Gord Johns
Courtenay—Alberni, British Columbia · NDP · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, we recall that the United Nations special rapporteur warned that Canada's temporary foreign worker program can create conditions resembling modern-day slavery. Last month, the San Group, a company operating in Port Alberni, was fined $429,000 and banned for two years for serious violations involving migrant workers.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I highlighted earlier, a Port Alberni company was fined $429,000 for its violation in its treatment of migrant workers, and it was given a two-year ban. Clearly, two years is not enough. The company operates other companies, and the rumour is that it actually has temporary foreign workers working for them as well.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to bring us back to a part of the conversation in which my colleague talked about the government's removing regulations on dangerous pesticides. Just last week, the Prime Minister announced his food security strategy, and the Liberals are removing important regulations that protect Canadians regarding pesticides.”
“Temporary foreign workers are often hired without the labour market opinion having been done in the right way. Workers who are looking for work are not getting hired. We hear in my riding about abuses of workers by employers, but there is no follow-up. There is nothing. When workers are in trouble, they are not supported.”
“I would like to hear from my colleague about whether, when food security and food sovereignty matter more than ever, my colleague sees the importance of the government's pausing its changes on these regulations, pausing these cuts and actually working with farmers to protect Canada's public agricultural research system?”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all my colleagues for allowing that to happen. Today is Brain Injury Awareness Day. It is an honour to table this petition on behalf of the families impacted by 165,000 new cases annually of brain injury in our country.”
The complete record
Every one of 557 lines we hold for Gord Johns, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 12.
“At a time when families and communities are grieving profound loss, Canadians expect leadership from the federal government grounded in evidence, compassion and public health. We have to strengthen the full continuum of care, not weaken it. Lives depend on it.”
“Mr. Speaker, public health experts across Canada are clear that supervised consumption sites save lives and connect people to treatment, recovery and support, and yet, in Ontario, the Conservative government is cutting supervised consumption sites. In Alberta, the Conservative government is closing Calgary's only such service, despite the fact that thousands of overdoses have been reversed there without a single recorded death. Frontline workers, physicians and public health researchers warn that shutting these services would not end substance use. Instead, they warn it would increase overdose deaths, push drug use further into public spaces and place greater strain on already overburdened emergency services, hospitals and law enforcement.”
“This is an opportune moment, when it comes to a trade agreement, to address irritants like this that are impacting the lives of British citizens who are living here in Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, like I said earlier, U.K. pensioners living in the United States, Israel, Turkey, the Philippines and the European Union are actually not penalized like this. Their pensions are not frozen. They are indexed, just like our pensions are for Canadians who are retiring abroad. However, for some reason, Canada has not been able to get an agreement with the U.K. The Prime Minister supposedly has this great relationship with the U.K. He should be able to negotiate this unfairness and this unjust policy by the U.K. government. Like I said earlier, a third of Canadian women over the age of 65 are living in poverty. This is absolutely a critical step to addressing that and this injustice. I hope that the government will take it seriously.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague from the Bloc raises a really important point. It is something I hopefully addressed, for the most part, in my speech, but he is absolutely right. This exposes Canada when it comes to the environment and when it comes to sovereignty here at home. We were able to get those ISDS, or investor-state dispute settlement, provisions removed from CUSMA. It should be something we could also negotiate in this agreement. I do not understand why the government is not putting that in as part of this agreement. I am glad to see the Bloc and the New Democrats advocating for this, so that this is dealt with and there is a responsible way forward when it comes to Bill C-13 .”
“Mr. Speaker, as I outlined at the beginning, we of course support trade, and we put conditions on how we support trade. It cannot be a blank cheque from the government. We also believe in reciprocity. We outlined, regarding the pork producers and the beef producers, that it is not reciprocal. These countries are getting access to our market, but we are not getting the same access to their markets. That is unfair. That actually has to be addressed when we negotiate. Of course, there are issues outside of this that we need to have at the table, like the British pension issue that I talked about. These issues all need to be part of the conversation, but we need to make sure it is fair.”
“This means providing the economic analysis needed for informed decision-making. It means ensuring Canadian producers receive meaningful access to international markets. It means protecting democratic policy-making by addressing problematic investor-state dispute resolution settlement provisions, and it means standing up for fairness for the tens of thousands of seniors in Canada affected by the U.K.'s frozen pension policy. Trade agreements should reflect more than economic opportunity. They should reflect fairness, reciprocity and respect for the people whose lives are shaped by these policies.”
