Mr. Speaker, my question from November 8 was on the doublespeak on the government's oil and gas production cut. The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Transport, at that point in time, responded by telling me that “[the] energy sector can increase its production while decreasing its emissions.”

I actually agree with that part, and I point to the decrease in carbon emissions per barrel demonstrated by Canada's oil and gas industry over the past two decades, through investments in technology and efficiencies. Canada's oil sands have decreased their CO2 emissions by over 32% over the past two decades.

What does the governing party think success actually looks like in this respect? In the world, our democratic allies asked, and are still asking, for more Canadian oil and gas. The parliamentary secretary told me, at that point in time, that countries around the world are looking to Canada for less polluting energies. I agree again. That is because we are delivering.

The parliamentary secretary then drifted into Liberal sound-bite fantasyland. He said, “Under the do-nothing approach of the previous Conservative government, Canada's imports of foreign oil were two times higher. It failed to promote Canadian energy.”

Did the doubling of production that we have had in this country over the last two decades just turn on magically, overnight, when the Liberals were elected? That is just wrong. Did the reduction in emissions per barrel just happen recently? Again, the data directly contradicts that. He then offered me a briefing on climate change. I know the member's depth on energy and climate change, and I guess I am a little surprised that the Liberal government had him read that statement. I recall that he had a tough time keeping a straight face. A golfer would say about the member for Niagara Centre that he is known to “fluff a putt”, but he will read whatever nonsense is put in front of him.

To the point, every credible organization has clearly stated that the cap would cost Canada around one million barrels per day of production, which would immediately be met with less environmentally responsible production from around the world, and 150,000 jobs would be lost. Billions of dollars of GDP would be lost, and there would be a sinking Canadian dollar, with higher deficits and Canadian poverty.

For the environmental result, let me refer to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development's words on the government's results. Two months ago he said, “The recent decreases to projected 2030 emissions were not due to climate actions taken by governments but were instead because of revisions to the data or methods used in modelling.”

This is all make-believe. All these experts that the government has been paying hundreds of millions of dollars to have accomplished nothing at the end of the day. It is about shutting down or about making it more onerous to produce oil in Canada versus every other jurisdiction in the world. Every other jurisdiction is prospering, while Canada is under the boot of the Liberal government to try to produce the resources for the benefit of the whole world.

Our emissions are going down. Our production is going up. We need to make sure that we can do more to continue on that path to provide a better environmental result for the world and a better economic result for all Canadians. I ask this to the member across the way again.

How in the world can they say that this production cap has anything to do with emissions?

Greg McLean

$598,041.00