Oh, oh!

Your leader isn't even here.

Mr. Lawrence:

I had hoped that I would have been able to stand this afternoon and welcome the Prime Minister back into the House after his absence. I gather that he has not been feeling well, and certainly we can all appreciate that.

Do you still think that?

Mr. Lawrence:

I would have been pleasantly surprised to welcome him back here this afternoon to take part in third reading debate of a bill that has been before this House for two and a half weeks, because I would have wondered why he could not have appeared at an earlier time. It may well be that the debate has not gone the way that he expected it would go. It may well be that because of the rather political stance and the lack of anything constructive from his minister in this particular debate, he felt that he had to bail the minister out by appearing at this late stage.

That, sir, is one theory and it may be correct. The other theory may be that before the Prime Minister himself could hurry off to Toronto to appear on a national television show tonight, he felt that at least he should appear in the House of Commons. I refuse to welcome the Prime Minister back under those circumstances. I have never heard a more barren, naked speech in my life, one designed to divide this country, than the one I have just heard.

Hear, hear!

Mr. Lawrence:

I ask you to search your mind, Mr. Speaker, to see whether there was one constructive proposal put before the House this afternoon by the Prime Minister in the first supposedly major contribution he has made on energy in this House for a number of years. There was not one constructive approach.

I do not mind his dwelling as he did on my leader's speech made before the chamber of commerce in Montreal a week and a half ago, because no one on our side before or since has indicated that speech was the be-all and end-all.

Mr. Gillespie:

It surely was not.

Mr. Lawrence:

It is fine for hon. members opposite to smile and haggle. If they do not disagree with it I wish they would stand up and say

so.

The Prime Minister pokes fun at us in regard to such matters as energy conservation. He claims we have said exactly the same thing as the Liberals. He said that we want to see energy conservation at a 2 per cent rate whereas they want a 3.5 per cent rate. He implies that is a minor exception. It is not a minor exception, Mr. Speaker; it goes to the heart of the question. We are using the 2 per cent figure because, first, we believe it is right; second, we believe it can be reached; and third, the research on the question was done for us by the government's office of energy conservation. I should point out that the chief of that office resigned in disgust because his bosses, the federal government, were doing absolutely nothing to reach that goal.

Thanks to the long windedness of the Prime Minister, I do not have time to go through these policies one by one and explain all the major differences.

Underlying all these matters and the point that was emphasized by my leader, by me and by just everyone on this side of the House when we talk on energy policy inside or outside this House, is the one thing that can save us from these grossly increasing foreign price increases, the one thing that can save us from being dependent on the Ayatollahs, the Venezuelans, the Mexicans or the Saudi Arabians, the one thing that can save us-

Mr. LeBlanc (Westmorland-Kent):

Is Exxon.

Mr. Lawrence:

-and not leave the maritime area hang out to dry the way the government has left them, the one thing that can fight and beat the multinational companies on their own ground, is for Canada to be energy self-sufficient-

Hear, hear!

Mr. Lawrence:

-for Canada to utilize its own energy resources to take up the slack where these people have left us dependent on offshore oil.

It is fine for the Prime Minister to talk about what happened ten years ago, but he does not have to go back that far. Since the last OPEC crisis-we are into another one now and will have more if these people are left to their own devices- this government has done absolutely nothing at all. We now export more oil than we did in 1976 when the last bill expired and the government took no steps to replace it. That is a shame, especially when more than one-third of the country has been left by the government to hang out to dry and now we are dependent on Mexico, Venezuela, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

If this minister and the Prime Minister, instead of gallivanting around the world, would spend half the time, half the

Energy Supplies

energy, half the money attempting to develop our own energy sources and our own domestic honest-to-goodness delivery system in this country, that would be a far better attitude.

This is the crux of all the speeches we have been making. Certainly we have a stand on Petro-Canada. Every one of those quotations fits in exactly with what we intend to do with Petro-Canada. All the government wants to do is replace big business with big government. We want to give the average Canadian the chance to take part in Canada's immense development of resources and, by golly, we are going to do it.

Hear, hear!

Mr. Lawrence:

The government may not have faith that we can utilize our own resources, and because of that lack of vision they are not going to bring it about. They are not going to achieve that because of the petty, divisive, quarrelsome attitude displayed by the Prime Minister this afternoon. We are never going to achieve an objective until that objective is laid out. Our objective is that we in Canada meet our energy needs with our own energy resources.

If we have to put cash programs in place-and we think now that because of the lethargy and complacency of the government this will be necessary-to develop oil in the tar sands, by golly, we will do it.

If we have to expand our pipeline capacity immediately so that we can use Canadian energy reserves for the maritime provinces, then, by golly, we will do it. We should not leave the maritime provinces to hang out to dry as the government has.

1 do not have enough time this afternoon to go through the idiotic, negative, sneering, divisive comments of the Prime Minister point by point, and I regret it very much. The country has a right to expect a lot more and a lot better from him.

I see you are looking desperately and anxiously at the clock, sir. I see it is six o'clock and, therefore, I conclude with these points.

Mr. Speaker:

Order, please. It being six o'clock, pursuant to the order made on Tuesday, March 20, it is my duty to put the question.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?

Agreed.

On division.

Mr. Speaker:

Carried on division.

Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker:

Order, please. It being six o'clock, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at two o'clock p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 2(1).

At 6.01 p.m. the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to Standing Order.

Thursday, March 22, 1979