“That raises an important question: If Canada is strengthening trade relations with the United Kingdom and deepening our economic partnership through agreements like this one, why is this long-standing injustice not being addressed as part of those negotiations? Trade negotiations are moments of leverage. They provide opportunities to resolve long-standing disputes and secure fair outcomes exactly like this one, yet once again the government appears to have failed to use that leverage. (1720) Bill C-13 represents an important step in Canada's trade relationship with the United Kingdom. Trade diversification matters. Building stronger partnerships with trusted allies matters. Strengthening the global trading system matters, but Parliament must ensure these agreements are fair, transparent and in the public interest.”
“We know that a third of women who are over the age of 65 in this country are living in poverty. People like Anne who spent decades contributing to the U.K. pension system, believing their retirement income would follow them wherever they chose to live, which it should have, have instead discovered too late that their pension would never increase. Because these pensions remain frozen, many seniors eventually rely on Canadian income support programs, including the guaranteed income supplement. In effect, Canadian taxpayers end up helping to fill the gap created by the U.K. government's policy. Estimates suggest this situation costs Canada hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Successive Canadian governments have raised this issue with the United Kingdom repeatedly, and each time the U.K. has declined.”
“Whether a Canadian retiree lives in Vancouver, in London, or in Sydney, Australia, their CPP benefits continue to increase with inflation. The U.K.'s policy stands in stark contrast to that. The consequences are very real for many seniors. As inflation rises and living costs increase, the purchasing power of frozen pensions declines year after year. Some seniors are struggling to afford basic necessities such as food, heating and medication. I think about Anne Puckridge, a 100-year-old veteran, who is receiving literally less than half of her pension because she chose to retire in Canada. While pensioners in the U.K. receive 176 pounds a week, the freeze means she is getting only 72 pounds a week. Like Anne, many were unaware of this policy before they moved to Canada.”
“At the outset, I want to thank Ian Andexser from Nanaimo, the chair of the Canadian Alliance of British Pensioners, for his leadership on this issue, as well as all those who are members of that organization. More than 100,000 British pensioners live in Canada and receive a state pension from the United Kingdom. Those pensions are frozen at the rate the pensioners first received when they retired or when they moved abroad. For over 70 years, unlike British pensioners living in the United States, Israel, Turkey, the Philippines, the European Union or several other countries, British pensioners here in Canada do not receive annual cost of living increases. This is unfair. Canada itself does not treat pensioners this way when they move overseas.”
“A coalition of civil society organizations, labour unions and academics from both Canada and the United Kingdom has called on the government to remove ISDS protections from this agreement. We are hoping that the government will act. If Canada has already recognized these risks in other agreements, then it is reasonable to expect the government to address them here as well. We have heard a lot today that there is another issue connected to Canada's relationship with the United Kingdom that deserves attention in this debate. It is a decades-long issue of fairness that affects tens of thousands of seniors living here in Canada. I am referring to the problem of frozen British pensions.”
“These experiences raise serious questions about the impact of ISDS provisions on the government's ability to regulate in the public interest. That is one of the reasons Canada removed the ISDS from the renegotiated Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, CUSMA. In the case of Bill C-13 , the government has not secured a side letter with the United Kingdom to exclude ISDS provisions between our two countries. This is particularly puzzling because the United Kingdom has already signed such side letters with Australia and New Zealand in their agreements. Canada could have negotiated the same arrangement, and we hope it will. Instead, these provisions remain in place.”
“They produce high-quality products that are competitive in markets around the globe, and they deserve fair and reciprocal access to markets, especially when Canada is opening its own market to imports. Without meaningful access to the U.K. market, the benefits of this agreement will remain limited for many Canadian producers. The third concern relates to investor-state dispute settlement provisions, commonly known as ISDS. These provisions allow foreign investors to challenge government policies through international arbitration if they believe those policies harm their investments. Under NAFTA, Canada faced numerous ISDS claims from foreign investors. More than 60% of the cases filed against Canada under NAFTA were linked to environmental or natural resource measures. That is deeply concerning.”
