Evidence of meeting #7 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was project.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

Cosbey  Chair, Commission on Carbon Competitiveness
V. DeMarco  Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General
Leach  Principal, Office of the Auditor General
Christie  Chief Economist, Canadian Energy Regulator
Farrell  Chief Executive Officer, Major Projects Office
Timlin  Vice President, System Operations, Canadian Energy Regulator
Labonté  Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
Jackson  Director, Major Projects Office
Maher  Professional Leader, Environment, Canadian Energy Regulator

12:10 p.m.

Vice President, System Operations, Canadian Energy Regulator

Jonathan Timlin

I appreciate the extra steps I was able to clock in this morning while getting back and forth from Mr. Christie's office, so thank you, members and staff.

Good morning, Ms. Farrell and Mr. Labonté.

My name is Jonathan Timlin, I'm the vice president of system operations with the Canada Energy Regulator.

I'm here with Mr. Darren Christie, chief economist, and Mr. Sean Maher, professional leader, environment.

I want to begin by acknowledging that I'm appearing before you today from Calgary, located within Treaty 7 territory, the traditional territory of the Blackfoot Confederacy, which includes the Siksika, Piikani and Kainai first nations. Treaty 7 territory is also home to the Tsuut'ina First Nation and the Stoney Nakoda, which includes the Chiniki, Bearspaw and Goodstoney nations. I'd also like to recognize the Métis who have settled in southern Alberta and call this place home.

Thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about the work CER is doing as part of your study.

I welcome the opportunity to briefly describe the CER's mandate, how we assess energy infrastructure projects in relation to greenhouse gas emissions, and how we support the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources and the Canadian public with information about potential future scenarios for Canada's emissions reductions and energy mix.

The CER's mandate is clear: to regulate energy infrastructure, international and interprovincial power lines and offshore energy projects in a way that prevents harm and ensures a safe, reliable, competitive and environmentally sustainable delivery of energy to Canada and the world. Our mandate includes the full life cycle of the energy infrastructure we regulate, from design and assessment through to construction, operation and end-of-life. We oversee approximately 73,000 kilometres of federally regulated pipelines and just over 1,600 kilometres of power lines.

We play an important economic role in pipeline rights and tariffs, as well as energy exports.

Part of the Canada Energy Regulator's mandate is also to provide information on energy. We provide information and analysis that inform decision-making and dialogue on energy in Canada.

In everything we do, safety and environmental oversight are always at the forefront. They're the reasons we exist. The CER does not develop or set government policy, including federal climate policies. Questions on these matters are best directed to our colleagues at NRCan and Environment and Climate Change Canada.

In speaking about our mandate, I also want to recognize reconciliation with Canada's indigenous people as core to our work. We're implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by enhancing indigenous involvement in our oversight, building renewed relationships based on recognition of rights, improving the cultural competency of the CER and its staff, and driving meaningful change in the CER's requirements and expectations of regulated industry.

The CER Act established the commission of the CER as the court of record responsible for making independent, adjudicated decisions and recommendations on pipelines, power lines and offshore renewable energy projects within Parliament's jurisdiction. In making a decision or recommendation as to whether a proposed facility is in the public interest, our commission takes into account a number of specified factors, including the extent to which the project hinders or contributes to Canada's ability to meet its environmental objectives and commitments with respect to climate change.

In assessing the extent of emissions, the commission also considers how the project's predicted emissions impact Canada's GHG reduction targets. The commission may impose legally binding conditions as part of a project's authorization, and conditions may refer to additional mitigation measures and other requirements in order to avoid or reduce a project's GHG emissions.

Alongside our regulatory functions, the CER plays a vital role in providing timely and relevant energy information and analysis to support industry conversation in Canada. We monitor energy markets on an ongoing basis and produce a series of publications on topical energy issues, such as energy trade, energy supply and demand, pipeline—

Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC

Excuse me, Mr. Chair, the interpretation has stopped.

The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono

The interpretation has stopped.

12:15 p.m.

Vice President, System Operations, Canadian Energy Regulator

Jonathan Timlin

Would you like me to repeat what I said?

The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono

Wait one second, Mr. Timlin. We'll figure out the problem on our side.

The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono

I'm sorry, Mr. Timlin. We're still having difficulty trying to make it out.

Mr. Timlin, in order to go ahead with time—because time is a factor—you can provide us with your opening remarks, and we will put them into our record.

We will now proceed with questions for the witnesses.

Thank you.

12:20 p.m.

Vice President, System Operations, Canadian Energy Regulator

Jonathan Timlin

Thank you, committee.

The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono

We will have Mr. Leslie for six minutes.

The floor is yours.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Can I start with Ms. Farrell, please?

I've been informed that the government officials are quietly telling stakeholders that the new powers in Bill C-5 could be used to bypass the Liberal tanker ban on the Pacific coast.

My question is straightforward. Does the Major Projects Office now have the legal authority to exempt certain projects from the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, yes or no?

12:20 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Major Projects Office

Dawn Farrell

I'm going to turn to Mr. Labonté on that question. He'd be better informed on that than I would at this point.

Jeff Labonté Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources

The act provides the ability for a project, should it be deemed in the national interest, to have a series of conditions. Those conditions can spell out the regulatory requirements. There has to be a project, and there has to be a proposal. It has to be something that's deemed in the national interest, evaluated and then presented to the order in council.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Can I reframe the question, then, for you?

If there were a pipeline approved for the west coast by this government with the aid of the Major Projects Office, it would face the current barrier of Bill C-48, the moratorium on tankers. Without the repealing of that legislation, could that project move ahead to get oil to tidewater?

12:20 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources

Jeff Labonté

I think we'd have to take a look at the project. At this point, there are no specific projects that indicate and have a route.

The route—

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Is it a possibility? It's hypothetical. Let's say that a project gets a route and gets built to the ocean. Bill C-48 stands in the way. Could the extraordinary powers under Bill C-5 and the creation of the Major Projects Office allow for, without repealing Bill C-48, oil to be moved to a tanker there? Is it possible?

12:20 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources

Jeff Labonté

Sarah, could you jump in on this one?

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

I have a point of order.

Sarah Jackson Director, Major Projects Office

The Building Canada Act applies to authorizations that are listed in schedule 2 of that act.

The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono

Mrs. Jackson, wait one second. There's a point of order.

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

I'm just wondering how this question relates to the study at hand. I would argue that it's irrelevant. Thank you.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Witness, please continue.

12:20 p.m.

Director, Major Projects Office

Sarah Jackson

If a hypothetical project were determined or designated to be “in the national interest” under the Building Canada Act, there's no automatic exemption from the tanker ban. The law does not provide for exemptions. It provides for streamlined approvals.

For authorizations listed in schedule 2, the tanker ban is not one of those pieces of legislation listed in schedule 2. By virtue of being designated under the act, that would not be an automatic result.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

There is—

The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono

Mr. Leslie, you do not instruct the witnesses to go ahead and speak. That is for the chair to do.

Thank you. You have the floor.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Is it possible, without repealing Bill C-48, for a tanker to come and pick up oil that has been transported from a pipeline approved by the MPO to tidewater? Is it possible without repealing Bill C-48?

12:20 p.m.

Director, Major Projects Office

Sarah Jackson

I can't comment on a hypothetical project.