Environment Committee on Nov. 28th, 2023

[Laurie Pushor]

We have extensive oversight protocols for managing large projects, such as the oil sands mines. Each year, a specific mine inspection plan is put in place. Our lead for each mine site has access to any and all experts they deem appropriate to support them in that oversight. They will do a series of site visits.

In addition to that, we also examine what the company is doing, in terms of their monitoring, operational plans and procedures, in order to ensure they are operating at the standards we expect them to. All that information informs what regulatory actions we may or may not feel are necessary to take. Those regulatory actions can be as simple as saying, “This issue needs to be addressed”, or “This thing we found needs to be fixed”, all the way through to significant penalties and operational consequences.

We do a diligent and extensive review of what we and our technical experts believe is the right oversight for each site on an annual basis.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

It will be some time before our reliance on oil ends. Let us recall that, last year, in Quebec alone, 18 billion litres of oil were consumerd. That made the front page of Le Devoir, with the shocking headline that Quebec was in a state of “enegy inebriation”. As long as we still need oil, we would rather use oil from Canada, since it is ours.

Yet we need to be very sure that oil operations are conducted properly. The tragedy at the Kearl site is a serious warning to us all. We have to make sure that does not happen again. If it were to happen again, we have to be able to take appropriate action.

Tests must be conducted on a regular basis. I am not referring to the tests done every morning or 10 times a day; regular testing is needed. There could be surprise water quality tests near oil extraction sites, which is used by all Canadians and by other countries. This is all well and good, but we still need to make sure the water quality is good.

Mr. Pushor, as the president of Alberta's energy regulator, can you tell us today whether water tests are done in the wells near oil extraction sites in Canada?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Please respond quickly.

[Laurie Pushor]

We have an extensive responsibility to see what is happening out on the landscape. We can compel a company to do whatever we think is appropriate or required in any specific instance. Monitoring is done around all of the oil sands sites.

I think it would be a bit of a stretch to think that you would extend every single well site in a conventional oil and gas industry...would require some kind of independent monitoring. We do have high expectations on the way companies perform and contain all of the fluids they manage in any operation anywhere.

I would just end by encouraging you to take the member from Fort McMurray up on her offer to look at the regional monitoring website she was referring to and see what the air quality looks like and what the water quality report is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Last but not least, we have Mr. van Koeverden.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

I guess I'll start where I finished off last time, which was with respect to accountability between industry or the regulator or really anyone.

It's clear to me that there's been no clear admission of fault or true accountability here. I haven't heard of anybody losing their job or really facing the facts here. If the AER isn't accountable and not one person at Imperial or the AER has lost their job, who ought to be held accountable for this or future leakages?

[Laurie Pushor]

As I've indicated, both of these matters are under investigation. An investigation will lead to whatever consequences or ramifications for Imperial that the investigative team deems appropriate. It wouldn't be inappropriate for me to speculate or comment further around accountability.

Robust investigations are under way and they will be fully transparent in sharing the findings of those investigations at the appropriate time.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Pushor.

We've seen this, and it's been referred to as the biggest leak in Alberta's history, with the largest amount of contaminated effluent that's ever entered an ecosystem. It's also been referred to as the largest cover-up ever in Alberta's oil sands history.

I've also been to Fort McMurray. I'm happy to go back; I'd be glad to visit again. What I saw was an environmental disaster unfolding. I don't think I'm the only one who feels that exact same way, Mr. Pushor.

Premier Danielle Smith has claimed that Alberta oil sands “represent the safest”, the most ethical and the “cleanest fossil fuel extraction in the world”, yet today, for the last two hours, we've been discussing one of the worst environmental disasters that our country has ever seen.

Do you believe it's true that the Alberta oil sands continue to represent the safest, most ethical and cleanest fossil fuel extraction in the world, despite all the evidence that we've been hearing about today and over the last couple of months?

[Laurie Pushor]

I can tell you that the standards that we at the AER are expected to hold industry to comply with are world-leading.

I would also note that you continue to refer to this as having the largest impact. It may be by volume, but I would remind you that the recovery of that fluid was extremely high because of the fact that it occurred at -30° and was mostly runoff, so it froze upon release.

