Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 11 of 11
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Madam Speaker, I would like to talk about the Conservatives' amendment to the throne speech. Among other things, the amendment states that there is a national crisis that requires the government to respect provincial jurisdiction.
Yesterday, we voted on a Bloc Québécois amendment calling on the government to respect the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces and increase health transfers by 35%.
Why did my colleague's party vote against the Bloc Québécois's amendment?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned the fossil fuel industry in his speech.
It was not the Bloc Québécois but rather the OECD who said the following regarding the climate crisis: “The longer governments wait, the greater the risks of an abrupt transition in which energy prices are higher and more volatile.”
I really wonder why the official opposition party sees only one form of energy, that which comes from fossil sources and will destroy the environment, our health, our youth and our planet. Why can they not see that there are other forms of energy that are renewable and do not cause all this damage?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, my colleague’s speech was very important, because he spoke about agriculture, and therefore food. Everyone agrees that this is a necessity. However, is my colleague really focusing on the right problem?
The current situation in British Columbia is causing food supply and access problems in certain parts of the province, including shortages of certain staples such as milk, eggs and poultry. The supply chain will be disrupted for some time to come.
Climate change is also causing droughts in some areas, forcing entire herds to be abandoned because they cannot be fed. Why is my colleague unable to make the connection between climate change and the problems facing the agricultural sector?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, when I was interrupted last night, I was talking about an April 2019 publication from the Public Health Agency of Canada that links climate change to health.
The government likes to say loud and clear that we must always listen to science. I would like to draw the attention of the House to another study published during COP26 by the very reputable journal The Lancet. The title of the article is “Young People's Voices on Climate Anxiety, Government Betrayal and Moral Injury: A Global Phenomenon”.
The title is certainly evocative, and this paper is the result of a survey of more than 15,000 young people aged 16 to 25 in 10 countries. I mention this study here because it goes to the heart of our responsibilities as elected officials. It directly addresses the links between the perceptions that people aged 16 to 25 have of states, the authority of governments, and their responsibilities to this generation on a single issue, namely, the climate crisis.
Let us look at a few numbers. Almost 60% of these young people say that they are very worried or extremely worried about the crisis; 83% believe that we failed to take care of the planet; and 65% feel that governments have abandoned the younger generation and are lying about their promises. Almost as many feel that they have been betrayed and that governments care nothing about their distress.
What we see is that the negative thoughts and concerns about the impacts of the climate crisis in many areas of their lives are directly related to their feelings of betrayal, inadequate responses and, even worse, government inaction.
Let us talk a bit about Environment Minister DeMarco’s report. Its clear and devastating content shows that urgent action is required and confirms the Bloc’s suspicions and what we have been saying for years.
To anyone who is tempted to place all the blame on the Harper years, I would point out that the Liberal government chose to wait four years before ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. In 2002, the Liberal government promised to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 6%, but did not establish a plan. In practice, nothing was done, and the rest, as we say, is history.
I am saying it now and I will repeat it throughout this Parliament: The Bloc Québécois will not allow the government to engage in double-talk, meaning paradoxical and contradictory policies that would undermine climate action.
I will not allow the Canadian federation to play diplomatic games by relying on the significant but insufficient progress that Quebec and many of the provinces have made by maintaining policies and public funds that have been helping destroy the planet for the past 30 years.
I will become a first-time grandmother in January. I will not look away and I will not give up the fight.
We at the Bloc Québécois are very determined. Whatever they are working on, my colleagues are all very concerned about the environment. Together, we will work for Quebec, for its youth and for its future.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.
I would simply like to say that health care is under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. They are the ones responsible for health care.
The federal government is responsible for health transfers and for the implementation of measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which causes lung, heart and kidney disease.
Not only is the government failing to act on its responsibilities, it is meddling in the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. The Liberals are endangering Canadians’ health and then telling us how to do our jobs.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Madam Speaker, I sincerely thank the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his speech.
As for effective or ineffective subsidies, they are playing semantics. All the subsidies are ineffective, because all subsidies to the oil and gas industry end up generating greenhouse gases and in turn cause health problems, as I have often said.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands for her question.
It seems to me that, during the election campaign, the Liberals promised a bill on the just transition. We will ensure that we take a close look at that. We will certainly not make any progress in the fight against climate change if we are unable to support workers. There is always doublespeak. There was not much in the throne speech, which I would say was insipid. Coming back to what my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie was saying earlier, subsidies are being handed out with fine names such as the emissions reduction fund. That is a Liberal government creation. Finally—
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, thank you for recognizing the second opposition.
I have to say that I do not even know where to begin with the speech by the leader of the official opposition, especially the part about the environment, because I have so many questions to ask him. First, I would say to him that ethical oil and clean oil do not exist.
The leader of the official opposition stated that Canada can play a leadership role. I will talk about the ways in which Canada is a leader.
