Industry Committee on March 22nd, 2022

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Rickford, thank you for being with us. I salute the leadership you have shown today by agreeing to appear before the committee to present your province's vision. I sincerely wish that the same thing had happened in Quebec.

That being said, I would like to point out the good questions that were asked by my two previous colleagues, which end up reducing the ones I had on my list.

I'd like to talk about resource processing. I'm particularly interested in the example of the Cobalt mining belt. You know, I'm the member of Parliament for Abitibi—Témiscamingue, so I'm just a few steps away from this company. I have a sailboat on Lake Timiskaming, and when the winds are favourable, I get there quite easily. You have a great processing model.

Could you talk to us about the importance of being able to do this processing close to the resource and the example it sets in terms of land use and economic levers in our resource regions?

[Greg Rickford]

Thank you for the question.

We learned from the Plan Nord in Quebec.

There's also the Centre d'excellence sur les métaux critiques et stratégiques Éléments08. I believe it's a project of the CEGEP in your region, Abitibi‑Témiscamingue.

These are things that we think have to be part of this strategy, Mr. Lemire. They're lessons that I have pulled from, or are pages from, the success of the Plan Nord du Québec, frankly, which I believe is one of the reasons that northern Quebec is having so much success on a number of levels in responsible resource development and in appreciable benefit for indigenous communities on all aspects of it. I mentioned, of course, the role that the industrial technology centre is playing at, I think, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue. As their MP, I'm sure you would know more about it than I would. Integrating these into institutions of higher learning I think is also a critical element—no pun intended—so that folks have a comprehensive understanding of just what we're trying to develop here.

So it's not just about exploration, Monsieur Lemire. It's also about raising awareness about the potential for things like building capacity for processing, and being fully integrated in a supply chain within the province of Ontario and in co-operation with jurisdictions like Quebec, especially when it comes to transportation and the prolific work you do in bus manufacturing and some of the exciting opportunities that are taking place on the ground around lithium, a power supply for those modes of transportation.

Does that answer your question?

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Your answer was very complete and very inspiring. Thank you very much.

In the next hour, Benoît Plante, representative of the Centre d'excellence sur les métaux critiques et stratégiques Éléments08, from the Université du Québec en Abitibi‑Témiscamingue, will be with us to talk about the role of the centre of excellence. It will help us understand how an academic institution can help companies, especially mining companies, to better innovate.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on important issues, such as the issue of commuter workers and the labour shortage.

From a regional development point of view, what structuring measures have been put in place to address the labour shortage and to ensure the full development of regions and resources?

What are the obstacles you face in your discussions with the federal government?

[Greg Rickford]

You know, I just finished a conversation with the folks at Wyloo, who obviously successfully...or as it will be announced—it's a matter of public information—a considerable stake in the Ring of Fire. It's the billion-dollar question, not the million-dollar question. I spent most of my professional career living and working in isolated fly-in, fly-out communities. That connotation comes with some good and some bad. On the energy side, it likely means that the energy sources come from diesel. We have to stop that, Monsieur Lemire. I'm sure you share that view.

That gets me on my shoebox, if you will, talking about the legacy infrastructure and what governments can really do to contribute to some of these projects and to ensure that communities most proximal to these potentially world-class resource projects have the right legacy infrastructure to support them in a comprehensive way.

The corridor to prosperity that would run up the middle of northern Ontario, that's as vast and remote and isolated as any part of Canada, and that has a compelling need for a corridor there, could supply energy. It could supply a road for better access to health services and programs, economic benefits that move beyond responsible resource development and mining projects in their proximity, and of course broadband capacity. Without these things, these projects just become the kind of legacy that Canada needs to move out of the business of doing.

Some of it will continue to be necessary, particularly in the High Arctic, but even then, governments like our own back in the day had invested in certain critical infrastructure, particularly around highways when and where possible, to ensure that we had alternative corridors for transportation, energy sources and now broadband and the like to ensure that there is a comprehensive sensibility about what we're trying to accomplish here beyond the resource projects themselves.

Does that make sense?

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Yes, I think that makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire and Mr. Rickford.

Mr. Blaikie, you now have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Rickford, for being here.

I had the opportunity in the fall to travel to Washington with the International Trade Minister, and with Mr. Hoback from the Conservative Party, and with Mr. Lemire from the Bloc Québécois. We were there to talk to American legislators about an electric vehicle rebate and its potential impact on Canada.

As part of that conversation we were also talking about Canada's role to play in providing critical minerals for the EV market. One of the things that really stood out to me in the course of that lobbying effort was how detrimental it is to Canada's interest not to have a real strategy. When we talk to our American counterparts there is no document that we can use to show them not only the place that Canada can play in their own strategy, but how Canada sees them fitting into our strategy, whether it's for developing resources or manufacturing the cars of the future.

I think that ties in nicely to the questions that were rightly raised earlier around the role of China and Russia in this market. Again, if you treat every acquisition or every new development as a one-off, without taking a properly strategic approach, then it's a lot harder to get to where you want to go, and to protect Canada's national and security interests.

