Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault

Mr. Speaker, Restigouche is in mourning following the sudden passing of Michel Soucy, mayor of the Campbellton Regional Community. We have lost a man who wore his love for his town and his region on his sleeve. Mr. Soucy devoted more than 20 years of his life to municipal politics, in addition to being involved with a wide range of organizations. He was a passionate, thoughtful man who was always smiling and had a knack for drawing people in. Mr. Soucy believed in the potential of our region and devoted all his energy to helping it prosper. The day before he passed away, I was with him at an event, where he spoke about how proud he was that our region would be hosting the next Acadian World Congress in 2029. I had tremendous respect for Mr. Soucy, and I will miss our conversations. His unexpected passing has left us all in shock, but his legacy will live on in Campbellton, Restigouche and our province at large. I offer my condolences to his wife Ginette, his children and his grandchildren. I am so grateful to my dear friend Michel for everything.

Madam Speaker, I heard something quite surprising from my colleague. He said that the government had implemented a measure to help with the cost of living because of pressure from the Conservatives. If we were to wait for the Conservatives before helping Canadians, there would not have been much help for the past 10 years. Yes, this time, they supported us in suspending the excise tax on gasoline. However, when it came time to vote for the Canada child benefit, to create a national school food program or to offer affordable child care, what did they do? They voted no every time. My colleague said that he is in favour of putting money back in Canadians' pockets. However, when we look at his voting record, it is quite the opposite. I have a question for him. Since when has he been in favour of implementing measures to help Canadians cope with the cost of living?

Madam Chair, my colleague is painting a rather alarmist picture. Looking at the bill, we see that the designation of regions of national interest will not be as broad as he says. When a new region of national interest is to be established, a study has to be conducted under the Impact Assessment Act. This study will be used to clearly delineate the geographic area and determine what types of projects can be pre-approved. There is a duty to consult with indigenous communities. There are environmental impact assessments. Once the region is identified, pre-approved projects can be rolled out. If new projects that could have an impact on the environment are proposed, they will have to go through an assessment process. I think the existing process shows that we can do two things at once: develop the economy and conitnue to conduct thorough assessments. I would like to ask my colleague whether he read the clause that clearly states that additional projects not addressed in the initial assessment must undergo environmental impact assessments.

Madam Speaker, our colleague delivered a rousing speech. It is always interesting to hear such speeches in the House, but there was a hint of exaggeration in some of his points. I would like to point out that Bill C-39 makes it very clear that we are able to move forward more quickly with projects of interest—projects that can contribute to the Canadian economy—while complying with rigorous environmental standards. The two can go hand in hand, and those standards must always be met. He mentioned the list of projects. I am thinking specifically of Churchill Falls, which is the largest investment in renewable energy in North American history. I am thinking of the offshore wind projects off the coast of Halifax, in Atlantic Canada. I would like to hear my colleague's views on the potential these projects have in terms of clean energy and on why it is important to move quickly to develop them.

Madam Speaker, earlier, I used the word “exaggerated”, which made some colleagues uncomfortable. Perhaps I could have used a more common expression, like “he went a bit too far” in his speech. In short, my question was about renewable energy. Bill C‑39 will help speed up the construction of major projects. I am thinking of hydroelectricity projects and wind energy projects. Does my colleague see a potential in Bill C‑39 for developing renewable energy projects, and why is it important to do so?