Natural Resources Committee on May 6th, 2024

[Michael Vandergrift]

It's such an important issue for the country. We are really focused on implementing the critical minerals strategy.

Earlier the minister mentioned the critical minerals infrastructure fund. We are just finished a first round of project applications. We're looking to make decisions on those very shortly. The goal is to find ways to open up new areas for mining through electricity transmission lines, roads or other types of infrastructure that allow for that mining to take place.

We're also seeing a lot more interest in the sector just over the past year in terms of new types of offtake agreements being signed with developing mines in Canada. We're starting to see offtakes with auto companies and offtakes with technology companies, different types of agreements being put in place now that we think will help to continue to stimulate the industry moving forward.

Finally, I would say that in the budget, there was a plan put forward around regulatory efficiency, which includes looking at and coordinating our permitting processes. Consultations with indigenous peoples are also very important. The indigenous loan guarantee program is part of that. Having a Crown consultation coordinator is part of that. There are also important steps we can take on our consultation processes.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I ask because when I was first elected, Ring of Fire was going to be the next big thing. For people I've talked to in the industry, the thinking is, “Let's move on and talk about other things because we're still...” The consultations weren't done right. We have to deal with roads. We have to deal with the really fragile ecosystem that's there. There are serious problems about moving into areas that have not had mining. However, we have areas that have mining.

For example, take the Sudbury nickel basin. Right now, pretty much all of Vale's nickel sulfate in Sudbury is probably just going to end up being hoovered up by the GM operation. There's not going to be a lot of excess unless we kick into production the ore bodies that are there, but that will require serious investment for shaft sinking and tunnelling.

God help me that I'm saying we should give a break to companies, but that's normally what they do, because they could easily go to Malaysia, and there are no standards in Malaysia.

Has the government looked at using the tax credit system, maybe even for a three-year or four-year period, to help companies that could actually get ore bodies into production now so that they don't have to go through the creation of electrification and all the environmental assessments? They are in Thompson, Manitoba. They could open up an ore body and run for 40 years without having to go through all the red tape. Sudbury can do it. Timmins can do it.

Have you looked at actually making an agreement with mining companies to say that if they commit to getting these ore bodies that you know are there into production, we will give them tax credits for the construction work on the tunnelling and shaft sinking?

[Michael Vandergrift]

That's an important issue that you are raising.

That issue has been raised with us, and it is something that we are certainly looking at. I think you are right that there is tremendous potential in existing mines and existing mining areas. In fact, we're seeing a lot of really interesting projects being developed around the Sudbury basin and in Quebec, where there are existing mines, etc. There's a lot of potential there.

I would say that another piece of the puzzle is around the question of the global pricing of a lot of these products and how we can establish a market that reflects the ESG standards that we all want to see in these products. We're seeing that in the nickel market right now, and it's a big issue. We need to address that part of it with international partners.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Absolutely.

You know, our competitor in this is not the United States. They're trying to get our metals, but our competitors are countries like Malaysia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, places that have no proper standards and that can easily bring mines into production because they don't have to meet any standards at all. In our region, Crawford Nickel is 12 kilometres outside of Timmins, and it's right beside a smelter. If we invest in that, we know it will have first nations support. We know that it'll meet environmental standards.

I guess the question is that if we're talking about the urgency of this, are we looking to kick-start development here so that we can compete, especially if Malaysia floods the market and nickel prices drop?

[Michael Vandergrift]

I could just say that yes, we are, and Crawford, in fact, is an example of one of those mines that are developing very interesting offtake agreements right now because of that potential. We do need to work with our allies and like-minded countries around the market on the pricing of these products to reflect the proper ESG requirements and to encourage that diversity of supply that's needed.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you. That was one round of questioning.

I want to say thank you to all the officials for joining us today and for providing your testimony to the committee.

Witnesses, you can finish up and leave.

Colleagues, I would just ask you to hold on for a minute before all of us exit. Because today's conversation was on the main estimates, do I have unanimous consent to call the vote on the main estimates in one motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

I'm just going to go through this quickly.

Shall vote 1 under Atomic Energy of Canada Limited; vote 1 under Canadian Energy Regulator; vote 1 under Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission; votes 1, 5, and 10 under Department of Natural Resources; vote 1 under Northern Pipeline Agency, less the amounts voted in the interim supply, carry?

ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED

Vote 1—Payments to the corporation for operating and capital expenditures..........$1,591,309,916

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

CANADIAN ENERGY REGULATOR

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$101,145,961

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$52,421,455

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Vote 1—Operating expenditures..........$886,000,876

Vote 5—Capital expenditures..........$38,370,809

Vote 10—Grants listed in any of the Estimates for the fiscal year..........$2,796,124,984

(Votes 1, 5, and 10 agreed to on division)

NORTHERN PIPELINE AGENCY

Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$540,000

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

Shall I report the votes, less the amounts voted in interim supply, to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, everybody, for attending today and for doing a great job of working together and asking lots of great questions. Enjoy the rest of your Monday.

The meeting is adjourned.