Unresponsive

It takes some effort for an answer in question period to stand out from the Cons' usual litany of substance-free partisan blather. But Mark Warawa managed it yesterday:

Mr. Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, the Americans are spending millions of dollars on a feasibility study to build a hydroelectric dam at Shanker's Bend on the Similkameen River. An 80 metre dam, if built, would flood 7,200 hectares in Canada.

The Okanagan Alliance of First Nations and the Regional District of Okanagan Similkameen have stated their opposition as has the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.

Will the minister notify the U.S. government that Canada is opposed to this project and will he insist that the government of British Columbia do the same?

Mr. Mark Warawa (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, as the member well knows, this government is committed to a cleaner environment. We have invested $1 billion in green infrastructure, $300 million for eco-energy retrofits, and $1 billion for clean energy projects and carbon capture and storage.

Wherever we look this government is taking action on the environment. I encourage the member to support the budget.

Now, Warawa's answer is useless enough on its face. But it looks all the more so when placed in context.

Remember after all that the Cons are now trying to claim that their environmental plan is supposed to follow from what the U.S. administration is doing. Which would seem to give them an awfully good reason to pay attention themselves to what's happening south of the border. But their second-in-command on the environment is apparently completely unaware of the issues raised by the U.S.' plans on the one subject where the two countries are supposedly in agreement.

What's more, having been presented with an issue which would obviously demand follow-up one way or another, Warawa didn't even pay lip service to the prospect of looking into the matter. Instead, his answer offers about the strongest indication possible that the Cons are completely unwilling to deal with legitimate questions by doing anything but filibustering with their own PR material - whether or not it has anything to do with the topic at hand. And that may say more about the Cons' fitness for government than any substantive response ever could.

(Edit: fixed wording.)