, yet Australia and Europe do. Why is there a gap there, especially when we're relying on other countries? If we're trying to streamline and standardize these regulations, there appear to be some existing gaps. I wonder if there are some comments there.Inspections and inspectorsManufacturing industryNatural health productsRegulationReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestLinseyHollett//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1240)[English]I have one more question that I really want to get in, regarding confidence in the products. We've identified risks, and it's going to take time to address those risks, but it doesn't change the fact that Canadians are buying those products today.The report also shows in paragraph 2.39 that “Health Canada did not know where all licensed products were manufactured.” It goes on to say that fewer than 5% of all active product licence-holders told the department “which licensed facilities manufactured their products before selling them.”Again, there seem to be some issues. How do we make sure Canadians are confident in the products they're buying, when there are so many holes, gaps and issues, whether they be contaminated products, expired products or not even knowing where these products are manufactured or where they're coming from?Manufacturing industryNatural health productsPermits and licencesReport 2, Natural Health Products - Health Canada, of the 2021 reports by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentLinseyHollettPamelaAung-Thin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1140)[English]Thank you very much. I'm going to start with the Auditor General's office. There are many instances throughout the report where it references the allocation of scarce resources COVID‑19 interim response strategy, and it specifically references that they would provide 2% of bulk purchases to Indigenous Services Canada. Do you have any dollar amounts for what that 2% ended up costing, in terms of actual dollar value?COVID-19Government contractsHealth care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1140)[English]Right, but does that number exist? Do you have that number somewhere else, so you could table it with the committee to give us the total dollar figure?COVID-19Government contractsHealth care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaAndrewHayesAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]Is that something you think you could get and table with the committee? I think that would be a relevant thing to have.COVID-19Health care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaAndrewHayesAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]Thank you.In regard to that, we saw at the beginning of the pandemic that we sent a lot of PPE overseas. When we look at this 2% threshold and ISC in general, were they exempt from having their PPE sent to other parts of the world, or were we able to leave that strategic stockpile in the hands of ISC?COVID-19Health care systemIndigenous peoplesNational Emergency Strategic StockpilePandemicPersonal protective equipmentReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaAndrewHayesAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English]On page 18 of the report you said, “Because of the COVID‑19 pandemic, we did not visit Indigenous communities or organizations during our audit.”To clarify, for consideration of this report, do I understand correctly that this means you would normally visit these communities? Do you believe that some information may have been missed because there was no physical presence on the ground in these communities?COVID-19Health care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaAndrewHayesAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1145)[English] Thank you.In exhibit 11.2, I find it interesting to look at the breakdown per province. We see that Manitoba received almost 800,000 masks. Across the board, they had a much higher amount of PPE sent to them, as compared to, say, Saskatchewan or Ontario. When you look at the population that is served by Indigenous Services Canada and compare the population numbers to the amount of PPE sent, why did Manitoba receive a vastly larger amount of PPE than any other province?COVID-19Health care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicPersonal protective equipmentReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaAndrewHayesAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Right on. That's good.I have a follow-up question for the deputy minister. It's in regard to exhibit 11.2 and why Manitoba received exponentially more PPE than all the other provinces.COVID-19Health care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicPersonal protective equipmentReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]In paragraph 11.58, the AG notes that the department chartered dedicated air services to transport nearly 5,400 passengers from April 2020 to March 2021. Can the department share more on information on this, such as the airline used and the costs associated with this program?Air transportationCOVID-19Health care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaChristianeFoxChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]On that last point, regarding the contractor, was this a sole-source contract, or was this something you put out to tender for competition?Air transportationCOVID-19Government contractsHealth care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaChristianeFoxChristianeFox//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]If you could include, Ms. Buckland, whether it was a sole-source or open-source contract?Air transportationCOVID-19Government contractsHealth care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaChristianeFoxRobinBuckland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1230)[English]It's very important to make sure that, at the end of the day, we got the right bang for the buck for taxpayers while still providing a high-quality service that was clearly needed. Most Canadians would agree with the fact that the service provided was needed, but at the end of the day, when we say sole-source