“In fact, the numbers tell a very clear story: There were no Canadian beef exports to the United Kingdom in 2024 and none in 2025. At the same time, imports of U.K. beef into Canada have increased significantly. They rose from $16.6 million in 2023 to $42.5 million in 2024, representing an increase of more than 150% in a single year. This is not the outcome Canadian producers were promised when the negotiations began. Organizations representing Canada's agricultural sector, including the Canadian Cattle Association, the Canadian Pork Council and the Canadian Meat Council, have all raised serious concerns about the lack of meaningful market access. They need to be consulted. (1715) Canadian farmers and ranchers operate under some of the highest food safety standards in the world.”
“This undermines accountability and weakens the ability of the House to properly scrutinize the agreement before us. The second concern we have relates to the ongoing barriers faced by Canadian agricultural producers in accessing the United Kingdom market. For years, and we heard this in the House today repeatedly, Canadian beef and pork producers have raised concerns about the United Kingdom's sanitary and phytosanitary regulations. These rules relate to food safety and to animal and plant health, but in practice, they function as non-tariff barriers that prevent Canadian products from entering the U.K. market. Despite years of discussions, consultations and negotiations, these barriers remain largely unchanged. This needs to be fixed. The result is a trading relationship that is far from reciprocal.”
“Under the Government of Canada's policy on tabling treaties in Parliament, when the government introduces implementing legislation for a new free trade agreement, it is required to table an economic impact assessment outlining the projected costs and benefits of the agreement. This policy exists for a simple reason, which is that members of Parliament cannot make informed decisions about trade agreements without understanding their economic implications. The requirement was introduced after repeated calls for greater transparency in trade negotiations. In fact, in 2020, the government committed to strengthening parliamentary oversight of trade agreements by ensuring that economic impact assessments would accompany implementing legislation. However, in the case of Bill C-13 , no economic impact assessment has been tabled.”
“Expanding trade opportunities between Canada and the United Kingdom has the potential to support Canadian exporters, encourage investment and reinforce the global rules-based trading system at a time when that system is facing increasing pressure. It is for those reasons that there is value in strengthening our economic partnership with the United Kingdom. However, supporting trade diversification does not mean giving the government a blank cheque. Parliament has a responsibility to ensure that trade agreements serve Canadians fairly, protect our public interests and deliver real benefits for workers, farmers and communities across this country. On that front, Bill C-13 raises several important concerns that must be addressed. The first concern is transparency.”
“Over the past several years, we have been reminded about how fragile global supply chains can be and how risky it can be for Canada to rely too heavily on a single trading partner. We acknowledge, as New Democrats, that diversifying our trade relationships matters, that strengthening economic co-operation with democratic allies matters, and that building resilient, rules-based trading systems is in Canada's long-term interest. The United Kingdom is an important partner in that effort. It is a G7 country, one of the world's largest economies and a nation with which Canada shares deep historical ties, cultural connections and long-standing diplomatic relationships.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-13 , legislation that would implement the protocol on the accession of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. At its core, the bill would update Canadian legislation so the United Kingdom can formally join the CPTPP trade agreement so Canada can meet its obligations under that accession protocol. I will begin by acknowledging the broader context in which this legislation is being debated. Canada's economy is deeply tied to international trade, as members are well aware. Millions of jobs in this country depend on exports and on our ability to access global markets.”
“Mr. Speaker, we would be hard-pressed to find another member of Parliament that advocates more for the livestock and agriculture industry than that member. I wanted to state that here. Agriculture is not a partisan issue, and this member has been a champion of that. I want to say how important the conversation around the indexing of British pensions here in Canada is when we have any discussion on trade.”
“Mr. Speaker, because the Liberal fisheries minister has failed to explain the Pacific salmon allocation policy review, misinformation is spreading across the west coast. Recreational fishing is essential to many Vancouver Island communities, which are uncertain about their future, and that confusion is fuelling division and racism. This review was directed by the courts to update an outdated policy with conservation first, recognition of constitutionally protected indigenous fishing rights and fairness for everyone on the water. Explaining what this review actually means is the minister's job. When will she show leadership and set the record straight?”
“We are calling for the government to actually act, follow up on its own transportation board recommendations, listen to the recommendations and introduce a coordinated response plan that includes coastal communities, with an ecosystem service fee so industry actually pays for it and cleans up our coast when there is a spill.”
