Economic Relationship between Canada and the United States Committee on March 30th, 2021

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

Yes. Thank you.

Given that we often look to the past and say that there have been no problems in the past 40 years, what is the average life expectancy—if you can call it that—of a pipeline?

[Andrew Pilat]

I couldn't answer that. I'm not a pipeline engineer. I'm sure they could last 100 years if they're well maintained.

I think Mike mentioned we've got 30 or so pipelines crossing the river here, and there have been no difficulties since they've been put in. Pipelines are a safe way of transporting energy. They're safer by far than trucking, barging or boating and rail. It doesn't take much to derail a train. Again, the pipeline has a lot of backup systems so if there is a spill it can be shut immediately, reducing the amount of spillage into the environment.

How long do they last? I can't tell you. Accidents do happen occasionally, but I know Enbridge and other pipeline companies have exceptional maintenance programs because of the heightened awareness of what will happen if there is a spill.

I'm not worried. I trust the people, and they have an excellent safety record as far as I'm concerned.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Mr. Savard-Tremblay, you have 15 seconds left.

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

In 15 seconds, I'll simply thank you for your answers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Thank you, Mr. Savard-Tremblay.

We will now go to Mr. Blaikie for six minutes, please.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin by addressing my initial comments to Mr. Archer, who had raised the importance of having some kind of cohesive energy strategy for Canada, which is not a position that we currently find ourselves in. Obviously, there's a tension between the very expansionary type of posture that Canada has had towards oil and gas development over the last number of decades and Canada's meeting its greenhouse gas reduction emission targets under the Paris accord.

As previous witnesses quite rightly pointed out, even if we're successful in reducing emissions in transportation; even if we're successful, to some extent, in reducing the emissions that are the result of extraction; and even if we're successful in reducing our emissions for power generation, for instance, there's still going to be a demand for oil and gas. The petrochemical industry is an obvious example of that. Electronics are everywhere, and every year it seems they get further and further integrated into our lifestyles. It's a product that there's going to continue to be a demand for.

The question is, how do we have a sustainable industry, both environmentally and from an economic point of view? The boom-bust cycle of the oil and gas industry in Canada has been hard on Canadian workers who plan their lives around a career and then find that the market goes into a different phase. Suddenly, the things they thought they could depend on aren't there for them anymore.

It seems to me that the obvious answer to that is some kind of strategy, but even earlier, what we heard [Technical difficulty—Editor] continuing to talk about simply needing to let the international oil and gas market do what it does, with no real indication of what I would call a meaningful strategy for how to have both an environmentally and economically sustainable future.

I wonder, Mr. Archer, if you want to speak a little bit more to that question of having a strategy, what that means in terms of government involvement in the industry and what that means in terms of expectations of private players within the industry to put what may well be a somewhat smaller industry on a sturdier footing for the kind of demand that may persist past when we're able to use renewable energy for heating and transportation.

[Scott Archer]

Thanks, Mr. Blaikie.

As far as differentiating between pipelines, I don't think that's a great plan. My hometown is where the first oil refinery in North America was. The very first Imperial Oil facility was built here.

We've all taken a beating lately due to, basically, the pressure that's been put on the oil industry, and really, we need to loosen the reins up on that. Energy east would be a fantastic plan to get Alberta crude to our east coast refineries. It would get Alberta back on its feet. It would get the east coast using Canadian oil in Canadian refineries.

As far as Keystone XL or any other pipeline that is used to transport Canadian oil to the States, how can it be a bad thing to get our oil industry back up and running, to bring billions in revenue back into Canada? Let's face it—the oil that the Americans use, or any oil that would be shipped offshore, is just going to come from someplace else. It's going to come from the Saudis. It's oil that's going to be consumed, and it's like we're punishing oil and gas workers for being oil and gas workers. There's no benefit to preventing our oil industry from thriving, right?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Sure. I mean, I'd open up the question to other witnesses who may want to talk about what a strategy looks like. I think that as Canada tries to meet its climate change targets, an unlimited expansion of fossil fuel extraction is not going to be compatible with that.

One thing we can do is try to get more value out of every barrel extracted in Canada. That means doing more of the kind of work that's done in Sarnia, with respect to refining, upgrading and actually specializing in taking that raw product and creating Canadian jobs in the market of value-added work, and creating value-added products.

I'm wondering if any of our other witnesses might want to speak to the potential of that. It's something that I think differentiates Line 5, not just because it's already an existing pipeline but also because of this potential for value-added work from projects like Keystone XL and the TMX pipeline.

[Mike Bradley]

Mr. Blaikie, that's exactly what we're trying to do here in Sarnia. It's critically important we recognize that things are changing very rapidly. That's why we have Bioindustrial Innovation Canada. We've approved a number of projects that are now being developed on the former Dow site, which was a major industrial place.

We have looked at other things. We are now focusing on hydrogen. I'm really pleased to see that the federal and Ontario governments—and I believe the Alberta government—are now looking at hydrogen seriously. We looked at it as a community 10 years ago and we couldn't make it work economically. Now we're manufacturing hydrogen here. The local college is developing probably 10 to 15 hydrogen-based projects on the research side.

I know exactly what you're trying to get to, which is that no one's really pulling it all together and saying that we can advance in this area. I tell people in this community.... I've been unpopular at times because I said we've got to change, instead of standing up and saying that we're not going to change—you need to change—so just leave us alone.

The reality is that if we don't change, we'll be dinosaurs. We have the opportunity going into hydrogen. Even Line 5 has reminded us of the value of fossil fuels and also how we can start to look—and need to continue to look—to find other ways with added value, instead of shipping it to the United States.

To me, added value in Canada is the key.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

Thank you, Mr. Blaikie.