contracts, it sometimes gets people a bit excited for certain reasons.Air transportationCOVID-19Government contractsHealth care systemIndigenous peoplesPandemicReport 11, Health Resources for Indigenous Communities - Indigenous Services CanadaRobinBucklandJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick Southwest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1100)[English]Do you need a motion to cease nominations?Committee businessElection of the Chair and Vice-ChairsAngelaCrandallAngelaCrandall//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1130)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thank you to all of the witnesses for being here today. I'm going to start with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. We're facing challenges to our food system and food security for people in this country. Right now, according to the Auditor General, we don't have a plan to respond to a crisis that would affect the entire food system. Your department's response so far is that you want to develop an action plan and have a stakeholder approach by fall of 2022. Stakeholder engagements are estimated to be finished in September to outline a path forward.I want to make sure that we're not in the middle of planning another plan to make a plan for half a year from now. We're talking about food and the ability for Canadians to eat. Are we doing anything more than simply making a plan to have a plan?Emergency preparednessFood resourcesReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestChrisForbes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1135)[English]In the Auditor General's report, it mentions that governments back in 2009 identified food as critical infrastructure. If it was identified that far back, I'm wondering why there weren't some actionable items when an actual emergency struck. Why are we where we are right now?Emergency preparednessFood resourcesReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenChrisForbesChrisForbes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1135)[English]Yes.On a question about PPE, we've seen some other programs where PPE was an eligible expense, for example, the seafood processing program, but not in the emergency processing fund, which was more geared towards food production. I'm going to reference Cargill, when they had the outbreak in April 2020.Why did only departments in one region of the country have access to PPE as an eligible expense? Out west, we had a scenario where there were outbreaks, yet they still couldn't have access to PPE being an eligible expense when it was clearly one of the main items that was sorely in need to prevent any delays to food production.Food resourcesPersonal protective equipmentReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenChrisForbesChrisForbes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1135)[English]I'm still hung up on the fact that we had major plant closures. There was a whole trickle-down effect. For our ranchers, our producers, the guys who are raising cattle to sell to the processors, it had a direct impact on them. The fact that these facilities were shut down for something as simple as not having access to PPE.... That was one of many reasons that they were shut down, but that was a big part of it. With the outbreak that happened, there was a massive impact on the entire industry. I think the lack of a comprehensive strategy and the fact that they weren't allowed to have that as an eligible expense really made it a problem here. Why was that not targeted by the department?Food resourcesPersonal protective equipmentReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenChrisForbesChrisForbes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Thank you very much.I want to turn my lines of questioning here towards the Auditor General's office. There was an emergency processing fund set up, and I'm reading from the chart in exhibit 12.2 that “New funding for food processors in the agriculture and agri-food sector to help them maintain and increase domestic food production and processing” comes to the tune of $77.5 million.In your audit, could you point to how much extra processing capacity was added to the industry with that $77.5 million?Emergency Processing FundFood and beverage manufacturing industryFood resourcesPerformance managementReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenJohnWilliamsonNew Brunswick SouthwestAndrewHayes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Thank you.To the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food, do you have an answer to that? How much capacity was added with the $77.5 million?Emergency Processing FundFood and beverage manufacturing industryFood resourcesReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenKimberleyLeachChrisForbes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1225)[English]Do you have a report that you could table? If you have something that you can table with the committee, that would be greatly appreciated.Mr. Chris Forbes: I'll find—Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Madam Clerk, can we follow up with him to get that report? That would be hugely beneficial to the committee. When I talk to ranchers and farmers, production capacity is one of the biggest issues they bring up, and the lack thereof or the fact that we only have two facilities in Alberta and one in Ontario to process. There are smaller provincial abattoirs, but at the end of the day, when we look at the federal side of things, we see that we only have the two main locations out west. Throughout the pandemic, we saw staffing shortages, all kinds of issues trying to maintain, let alone increase, production capacity. When I see that we spend $77.5 million to maintain and increase capacity, and I'm hearing from the department that we don't have an answer as to if we're able to do either.... Were we able to maintain anything, even? Again, all I saw in the news was that there were shortages all across the board. Emergency Processing FundFood and beverage manufacturing industryFood resourcesReport 12, Protecting Canada's Food