I just wonder if you have some reflections you'd care to share with the committee on whatever efforts are taking place to build a proper national strategy around critical minerals and the EV market that we might take to our allies in order to impress upon them the importance of continuing to work with Canada and ensuring that Canada is part of their plans as we go forward into a very different auto market into the future.

[Greg Rickford]

Daniel, this is a really important question that you ask, and a friendly “hello” as a fellow Mantarian. You could appreciate, as my neighbour out there in Kenora, it's great to have a question from you.

Manitoba supplies 100% of Canada's cesium, lithium and tantalum. They're home to some great nickel, copper, zinc and gold mines in their own right. I've had a chance to live in many parts of remote northern Manitoba in previous careers. I've talked at great length about Ontario. I've mentioned British Columbia and Quebec here. I'm trying to be a happy family member and resist the urge to be Marcia Brady, as making a special case for Ontario's critical mineral strategy.

Some would ask why is Ontario doing this, and not the federal government? That may be a cryptic part of your question, or an explicit one. Why isn't there a national strategy?

In Ontario's case I think we see an opportunity that's a little bit different from our provincial counterparts to the extent that with a world-class automotive sector in the manufacturing space, we see this from ground to the car itself, which puts us in a unique position.

But certainly, as I mentioned earlier, on legacy infrastructure and a strategy overall, it behooves the federal government to get this right. Some of these FPTs can be pretty boring and agenda driven. It might be useful for us to think about a critical mineral round table that endeavours to develop a national, coherent strategy for the benefit especially of our neighbours.

We can't have President Biden saying that he needs to focus on a domestic supply of critical minerals. Daniel, he ain't got none. I think there is a little bit of nickel up in Washington State, but other than that, there is not much going on there, so his reference, obviously, was clearly to Canada. I think this is an opportunity for the federal government to get together with its provincial counterparts and develop a strategy that acknowledges not only what we're all doing in this space, what we're all talking about on the side with my provincial ministers, but offers up to our friends in the United States, and frankly to the rest of the world, an alternative to Russia and Communist China.

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

I certainly applaud Ontario's efforts to begin the work of doing some real strategic planning.

Of course, I think that having a federal strategy doesn't look like coming in and telling provinces what to do in their own right, because I agree with you that different provinces have different opportunities. But I think the federal government, in its best light, would convene provinces to try to create a table where, to the maximum possible amount, provincial strategies can be complementary instead of competitive and can serve a wider Canadian interest while respecting the individual opportunities of provinces in this.

I think another component that's best done with the federal government at the table, of course, is recognizing the role of indigenous people and trying to incorporate indigenous people into that planning exercise as early as possible, including that strategic planning.

I know you've spoken a little bit already about some of Ontario's work with indigenous people, but I wonder if you could explain to the committee what steps you're taking to try to incorporate indigenous communities as early as possible into the planning stages of both particular projects, but also the larger question of the strategy.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Minister, I would have to ask you to do it in 15 seconds, and I think you won't be able to.

Mr. Blaikie, we can come back in the second round, and you'll have some time for this.

[Greg Rickford]

Maybe somebody from the Conservative Party could give Daniel a couple of extra minutes. That was a great question and it's pertinent—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

It was indeed a great question, but we have a second round. I'll shorten the time, and I'm sure someone will ask that question. I'll let you move on.

We have 10 more minutes with the minister. I'll reduce everyone's time to three minutes for the Conservatives and Liberals and two minutes for the Bloc and NDP, so that we have time for the second panel.

We'll start with Mr. Kram for three minutes.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Minister Rickford, welcome to the industry committee. Thank you for joining us to share best practices. I understand that the Ontario provincial government has come up with its provincial critical mineral strategy.

I think some people might be reading my notes. One of my questions was about indigenous consultation and participation. Why don't we pick up there, Minister Rickford?

What recommendations would you make in terms of making sure that indigenous communities are included as participants in a critical mineral strategy?

[Greg Rickford]

Thanks, Michael.

We're not perfect at it; we're barely good. It's still on a project-to-project basis. I give full credit where credit's due. Le Plan Nord du gouvernement du Québec established a template, the James Bay Agreement, which is obviously a world-class document that, generationally, has proved to be the platform from which a lot of this good work has been done in resource development in forestry, mining and—underpinning it—hydroelectricity generation. I give credit where credit's due.

As I said earlier, Michael, the success of our projects over the past couple of years has been characterized by a substantive role, a partnership both in the context of the private partner and the relationship with the government when the indigenous communities have led. In the Ring of Fire, the environmental assessment for the corridor to prosperity, the row—roughly the length of the distance between the Toronto Maple Leafs Scotiabank arena and where the Montreal Canadiens play—is being led by indigenous communities.

Similarly, all of the projects that have moved past the environmental assessment to a leave to construct have opened or are now expanding. They are a testament to the contributions by indigenous communities and/or their businesses and indigenous organizations that have helped put the contours to the business, labour and environmental elements of the project.