We will now start our second round with Ms. Gladu for five minutes, please.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Mayor Bradley, I just wanted to correct the record. I know you said that Premier Ford couldn't get a call with Governor Whitmer, but we heard testimony earlier today at committee from Associate Minister Walker that in fact he did get a call. That's good, but I do know that Minister O'Regan has been very frustrated that he cannot get a call and that many cannot.

I have another question.

If Line 5 is shut down, what will that affect agriculture and rural people in our riding?

[Mike Bradley]

First of all, if I'd known Premier Ford had gotten through, I would have asked him to ask the good governor to write back to me. I'm feeling very isolated and lonely. I'm not getting any responses to my many letters.

There will be huge ramifications. I welcome the Lambton Federation of Agriculture and the Ontario one, which have jumped in big time. We saw that two years ago with the shortage of propane. It had a devastating impact and almost closed down the industry at one point.

I think it is marvellous in the sense that this event has had a cross-industry sector impact. That's what brought us all together to fight back and say that we'll work our way through this and negotiate a settlement.

Yes, there's no question that there will be a significant impact on Ontario and on Quebec agriculture.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Enbridge has suggested that the federal government should submit an amicus brief of support when the matter is heard, to try to get it heard at the federal level and to consider filing suit of treaty violation if Governor Whitmer doesn't rescind her executive order.

Do you agree that these actions are important? What else do you think the government should do to impact this issue?

[Mike Bradley]

I'm not a lawyer, but I will say that, from what I understand, it would be the right decision for federal government to make when they're ready. It's a question of timing, too. There's the political front and there's the legal front. It's a question of how you want to touch both levers.

I would support the federal government. I think the community would, if they go forward in the legal challenge. Again, time is the issue. The longer we're having this debate and the longer this continues, the more damage it's doing to the Canadian economy and to potential investment in this province and this country.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Absolutely.

Mr. Pilat, what would your final comments be if you could tell the Prime Minister what you'd like him to do?

[Andrew Pilat]

I agree that we're far better off with a negotiated settlement than we would be with a legal settlement. I would like the Prime Minister, if he could, to talk to Governor Whitmer, and again to President Biden, and just stress the urgency of this matter, the importance of it. We are literally talking about ripping the legs out of our economy in central Canada and, let's face it, in many of the midwestern states.

We have to proceed urgently on this matter. It is important that we get it resolved.

I always feel that a negotiated settlement is better than a legal one, but if we have to go the legal route, we go the legal route.

The governor should be aware of that. I am quite surprised that she hasn't felt the pressure from the surrounding states that are dependent on the fuel that comes out of Line 5. It goes back and forth across the border. The oil that comes through Line 5 goes down to the Toledo refinery that supplies all of the jet fuel for the international airport in Detroit. Line 5 supplies all the jet fuel that goes to the Toronto—

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

All right, I don't have very much more time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

You have 20 seconds.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I want to give Mr. Archer a final comment.

What would you have the federal government or the Prime Minister, do?

[Scott Archer]

Spring into action, basically. The Prime Minister, needs to deal directly with President Biden. I don't feel that we can trust the courts with this. It's a giant issue, and if it's not resolved, it is going to destroy this town, without a doubt.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Raj Saini]

We'll now go to Mrs. Romanado, for five minutes, please.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for being with us today. There are some elements that are always brought forward at these committees that we may not have heard.

One thing I want to clarify, to make sure it's on the record, is that this committee, over the last six meetings, has heard from various witnesses, and we have not heard once anyone say that this is a good idea to close down Line 5.

The representatives from Michigan were invited to this committee for us to hear their side—the question of why they are going this route—and they declined. This committee has been trying to make sure that we have all of the information so we can do a proper assessment of the situation.

I understand that the Attorney General of Ohio filed an amicus brief back on March 19. Louisiana is also in agreement that this is a bad idea. We've heard from pretty much everyone.

I didn't have a chance to talk to the provincial representatives in the previous panel, but I want to check in with Mayor Bradley.

You talked to us about the importance...and the impact this would have on Sarnia. You mentioned that you've written to all the mayors in Ontario. One thing I haven't heard yet is whether anyone has had conversations with their counterparts across the provinces.

Mayor Bradley, for instance, have you had a chance to speak to Mayor Valérie Plante in Montreal, given the fact that Line 9, which is directly connected to Line 5, goes to the Suncor refinery in east-end Montreal and 66% of the supply to Quebec flows through that. Have you had a chance to reach out to the mayor of Montreal to see if there is an opportunity to have a joint front on this?

Could you elaborate on some of the efforts you've made across the provinces versus strictly in Ontario?

[Mike Bradley]

That's an excellent question. No, I have not. I'm not diminishing my role as mayor, but I have me and one assistant, and trying to have the resources to reach out and do things is very difficult. I'm very grateful that I have support in the community, which has helped carry that burden forward.

However, that is an excellent suggestion. Just as we are tied in so deeply to the west, we are tied deeply into Montreal. In fact, at one point in time we had a great movement of people between Montreal and Sarnia. There are strong roots here to this day, through Imperial Oil.

I will follow up on that. I should have done that, but I didn't do it. That is a good suggestion and I will follow up immediately tomorrow.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you.

I think it would be helpful for folks in Quebec to realize the impact this will have, not only for folks in Ontario and western Canada, but also in Quebec.

Mr. Archer, I know my colleague Marilyn, who has talked my ear off about this issue, is absolutely an advocate with respect to what's going on with Line 5. She tabled this petition in the House back on, I believe, March 10. A response is forthcoming.

Can you talk a little about additional advocacy efforts that you've made in terms of making sure that folks know about the impacts of a closure of Line 5?