SystenChrisForbesChrisForbes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1620)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I'm going to start by asking you how many countries you are collecting data from.Information collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeKamranKhan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Yes, I guess just generally speaking, because as you talked about, it's not just a Canada-based package. You're getting datasets from across the world. How many countries is it, approximately?Information collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaKamranKhanKamranKhan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English] Okay. That's obviously an enormous amount of data that requires a lot of server capacity.Where are all the servers that host all that data? Are they all here in Canada, or where are those servers located?Data banks and databasesElectronic resourcesInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaKamranKhanKamranKhan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]The reason I'm wondering is that the context of this study is de-identified data. We've seen other reports that between 90% and 95% of individuals who had their data de-identified can be re-identified.The reason I'm asking is that quite often data is only as secure as the person who's trying to find it. When there are multiple avenues, that's what I'm trying to get at here.I guess this would be a broad, industry-based question, and we see breaches of security within the government from time to time. We see it in the private sector from time to time, and quite often, actually. Industry-wide, what risks are there to this data being taken by a nefarious character?e-SecurityInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaAlexDemarshAlexDemarsh//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]I've one more question here for you guys.The federal response plan in April 2021, under the heading of surveillance, states that: COVID-19 surveillance is a pan-Canadian initiative...numerous data [systems] including existing surveillance systems with novel, non-traditional data sources.It sounds like a lot of things going on. It's a very vague, very broad definition for surveillance. Is there any issue that a definition like that might be too all-encompassing, too broad, and not narrowly focused enough for the framework of what you guys are doing, which is providing specifically for infectious disease?Information collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaTerminologyAlexDemarshAlexDemarsh//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Thank you very much.You made an interesting comment in regard to the fact that consent is.... I'm trying to remember the exact words you used. It was that in regard to getting de-identified data, consent was either not required or was kind of an inconvenience, more or less, to getting that data. Could you comment a little more on that? Why is getting consent such a problem when using de-identified data?CellphonesConsentIdentityInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy of personal recordsPublic Health Agency of CanadaPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgePamelaSnively//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English] I get hung up on the fact, though, that the data was personal to start with. You said over and over again that it's okay because you de-identify it and consent doesn't matter at that point, but you still had to get that personal data in the first place.We've heard about the social good of programs like this, but what about the ethical good of society and of your subscribers, when you're clearly taking personal data without clear consent, even though it's being de-identified? You said yourself that you need consent for personal data, but you didn't pursue it. Why?CellphonesConsentIdentityInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy of personal recordsPublic Health Agency of CanadaPamelaSnivelyPamelaSnively//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Did you guys ever consider sending a text message to all your subscribers, informing them of the program and what its intended purpose was? I know you've alluded to posting on your website, or different things like that, where the average person isn't going to go looking for it. Did you guys ever consider using a text message to inform everybody that their data could potentially be used by the government to inform policy decisions that would directly impact them?AccountabilityCellphonesInformation collectionNews releasesPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPamelaSnivelyPamelaSnively//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]As a clarifying statement here, or maybe a reassuring statement here on behalf of Canadians, from the company side, under this program, at what point will the data that the federal government is using be returned to you, or is there an assurance from the government that it will be destroyed and not held longer than is necessary?CellphonesElectronic data protectionInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPamelaSnivelyPamelaSnively//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1705)[English]Will you guys be destroying the data, then, that you have collected, or do you guys have a mechanism for your subscribers to reach out to you asking for the deletion or the release of that data that has been collected to the individual directly?CellphonesElectronic data protectionIdentityInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPamelaSnivelyPatKellyCalgary Rocky Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1625)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair.I'm going to start with Mr. McMillan. How important is energy security to a country like Ukraine?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementNatural gasTrade agreementsUkraineJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekTimMcMillan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Can Canada help? Do we have resources or things that could help out Ukraine?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementNatural gasTrade agreementsUkraineTimMcMillanTimMcMillan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]What was the biggest hurdle preventing them from reaching final approval?