“Mr. Speaker, we can ask coastal communities how the Liberals' regimes are playing out. If a spill were to happen today, nothing has changed. It would be municipalities, conservation groups and first nations caught holding the bag. Promises and statements like that do not protect coastal communities. The Transportation Safety Board said that Canada is not properly prepared for marine emergencies, including marine debris spills. The owners of the ZIM Kingston are only on the hook for six years under the current regime the member talked about. A hundred shipping containers landing on the bottom of the ocean are going to take a lot longer than six years to surface.”
“More traffic, alongside increasingly dangerous navigating conditions due to climate change, mean that spills will only become more common and more devastating without a real plan. Let us not ask coastal communities to wait for the next disaster. I ask the House to please pass my bill to establish a national strategy on shipping container spills, build out rapid response capacity with an ecosystem service fee, and take proactive steps to protect our coasts.”
“With new equipment, training and capacity, these crews could actually step in and also respond to marine cargo spills as well, giving much-needed support to existing cleanup efforts. A small ecosystem service fee could be applied to each container coming to port, which could help fund critical response capacity while keeping the financial onus on transnational shipping corporations that are doing business, not on everyday Canadians. A polluter pays model, as with oil spills, could apply here. Again I will remind the government that the time to act is now. We learned on Monday that cargo volumes at the Port of Vancouver rose to a record high of 170 million tonnes in 2025.”
“That is also why the Transportation Safety Board reported in 2024 that Canada is not properly prepared for marine emergencies, including marine debris spills, and advised that a well-resourced response plan will protect marine ecosystems and save lives. That is exactly why I am here. It has been over a year since that report came out and four years since the committee report, and there has been nothing from the government. Transport Canada committed to act on these recommendations, yet in all that time, there has been no concrete action, no improved liability framework and no standing response plan. It has been pure inaction, plain and simple. However, there is a clear path forward here. Canada has standing oil spill response teams at the dock, ready to move. I want to thank them for their deeply valuable work.”
“If not for the quick response of the Heiltsuk nation, it might have caused a devastating marine spill with reverberating effects on the environment and nearby communities. Each time, it was not the federal government taking the first response and leading the cleanup. It was municipalities, volunteers and, again, often first nations and indigenous communities. While the work they do is incredible, they can only respond rather than act to prevent the worst effects of marine debris spills, straining limited resources in this process. That is why, in 2022, the fisheries and oceans committee called for the government to step up with regulations against expanded polystyrene foam in packaging, a stronger polluter pays liability model and a coordinated cleanup plan involving all stakeholders, especially first nations.”
“They have been raising the alarm for years, but the government still has not addressed the gaps. It is time the Liberal government listened and actually took action. In 2016, the Hanjin Seattle lost 35 shipping containers just off the coast of Tofino, spreading millions of pieces of damaging styrofoam and plastic across the beaches. In 2021, even worse, the ZIM Kingston lost 109 shipping containers in a spill just south of Ucluelet, in the Strait of Juan de Fuca off Victoria, dumping toxic chemicals, toys, household appliances and other plastic items off our coast. Those are going to appear and resurface for the next 100 years and beyond. Last November, near Bella Bella, a freighter carrying a full load took on water.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am here again tonight to once again remind the House and, of course, the Liberal government about a massive gap in our emergency preparedness framework: the lack of a standing federal plan to prevent, prepare for and actively respond to marine debris spills. To begin, I want to recognize some of the environmental champions who have been calling attention to the urgency of this issue: Lilly Woodbury from Surfrider Pacific Rim; Karla Robison, who helped deal with the tsunami fallout from the Japanese earthquake at Fukushima; Josh Charleson and Josh Temple, both from Coastal Restoration Society; and organizations like Ocean Legacy and Living Oceans. These people and groups have been doing the work on the ground in coastal communities.”
“Therefore, they call upon the Government of Canada to establish and fund a new centre of excellence for peace and justice to support conflict resolution, diplomacy and peacebuilding for Canadians and the international community.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to present a petition from Canadians committed to advancing peace and human rights, especially given the conflict right now in the Middle East. The petitioners note that Canada pledged itself to these principles with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. They highlight that justice, equality and freedom are essential to preventing conflict while a lack of respect for these rights fuels violence worldwide. The petitioners further stress that Canada has lost vital civilian-led capacity for research, education and training in peace operations with the closure of the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre. They cite also that the current spending obligations and commitments by the federal government on NATO and military spending should prioritize peacekeeping.”