Canada is a leader when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. Canada is the top emitter of all G7 countries. Canada is a leader when it comes to subsidies for oil energy and having the most polluting vehicles, for example. Canada makes the third largest per capita contribution to global warming.
When the leader of the official opposition speaks about improving the environmental record—we know that there is work to do—does this mean that he and his party believe we should go from oil to even more oil?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the fossil fuel industry plans to drill 1,363 new wells in 2022. Most of them will be for oil. However, Canada is fully supplied; there is no demand for more oil. Clearly, that oil must be intended for export, and a pipeline will be needed to reach global markets. However, the only new export pipeline project is Trans Mountain, which is owned by the government.
In the midst of a climate emergency, will the minister denounce the increase in oil production and confirm that his government will not promote it through its pipeline?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the government is defending the indefensible. I want to continue talking about Trans Mountain. The flooding in British Columbia unearthed entire sections of the pipeline and exposed them to debris. Trans Mountain is now at an increased risk of spills because of climate change. The project is doubly harmful. On the one hand, it is accelerating climate change and, on the other hand, climate change is increasing the risk of spills. It is a lose-lose situation for the environment.
How can the minister support an increase in dirty oil exports through his pipeline that is doubly harmful?
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the voters of Repentigny who have put their trust in me for a third time. I would also like to thank all of the volunteers who supported me and helped me achieve victory, which can never be taken for granted. I am thinking in particular of Christiane and Assia. I do not have enough time today to thank everyone by name.
Representing and defending the interests of my riding, Repentigny, is very important. It is just as important to be a voice in the House for all of Quebec when it comes to the environment, and more specifically to what the Government of Canada is not doing but has an obligation to do in order to ensure a future for my nation, for my people, of every generation.
Let us turn to the throne speech. After an election that nobody wanted, were we entitled to expect a content-rich throne speech, a speech that had substance and that provided clarity about the government's agenda? I think so.
I am not the only one who noticed that Governor General Simon's first throne speech unfortunately did not live up to any expectations. We heard a few statements such as: “The Government is taking real action to fight climate change.” Really. “Now, we must go further, faster.” All right. “This is the moment for bolder climate action.” We shall see.
The campaign promise to cap oil and gas sector emissions sounded really promising, but here is the problem: the government's behaviour on past commitments and the lack of transparency raised by Commissioner DeMarco suggest that there is something fishy going on. What is needed is a cap on oil and gas production and a phase-out plan if there is to be any hope of getting real results. Again, there is no such thing as clean, ethical oil and coal.
The throne speech contained only three lines on the electrification of transportation. It was the Bloc Québécois that proposed net-zero legislation to force auto manufacturers to make a varied fleet of electric vehicles available to Quebeckers and Canadians within a reasonable time frame.
Although the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development was unanimous in recommending the adoption of such a policy, the government dragged its feet before responding and eventually called an election.
What about the total lack of any reference to the banking and financial sector's responsibility for the climate crisis? My colleague from Mirabel spoke about this at length last week.
We are still waiting for the mandate letters to be sent to the various ministers, particularly the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. My colleagues and I are anxious so see that letter. Citizens and organizations continue to be concerned about the federal government's inaction on climate change. With a throne speech so lacking in content, that mandate letter would at least give us a true indication of the government's intentions on this issue, which, we must agree, is urgent.
The new cabinet was sworn in on October 26. Five weeks have passed, and the Prime Minister is still keeping us waiting. For a government that kept saying how much it wanted to get to work, I have my doubts about how hard it has been working so far.
What we are seeing right now in British Columbia and the Maritimes also happened in Quebec in 2018. Whether it be flooding, heat waves, forest fires or droughts, natural disasters are everywhere, and no region will be spared. Anyone who has doubts about the effects of the climate crisis should go and talk to the communities that are on high alert right now.
The combined impact of climate change and the pandemic is serious. The global health of populations is being affected. New pathologies are emerging. Some are worsening and others are taking on an unprecedented scale.
In November, researchers at the Université de Sherbrooke's faculty of medicine published the results of a study involving 10,000 people that was carried out over the past two years during the pandemic. I will provide a summary and I invite my colleagues to read the results in their entirety. The study shows that “the longer it takes governments to act on climate change, the greater the psychosocial impacts.”
I also invite the government to read one of its own publications from the Public Health Agency of Canada, a special issue devoted entirely to climate change and health. In the first few pages we read the following:
While the health sector is already grappling with climate change impacts on public health and healthcare needs, priorities, use, provision, and costs, health adaptation is generally under-represented in policies, planning, and programming.
It is important to mention that the impact that the climate crisis is having on the health of vulnerable populations—in particular seniors, people living in rural areas, farmers and indigenous peoples—as evidenced by infectious diseases, food security, water, morbidity, mortality and the entire spectrum of mental health, is now a threat to everyone.
Results: 1 - 11 of 11

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data