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementNatural gasTrade agreementsUkraineTimMcMillanTimMcMillan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]Thank you.Mr. Potoczny, where are we at right now for trading agricultural products to Ukraine under the current agreement?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementFarming and farmersTrade agreementsUkraineTimMcMillanZenonPotoczny//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]Thank you for that.Building off that framework, I asked this question to departmental officials and I'd like to get your perspective: What about the certification process for manufacturers? That's one of the requests from manufacturers in my riding that are exporting agricultural equipment to Ukraine. They're looking for some certainty on the certification required. Do you have any comments on that?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementFarming and farmersTrade agreementsUkraineZenonPotocznyZenonPotoczny//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]Thank you very much.Mr. Waschuk, I think there is one question we haven't really touched on yet. What's going to be the impact if there are any economic or trade sanctions imposed on Russia? What's going to happen to trade in the region? Are there risks? Are there benefits? What would that mean for this particular trade arrangement?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementEconomic sanctionsInternational conflict and international conflict resolutionRussiaTrade agreementsUkraineJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekRomanWaschuk//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1725)[English]Thank you.Do any of the other witnesses want to just comment quickly on the potential for upgrading and continuing to get more up-to-date farm equipment, but also farming practices to help tap into the growing potential that Ukraine has? I think that would be an important topic to further elaborate on, if anybody wants to touch that one.Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementFarming and farmersTrade agreementsUkraineRomanWaschukRomanWaschuk//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1630)[English]Thank you very much.Could you update us right now as to where we are at for trading agricultural products to Ukraine under the current agreement?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementFarming and farmersTrade agreementsUkraineJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekJayAllen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1630)[English]Thank you.What about the manufacturing side? I've been talking to a few different groups in my riding, and there's some concern about certification between countries. Is there a chance to update or modernize this agreement so that we have certainty in the certification between Canada and Ukraine within the context of manufacturing?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementFarming and farmersTrade agreementsUkraineDeanFosterJayAllen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1635)[English] I'm asking specifically about agricultural manufacturing again. I do know that there are quite a few manufacturers in Saskatchewan that ship products over there. How much room for growth is there for that in Ukraine? I'm hearing reports that their equipment is 30, 35 or 40 years old over there and that there's a great market opportunity there to try to help out.Are there any proactive clauses or parts to the trade agreement whereby we can actually try to help boost and increase their use of more modern machinery and even, quite frankly, agricultural practices?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementFarming and farmersTrade agreementsUkraineJayAllenJayAllen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1635)[English]Thank you.Lastly, just in looking around the regions, what would be the ramifications if Canada were to, say, impose Magnitsky sanctions? What would that do to potential trade or the general atmosphere over there if we were to use Magnitsky sanctions?Canada-Ukraine Free Trade AgreementEconomic sanctionsInternational conflict and international conflict resolutionRussiaTrade agreementsUkraineJayAllenJayAllen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1230)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witness for his testimony here today.Quite often, when we have an emergency.... We can look back at what happened with 9/11 and the level of surveillance and security at that point in time. We're now looking at the measures that are going on throughout this COVID-19 pandemic. What are the risks here that, because of the extraordinary measures that we have gone through to collect all this data, the government is not going to relinquish some of the ways and means by which it is surveilling citizens? Are they going to let people revert back to normal? I guess this is kind of what we're looking for. Is there going to be a backing off in the amount of surveillance and the amount of data that's being collected here?CellphonesElectronic surveillanceInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeAlainDeneault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English]I feel like we're getting very close to a threshold here of infringing too far into people's lives, and the data people are generating, their own data, is being used against them. Is there an ethical concern about the use of this data? CellphonesEthics and ethical issuesInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaAlainDeneaultAlainDeneault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1235)[English] Maybe you could give that quickly, and then comment really quickly as well on consent. Are people able to very clearly give consent to their data being used or taken?CellphonesConsentInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaAlainDeneaultAlainDeneault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1620)[English] Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Thank you to our witnesses for