“Despite performing the same dangerous work as other firefighters, wildland and forest firefighters are excluded from the firefighter category in the national occupational classification, which is a misclassification that limits their access to recognition, benefits and protections available to other firefighters and public safety workers. The petitioners therefore call on the government to immediately correct the miscalculation of wildland and forest firefighters in the national occupational classification by recognizing them as firefighters. They also ask the government to remove any and all federal barriers that prevent wildland and forest firefighters from being recognized as the firefighters and public safety workers that they are.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to table a petition that was collected by the National Union of Public and General Employees. The petition first highlights that wildland and forest firefighters across Canada perform life-threatening public safety duties, including wildfire suppression and evacuation. They protect communities, ecosystems, property and critical infrastructure during increasingly severe wildfire seasons. The petitioners also highlight that climate change has led to longer, hotter and more destructive wildfire seasons, placing wildland and forest firefighters at a growing risk to their physical and mental health. However, they routinely deploy across provinces and territories, and internationally, to provide emergency response.”
“Madam Speaker, the bureau of pensions advocates is about to lose half of its workforce. The Liberal government is sunsetting a program that is meant to address wait times for Canada's RCMP and military veterans. This is important for veterans who are appealing benefits that have been denied. In fact, the bureau has had an 89% success rate for cases that have been heard improving benefits. Greg Harlow, the president of the Association of Justice Counsel, the union representing the lawyers employed by the federal government, said, “Veterans are going to get hurt” by this. The NDP put forward a motion to reverse these cuts, which was defeated by the Liberal government just yesterday. Can my colleague speak about the duty and the honour we have to support Canada's RCMP and military veterans?”
“It is estimated that there are 1.6 million Canadians who are living with a brain injury today, yet there is no coordinated national response. The petitioners call on the government to support my bill, Bill C-206 , to develop a national strategy on brain injuries; to improve education, awareness and prevention; to ensure better access to treatment and rehabilitation; and to have better coordination and recovery supports for Canadians living with the impacts of brain injuries.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to table a petition from Canadians on Vancouver Island, from Victoria and Courtenay to Port Alberni and Parksville. They are all calling on the federal government to take leadership on brain injury awareness, prevention and treatment. The petitioners note that brain injuries can occur in many ways, from accidents and sporting events to illnesses, strokes and overdoses, and they often result in serious physical, cognitive, emotional and behavioural effects. They would like to see better coordination between the provinces and the federal government on this issue. The petitioners further point out that brain injuries are frequently linked to other challenges, including substance use and homelessness, and they create additional barriers for those affected.”
“This petition also highlights that climate change is already costing Canadians billions of dollars each year and that a fair tax on extreme wealth would generate significant revenue to fund good-paying jobs, public services and a just transition to a sustainable economy. Last, these petitioners are calling on the House to reconsider sweeping cuts to jobs and services and to bring forward legislation that would ensure that corporations and the wealthiest of Canadians pay their fair share.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am honoured today to table a petition on behalf of residents from Port Alberni, Parksville, Qualicum and Courtenay in my riding who are concerned about rising inequality, austerity and the erosion of public services. These petitioners note that while corporate profits continue to reach record highs, more Canadians are struggling to afford the basics of life. They warn that austerity measures, particularly the government's planned $25-billion reduction to publicly funded jobs and services, would only deepen inequality and undermine the programs that Canadians, especially seniors and people living with disabilities, rely on and are entitled to.”
“Mr. Speaker, here we are today, on the fourth anniversary of the war that Russia implemented on Ukraine, and what did we hear from a Conservative? A Conservative got up and stated that “the program for bogus refugee claimants” costs the same as the transfer to the whole province of Saskatchewan at $1.6 billion a year. Basically, the member is insinuating that every single immigrant and every single refugee has a bogus claim. Maybe the Conservatives are trying to hide the fact that, up until yesterday, they had only asked four questions of the health minister . They could do better. Does my colleague agree that these refugees and immigrants pay taxes, that they work in our health care system and that this exercise here today is shameful?”
“Mr. Speaker, our health care system is already stretched, yet the Liberal government piles on needless paperwork. The College of Family Physicians warns that the disability tax credit form is worsening the strain on family doctors and limiting access to the Canada disability benefit. Instead of fixing the problem, budget 2025 sets aside $10 million to help people navigate a broken system. Provinces already determine disability eligibility. Why will the minister not just accept provincial approvals for the disability tax credit and cut red tape so family doctors can focus on patient care and so people with disabilities can actually access their benefits?”
