Economic Relationship between Canada and the United States Committee on March 18th, 2021

[Joseph Mancinelli]

Now, I'm not sure if the numbers are going to warrant moving forward and stopping it. I haven't analyzed that. I can tell you that the Senate committee I spoke to seemed to be overwhelmingly in support of our position. There were a lot of farmers who are senators on the Michigan side and they are really concerned about the impact it will have on the agricultural industry. They were most concerned also.... A very interesting thing that I learned from the discussion is that they are afraid that if it does go to trucking and to rail, they won't get their agricultural products to market, because petroleum will take precedence over their agricultural products.

I think the Senate is definitely against shutting down. Whether or not they are successful in getting the House in Michigan to successfully defeat the action, I'm not sure.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

That's really helpful.

I have a question, then, for both of you.

I'm going to put two questions together, because I only have four minutes. The first relates to your members on both sides of the border. We here are concerned particularly about the Canadian members, but we also care about the union members on the U.S. side. In that case, wouldn't many of them lose their health care and other benefits in the event that they lost their jobs? Here we have medicare so people won't lose their primary health care, but in the U.S. wouldn't many of your members, if they lost their jobs as a result of Line 5 shutting down, actually lose their health care? Shouldn't that be of concern to the Michigan Legislature and Governor Whitmer?

My second question is about the fact that Enbridge had mentioned they were recommending that the Government of Canada, the Government of Ontario and other provinces intervene in the Enbridge lawsuit. Do you have a position on that?

I will go quickly to Sean and then Joe.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

You have less than a minute.

[Sean Strickland]

One of the advantages of being in a union is that you have health and welfare benefit plans on both sides of the border. The problem would be that, in the U.S., if you're not working, you're not going to be able to contribute to that health and welfare plan, so you could run out of benefits.

In terms of the lawsuit, I would say no. Just like in Canada, there's a distinct process for judiciary and for elected officials. To whatever extent we need to let the judiciary process play out, we need to do so, but we're prepared to do whatever we can based on the results of that judiciary process and lobby to whatever extent we can within the guidelines of the law to make sure we get a favourable result.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Mr. Mancinelli, you have 20 seconds, please.

[Joseph Mancinelli]

We in the labour movement pride ourselves on the fact that we don't rely heavily on the government to help our members. From time to time we do, but by and large we have our benefit plans and our pension plans that are completely funded by the industry and by our members.

When you lose your job, you lose the ability to do that, and that puts a greater strain on the government, whether it be Canada or the United States. The domino effects of our members losing their jobs will have an effect on everybody, including other citizens who aren't our members, and the government as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Thank you, Mr. Mancinelli.

Mr. Savard-Tremblay, you have two minutes.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I'd like to go back to the question I asked earlier.

Mr. Mancinelli, you said earlier that it was a totally unjustifiable and unjustified decision. That said, where does the data come from that the governor has put forward about, for instance, capping the pipeline and the fact that there must be a support every 75 feet, but that it isn't there?

[Joseph Mancinelli]

There are checks and balances in the new pipelines that are being built.

I'll spend a quick moment on the proposed pipeline that's being built. The proposed pipeline is going to be built 100 feet below the lake-bed. It's going to be built within a concrete tunnel. Then the pipeline runs within this concrete tunnel. Then there are checks and balances, and valves that would shut down so many feet in the event of any kind of rupture. Keep in mind that the event of a rupture within a pipeline that's encased within a tunnel that's concrete.... If for the existing tunnel it's one in 2,000, just imagine what it will be for the new tunnel.

It's a very safe alternative and an environmentally friendly one, as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

You have 10 seconds, Monsieur Savard-Tremblay.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

If the risk is estimated at one in 1,000 and spread over a number of years, it may still represent a risk that is not totally unrealistic.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Give a very short answer, Mr. Mancinelli, please.

[Joseph Mancinelli]

I don't think there is any real great risk here. There's always a risk, but not a great risk.

One in 2,000 is a pretty good number, and I think with the new pipeline it will be far greater than one in 2,000. I don't see this as being any great risk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Thank you, Mr. Mancinelli.

Thank you, Monsieur Savard-Tremblay.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

You're talking about the future—

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Thank you, Mr. Savard-Tremblay.

For the final two minutes, we go to Mr. Masse, please.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Strickland, obviously one of the major concerns here is the environmental consequences. Even outside of Line 5, we're very deficient for oil boom protection in the Great Lakes.

I was just speaking at the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative. There is a series of things and money that the state and most importantly the federal government in the U.S., and a little bit from Canada.... We're still working on rehabilitating the Great Lakes.

What is Enbridge doing with regard to contributions to this? Are there offsets that are taking place, similar to those for carbon, that are actually going to be made to the Great Lakes in contributions by Enbridge?

[Sean Strickland]

I'm not 100% sure of the answer to that question, Mr. Masse. I'd say that this would be a question better positioned to Enbridge.

I can say—based on a previous question as well, looking for third party studies of the existing pipeline—that there are third party pipeline studies that have been done in the U.S. I'd be happy to submit those to the committee. The largest and most important third party validator is the U.S. regulatory agency that inspects the pipelines, which has given it a clean bill of health over the last 50 years. So that's really important.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

No, I know all of that.

My point here, though, is that we should all be aware of what Enbridge is doing to enhance the environmental...not only the protection that Mr. Mancinelli has mentioned, which is good. Maybe you want to expand on this. We should be well versed here about what Enbridge is actually doing to improve the environment for the situation. Similar to offsets for carbon, what offsets is Enbridge doing for the Great Lakes? I think that's part of the problem, perhaps, that we don't know those things.

[Sean Strickland]

That's a great question, absolutely. I'll maybe add something. I think there's an opportunity to green all of our pipelines. Keystone had a proposal to power it with renewables, which would have created 1,600 megawatts of renewable energy.

I think there's an opportunity to talk to Enbridge, TC Energy, Cenovus and other large Canadian energy players that are moving oil and petroleum by-products across the country about doing what they can to protect the environment and the Great Lakes and also to power the pipelines using renewable technologies. I think that's an opportunity there.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's all about Keystone. I'm just talking about Line 5. As the Great Lakes critic, I don't know exactly what they're in for in terms of the commitment. That's what I want to—

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

Thank you very much to Mr. Mancinelli, Mr. McMichael and Mr. Strickland for joining us this afternoon. I really appreciated your insights, and I'm sure the committee is more illuminated after spending some time with you.

Thank you again on behalf of the committee. We're going to ask you to sign off now.

[Sean Strickland]

Thank you.

[Joseph Mancinelli]

Thank you to the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

I'd like to suspend for a few minutes just to allow the new witnesses to do their sound checks.