coming.Ms. Cavoukian, I think it's fair to say that for a lot of people out there who are having their location data collected without their knowledge or consent there is a level of trust that has been damaged and, quite frankly, broken. How important is public trust when it comes to an issue like this?CellphonesConfidence in governmentInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeAnnCavoukian//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]I've seen some interesting commentary around the amount of surveillance that's gone on during the pandemic. When compared to what happened post-9/11, what's going on right now dwarfs what happened back then. I'm wondering if you have more comments on that.CellphonesElectronic surveillanceInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaAnnCavoukianAnnCavoukian//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Thank you for that statement. That's very important.I worked in the telecommunications industry for 10 years prior to being elected. It's my experience that people's data, whether.... Even as far as a smart home goes, your level of protection is only as good as the individual who's trying to access it. Earlier, you mentioned synthetic data, but what else needs to be done, above and beyond the anonymized data, to actually try to really protect people? I've seen other reports. They had a sample of 100,000, and they were able to reidentify about 92% of all users, so there are obviously some issues. What more needs to be done here?CellphonesInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy of personal recordsPublic Health Agency of CanadaAnnCavoukianAnnCavoukian//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Mr. French, I serve a very large rural riding, and I think there's been a lot of concern from residents' being harassed by the government. They already live out in a rural area, are basically isolating by default and have been harassed about that. When you look at the de-identified data, how much easier is it to reidentify data of people living in rural areas compared to somebody who lives in a massive urban centre?CellphonesInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy of personal recordsPublic Health Agency of CanadaPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeMartinFrench//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]In an article in the National Post, you mentioned some populations that could experience an intensification of tracking that could have harmful repercussions. I'm wondering if you could provide some context around that or a few comments there.CellphonesElectronic surveillanceInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaMartinFrenchMartinFrench//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1720)[English]That's helpful, so I appreciate that.I only have about 30 seconds left, so I have a quick question for Mr. Weinstock. I have a lot of constituents who are understandably angry and frustrated about basically having been spied on or surveilled and the data they're generating being used against them by the government. I'm wondering if there's a philosophical or an ethical argument there.CellphonesElectronic surveillanceInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaMartinFrenchDanielWeinstock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1640)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair.I'm going to start with the Canadian Steel Producers. I was just looking through a list of LNG projects that have been cancelled around the world. Of the 11 largest projects, eight were in Canada. I'm just curious to know, for your member companies, how big an impact that has had, seeing that many potential projects cancelled that would be looking to you as Canadian pipe.Canada-United States relationsInternational tradePipeline transportationJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekCatherineCobden//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English]I'm wondering if you could comment on how much more environmentally friendly Canadian steel is over our competitors' steel. I'd like to think specifically about Evraz steel, which is in Regina. Upwards of 90% of their steel is actually recycled. I'm wondering if you could comment further on how much more environmentally friendly our steel is in Canada.Canada-United States relationsInternational tradeSteel industryCatherineCobdenCatherineCobden//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1640)[English] Last of all, do you have any statistics that you could present to us, either right now or maybe in a submission later to the committee, about how much lower global emissions would be if we used more Canadian steel instead of importing steel?Canada-United States relationsInternational tradeSteel industryCatherineCobdenCatherineCobden//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]That's awesome. Yes, if you could submit those to the committee, I would greatly appreciate that. Thank you.I'm going to switch my focus over to Mr. Zaghib. I'm just wondering if you could share your thoughts on where Canada is at for developing critical minerals domestically. I ask because I've heard a lot from industry and others about excessive timelines for approval getting in the way, as well as some upcoming potential tariffs under CUSMA with regionally sourcing lithium for EV batteries. I'm just wondering if you have any comments on that.Canada-United States relationsCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementElectric vehiclesInternational tradeCatherineCobdenKarimZaghib//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]Thank you.KarimZaghibJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black Creek//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1620)[English]Thank you very much, Madame Chair. Thanks for joining us today, Minister.I want to open by asking you this. When the provincial government of Saskatchewan and also the Government of Quebec were looking to set up trade offices in the U.K. at Canada House, they were met with all kinds of resistance and ended up having to set up offices elsewhere. Why was that?Canada-United States relationsInternational