We will do our best to take the lessons from this, make sure we continue to improve and strengthen our operations at the AER, and do the best we can for the people of Alberta. We will interact with our colleagues at the Government of Alberta where we see and feel that there may be needs for regulatory enhancements. We will work to support our colleagues as they do that.

We will come to work every day to ensure that the people of Fort McMurray know there's a regulator on the job ensuring that industry is complying with the expectations that all Albertans have for that industry. That's the role of the regulator. While I get criticized from some on some sides of the ledger, I can assure you I get criticized from all sides. That is the life of a regulator. We accept that willingly and we understand that's our role.

Be assured that there are 1,000 people at the Alberta Energy Regulator who get up every day and attend and diligently do their best to ensure industry is complying with the standards Albertans expect them to.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Pushor. I would just note that it's not just Albertans; it's Canadians. I also want to note that there has been evidence of these contaminants reaching as far north as the Northwest Territories and elsewhere, so it's not the case that they just froze in place.

But I thank you for your testimony, and I thank you for being willing to be criticized. It's a public job, so it's very important.

Mr. Chair, I believe there's been a notice of motion distributed to the clerk. If I have the indulgence of the chair, I'd then read that motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Sure.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you very much.

The motion is as follows:

Whereas, the Alberta Energy Regulator failed to contain a tailing pond seepage while waiting 7 months for a geochemistry study to be completed.

Whereas the Alberta Energy Regulator has referred to this disaster as a communications problem, yet failed to communicate the impacts of this spill to impacted communities and other levels of government.

Whereas, the Alberta Energy Regulator previously claimed that there was no contaminants found in the waterways when in fact Imperial staff told ACFN inspectors that dissolved iron was found in waterbody 3, and on April 3, 2023 that a test showed F2 hydrocarbons and naphthenic acids in a waterbody.

That the committee express its disappointment with the Alberta Energy Regulator and acknowledge that the Alberta Energy Regulator has been deficient in protecting the environment and health of communities adjacent to tailing ponds that it regulates.

That, in relation to the committee's study of freshwater and following the evidence provided by witnesses regarding the toxic leak of tailing ponds and ongoing deficiencies in protecting the health and safety of Indigenous communities at risk, the committee:

1. Call on the Alberta Energy Regulator and the Government of Alberta to work with companies that operate tailing ponds and the federal government to conduct a study to assess the impacts of tailing ponds on human health;

2. Call on the Alberta Energy Regulator to require operators of tailing ponds to increase monitoring of adjacent drinking water sources;

3. Call on the Alberta Energy Regulator to conduct a geotechnical audit of all tailings limits;

4. Call on the Alberta Energy Regulator to require operators of tailing ponds to halt the release of tailings into waterways;

5. Make formal recommendations in its study of Freshwater to improve the protection of Canada's freshwater resources from contamination from tailing ponds.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Are you just giving notice or are you moving this for debate?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

I am moving it. It's on the table.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You're moving it. Okay.

Mr. Mazier, you have your hand up.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Could we recess for a second?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I think unless we're in committee business....

Are we in committee business?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I don't think you have to be in committee business.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

You need 48 hours' notice.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That's not when it relates to the topic we're discussing.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Pushor, thank you very much. We appreciate that you and your legal counsel made the time.

We'll now take a break for a second.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay, we have a new participant from Fort McMurray.

Mr. Mazier, you have nothing more to say; you just asked for a recess.

We'll go to Mr. Deltell.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Over the past two hours, we have learned a lot and have asked some very relevant questions. In my view, we got to the bottom of a number of issues, so it has been worthwhile. I am very pleased that we have discussed water and have learned that the water quality will be tested not only in the event of tragedies, but indeed regularly, and sometimes randomly, whether that is groundwater, waterways, rain water or deep water. I think we got to the bottom of issues and I am very pleased about that.

So I am a bit surprised that the government is tabling a motion to go even further.

I would like to mention something about the motion introduced by our friends on the government side. They ask for five things at the end of the motion. Apart from the final item, which is that this be included in the recommendations, what are the four other items about? Look closely at the motion that our friends on the government side have tabled. In each of the items—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Excuse me, Mr. Deltell.

Ms. Chatel, do you have a point of order?