“I am proud today to present this petition and to stand with the petitioners in supporting their call for the government to eliminate this unjust clause and ensure that surviving spouses and partners receive the pension benefits they deserve and should be entitled to.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition signed by Canadian military and RCMP veterans who are calling on the Government of Canada to eliminate the so-called marriage after 60 clause, a discriminatory provision of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act that denies survivor pension benefits to spouses and partners of military and RCMP veterans who marry after the age of 60. This outdated policy punishes these veterans for finding love and companionship later in life and forces some to choose between financial security and their partners' future well-being. These veterans have served our country with honour, and they and their loved ones deserve to be treated with fairness and dignity.”
“Mr. Speaker, nowhere in the world has the free market solved an affordable housing crisis. Let us look at the Netherlands, with 34% non-market housing; Denmark, 21%; Britain, 16%; and France, 17%. Here in Canada, we are now at 3.4% non-market housing. Nothing in this bill sets targets on non-market housing. My colleague had a good idea around removing the GST on housing. Instead, why do we not take that GST, invest it back into the communities where homes were sold and use it for building non-market housing? We know we need a mix of market and non-market housing. They go hand in hand. Do the Conservatives support any form of non-market housing? Do they understand its critical importance for the most vulnerable, for people who are trying to make ends meet, especially housing that is geared to income?”
“These petitioners point out that the federal government has previously partnered with British Columbia through the investing in Canada infrastructure program's community, culture and recreation infrastructure stream and call for its renewal and expansion. Petitioners urge the federal government to ensure rural and coastal communities have equitable access to the recreation infrastructure needed for a healthy and sustainable community and country.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to table a petition on behalf of residents from Tofino, Ucluelet, Port Alberni and the Oceanside region in my riding of Courtenay—Alberni who are deeply concerned about the shortage of community recreation facilities in our region and across Canada. Petitioners stress that recreation centres are vital spaces for people of all ages to gather, stay healthy and build strong communities. They note that recreation promotes physical and mental health, supports rehabilitation, reduces antisocial behaviours and lowers long-term health and social costs. Facilities also help retain families, seniors and youth in rural areas while driving economic and volunteer activity.”
“Mr. Speaker, we keep asking the Liberal government when pharmacare will expand, and we cannot get a straight answer from the Minister of Health . British Columbia's pharmacare agreement starts next week, because New Democrats pushed for it and because the B.C. NDP moved quickly. Families in other provinces are still waiting because the Liberal government is not negotiating. This means access to life-saving medicine depends on someone's postal code. When will the Minister of Health finally start negotiating so Canadians can access life-saving medicine no matter where they live?”
“(1320) Again, I want to thank my colleague the MP for West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country for bringing this bill forward. I look forward to working with him on these additional concerns and solutions, from marine debris and container spills to building responsible ship recycling capacity here in Canada. New Democrats will be supporting this bill and will continue to push the government to do the full job of protecting our coasts, our communities and the waters we depend on.”
“This is the standard Canada should be embedding in any national ship recycling framework. Bill C-244 would strengthen accountability when vessels are abandoned or cause pollution. That is necessary. However, if we want to stop the problem at its source, we must also build the end-of-life solutions that make responsible disposal the easy, affordable way for vessel owners. Parliament should support Bill C-244 . It would close loopholes and strengthen prevention, but the government must act on container spills and marine debris, implement the Transportation Safety Board's recommendations and invest in Canadian ship recycling capacity with strong federal standards. If we fail to do the full job, we will keep paying more to clean up pollution after the fact instead of preventing it at the source. Coastal communities deserve better than that.”
“This is not only an environmental necessity; it is also an economic opportunity to create good, local jobs in coastal communities while preventing pollution before it happens. In Port Alberni, in my riding, the ship recycling leadership group that I have been working on has brought together local governments, labour, environmental organizations, industry, and indigenous partners to develop a model for responsible ship recycling. A core guiding principle of that group is that ship recycling must be grounded in indigenous leadership, decision-making authority and consent. Responsible ship recycling cannot be imposed on communities, and it must be done with indigenous nations as true partners with leadership at the table, real decision-making authority and free, prior and informed consent.”