tradeProvince of QuebecSaskatchewanUnited KingdomJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English] Then why exclude two provinces?Canada-United States relationsInternational tradeProvince of QuebecSaskatchewanUnited KingdomMaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]That's how it is.MaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Sure. Briefly, please.MaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Except Saskatchewan and Quebec.MaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1620)[English]Thank you.Last year, at a different committee, I asked you about the CUSMA deal. In particular, there's a part of the deal that allows for the different countries to source up to 75% of lithium regionally tariff free, with the main purpose specifically for developing an EV battery market. At that point in time, between yourself and the department officials, there seemed to be a lack of awareness about this provision. Has anything been done since then to address this, and do you think we'll be able to meet that window? That window is closing within a little over a year.BatteriesCanada-United States relationsElectric vehiclesInternational tradeMaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Thank you.What's being done by the government to at least attempt to hit this process? At the end of the day, if we're going to have to start paying tariffs on lithium when we have the full-on resources here, everything we need to have the industry here but have zero production at this point in time.... We're over a year into this deal and we knew this was there, but we're doing nothing about it. I just want to know, and I'm concerned, whether Canadians—or the government—are doing everything they can to try to develop this. Are you actively advocating internally for that?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsElectric vehiclesInternational tradeMaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]What about red tape reduction to try to help hit these targets?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsElectric vehiclesInternational tradeMaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillMaryNgHon.Markham—Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1625)[English]Lastly, I have to circle back to the country-of-origin labelling, which was brought up earlier, because that's something that's going to be hanging over our heads. It has been quite the process to defend against that in the past. I would like some reassurances and to know that this is something that is actively on your radar and your ministry is going to be doing everything you can to defend against that. If we take the same approach as we did with BSE and you miss the targets, we end up having to operate under those restrictions, as we did for a long time. What are you doing to make sure that we don't get hit with country-of-origin labelling once again in Canada?Canada-United States relationsCountry of originInternational tradeMaryNgHon.Markham—ThornhillJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black Creek//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Thank you again, Madam Chair.My first question will be for whoever wants to answer it. I'm looking for a quick update as far as where we are at with the P.E.I. potato issue.Canada-United States relationsInternational tradePotatoesPrince Edward IslandJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekArunAlexander//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Thank you for that.Was there any mention of any exact timelines? It's great to see they're trying to expedite it, which is good news, but is there any reference to a timeline, like by the end of March, beginning of March, anything like that?Canada-United States relationsInternational tradePotatoesPrince Edward IslandArunAlexanderArunAlexander//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]In regard to CUSMA, is there anything else Canadians need to be aware of when it comes to this deal? We have been able to find things like a reference to the three-year tariff-free window for sourcing 75% of lithium regionally. I asked a question about that earlier. There's always some playoff. There are lots of small things like that hidden in trade deals.Is there anything else that the committee or Canadians in general should be aware of?Canada-United States relationsCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementInternational tradeArunAlexanderArunAlexander//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]I have one more specific question for our grain farmers. Do you or anyone else have anything to add in regard to them?ArunAlexanderArunAlexander//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]CUSMA would be great, but if there's anything generally speaking, that would be fine, too.DougForsythDougForsyth//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]That's fine. I just thought I would ask, because I know there were a few pieces to CUSMA in regard to that. I thought I would ask a general question.Ms. Gregory, digging a little bit further into this issue with CUSMA and lithium.... I know that we were first alerted to this issue when I was a member of the industry committee.Where is industry at with trying to develop a lithium market here in Canada? Do you have anything for us on that?Canada-United States relationsCritical mineralsInternational tradeSustainable developmentDougForsythMaryGregory//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1715)[English]Thank you.MaryGregoryJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black Creek//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1155)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.Mr. Therrien, I think Canadians at large were quite alarmed and surprised to learn that, as I think one article I read said, 33 million users had their data accessed by PHAC. It begs the question, how many other departments out there are accessing people's personal information within the federal government?CellphonesData sharingInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Yes. I think the general concern, though, is that the government is taking people's personal data, but then it could potentially use it against them. Is that a concern? Are there any safeguards to prevent that from happening?CellphonesData sharingInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Yes. I think that's definitely problematic.My last question goes back to when you appeared in 2020 before the industry committee, which I was a member of at the time. You indicated that when properly designed, tracing applications could achieve both public health objectives and the protection of rights simultaneously. I remember that at the time you had some concerns about that, because the government hadn't actually consulted you at that point in time. How were those concerns addressed, and what has been done to prevent that?Application softwareCellphonesCOVID-19Information collectionPandemicPrivacy and data protectionPublic Health Agency of CanadaDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1155)[English]Yes.DanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1645)[English]Thank you very much, Chair. It's an honour to join this committee today.My questions are for Mr. Terrazzano.In Bill C-8, an act to implement certain provisions of the economic and fiscal update, there's a provision for the Income Tax Act to introduce a new refundable tax credit to return fuel charge proceeds to farming businesses in backstop jurisdictions. Have you had a chance to look at that? What are your thoughts on that system, and is it essential to have in place?C-8, An Act to implement certain provisions of the economic and fiscal update tabled in Parliament on December 14, 2021 and other measuresCarbon taxFarming and farmersPre-budget consultationsTax creditsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleFrancoTerrazzano//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1645)[English]If I'm not mistaken, that's supposed to only increase on April 1, and no, it's not an April Fool's joke.Do farmers get back more than they pay in carbon taxes in Canada?Carbon taxFarming and farmersPre-budget consultationsTax creditsFrancoTerrazzanoFrancoTerrazzano//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Unbelievable.One of your recommendations for the government is to end the gun ban and buyback program. Have you had a chance to do a fiscal analysis of that? What are you projecting that the buyback program is going to cost the taxpayer?Firearms Buyback ProgramGun controlPre-budget consultationsRestricted firearmsFrancoTerrazzanoFrancoTerrazzano//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]One other recommendation you have that is of particular interest to me, because I hear about it on a daily basis from my constituents, is to phase out equalization. Could you comment on that one further?Equalization paymentsPre-budget consultationsFrancoTerrazzanoFrancoTerrazzano//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1650)[English]Thank you very much.Chair, I only have about 15 seconds left, so I'll cede my time.FrancoTerrazzanoPeterFonsecaMississauga East—Cooksville//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1655)[English]Thank you very much.Mr. Kingston, I would like you to clarify a statement you made about supply chains already being in existence for electric vehicle batteries in Canada. I'm wondering if you could clarify that statement.BatteriesCanada-United States relationsDistribution and service industriesElectric vehiclesInternational tradeJudy A.SgroHon.Humber River—Black CreekBrianKingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Okay.I guess this question will be for you and maybe also for Mr. Vescio. In the CUSMA deal, there was a three-year provision that we could source lithium regionally tariff-free. We heard testimony at the natural resources committee last year that it will take closer to 10 years to get this industry going to the point where it's actually producing something. Are you concerned about that?BatteriesCanada-United States relationsDistribution and service industriesElectric vehiclesInternational tradeBrianKingstonBrianKingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English] Go ahead, Mr. Vescio.BrianKingstonGian PaoloVescio//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1655)[English]Yes. Unfortunately, we're going to completely miss that three-year window to source tariff-free. What's the biggest regulatory burden that we face to get this battery supply chain going and up and running?Mr. Vescio or Mr. Kingston, either one of you could answer that one.BatteriesCanada-United States relationsDistribution and service industriesElectric vehiclesInternational tradeGian PaoloVescioBrianKingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Mr. Vescio, do you have anything you want to add to that or is there anybody else on the panel who wants to add to that?BrianKingstonGian PaoloVescio//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer: (1700)[English]Thank you very much.Mr. Kingston, there's one other issue that I see here. Yes, we're aiming for 100% by 2035; that's what the government has stated as a possibility, but one thing I find interesting is that there's been a study in California showing that 20% of EV drivers ultimately end up switching back to gas. Do you think we could see that happening in Canada, particularly with the climate that we live in?Canada-United States relationsCharging stationsInternational tradeGian PaoloVescioBrianKingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/105559JeremyPatzerJeremy-PatzerCypress Hills—GrasslandsConservative CaucusSaskatchewan//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/PatzerJeremy_CPC.jpgInterventionMr. Jeremy Patzer (Cypress Hills—Grasslands, CPC): (1640)[English]I'm Jeremy Patzer from Cypress Hills-Grasslands, the southwest corner of Saskatchewan, a large agriculture and energy riding. I'm looking forward to it. This will be a good one. Committee businessOrganization meetingRichardMartelChicoutimi—Le FjordSimon-PierreSavard-TremblaySaint-Hyacinthe—BagotINTERVENTIONParliament and SessionDiscussed TopicProcedural TermCommitteePerson SpeakingParticipation TypeSearchResults per pageOrder byTarget search languageSide by SideMaximum returned rowsPagePUBLICATION TYPE