We have our own templates—plural—to draw from. I think that's a good indication of what we need to continue to do and how we need to do it.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

In a response to an earlier question, you brought up Bill C-69 as it relates to the Ring of Fire.

If you were back in federal politics, Minister Rickford, and you could make some changes to Bill C-69, would you offer any recommendations that might be helpful?

[Greg Rickford]

I've written extensively about it, Michael. I want to keep this discussion going without some of the partisanship that sometimes infects conversations like today's, because they're important.

A heads-up would have been good, and I have a couple of quick points there. I still am concerned about what I call some of the “windows” for cabinet-level government and/or other stakeholders and potential partners to press the pause button on a given project at a given state.

I think critics, on balance, still have some of those concerns. I would have preferred that we test drove Bill C-69 on a project that crossed provincial boundaries instead of this project, but it's there. We've successfully negotiated it as different levels of governments and private partners, and I think we're in a decent place. We'll learn the lessons moving forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Rickford.

We'll now move to Mr. Erskine-Smith for three minutes.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thanks, Joël.

Mr. Rickford, I appreciated the comments you made around addressing the regulatory framework and ensuring that we don't sacrifice environmental protections and consultation with indigenous communities.

It's a big week for you in some ways. You have the strategy from the province, and I understand there's a big announcement coming tomorrow on the EV file. When we look to the strategy that you now have in hand on the critical minerals file, it speaks to improving Ontario's regulatory framework, and as part of that, coordinating the new framework with other federal and provincial regulatory requirements.

You don't have to answer in full, but, if you can give some examples, it might be helpful. What would be really helpful for our purposes as we look to the way we can complement our own work with yours is if you and your officials can follow up at some point with a more detailed set of examples where, as we develop our own strategy, we can make sure that we complement our strategies in a more perfect way.

Say anything you like in response, but it's the follow-up I'm most interested in.

[Greg Rickford]

In general terms, Nathaniel, as I said earlier—and this is a metaphor—it's singing from the same songbook, understanding and respecting what each jurisdictions holds near and dear to them and what the value proposition is. I mentioned that Ontario's strategy is bold, because we have a rare opportunity from extraction right through to the technology being manufactured here in southern Ontario. That is an extraordinary, one-of-a-kind opportunity.

There are differences as we move across the country, but to the extent that major environmental assessments may come into play, especially as they may pertain to a national interest, it's important we sit down as partners and ensure that we're thinking about it the right way. We understand that our role is not to build mines, but to create the right conditions for communities—including, most notably, indigenous communities—to benefit from them; to be satisfied, from a business, environmental and human resource perspective that we're pulling the right levers at the right time; and providing, at the same time, the kind of business certainty that these large-scale investments require.

I would finish very quickly with the infrastructure piece. I can't stress enough that these legacy infrastructure projects are actually bigger than the mining projects over the course of time. Building the corridor to prosperity is going to provide, arguably, a lot more contemporary jobs and processes, when you think about it, than a mining operation sustained over the course of time.

Being involved as full partners on those kinds of things would make sense to me. We're hearing great things from the federal government on this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Mr. Rickford.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for two minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you again for your testimony, Mr. Rickford.

I think the issue of strategic critical minerals is very directly related to the issue of the electrification of transportation, which is also a very important issue.

I will tell you an anecdote. Last week, there was Mr. Zelenskyy's speech. I decided to go through Ontario to come home, which I had already done a few times. I knew that the fast‑charging stations in Deep River weren't working, because I had run into this problem in the past. So I checked my app before I left Quyon. The electrical load was 90%. I went to Mattawa. The two fast‑charging stations there were not working. I got home about 10 hours later. I had to tow my car to North Bay, where there were no fast‑charging stations. The tow truck couldn't take me to Timiskaming because it would have had to cross a border.

In short, my question is very simple: Does the issue of strategic critical minerals include electrification and the production of fast‑charging stations?

A public network similar to the electrical system might be possible. I can tell you that I would use it from time to time, and I would be very grateful to have access to it.

[Greg Rickford]

I'm glad to see the traditions are still alive, touting your riding and your jurisdiction and taking shots in your question at other members in a friendly kind of way. Nonetheless, Mr. Lemire, let me be pointed in my response, given the time constraints.

There's no question that electric vehicles are all the rage, baby, as Austin Powers might frame it, but there are a couple of other important things that critical minerals have to do for the world, and they can come from Canada. Frankly, battery storage would be really nice in our major corridor through southern Ontario and Quebec, so we don't have to spill electricity at ridiculous prices into the United States. I'm not sure if you've thought about that, but we're looking at that in Ontario. Batteries will require those kinds of critical minerals to do storage. Given the demand of other high-tech industries, including our iPhones and everything else, you can't have one of those without critical minerals.

Of course, there's also national defence. If you take a look at the situation between Ukraine and Russia, and the implications for jurisdictions the world over, this is in part about a looming crisis around critical minerals. There's access to titanium. Russia has threatened nickel. Many of these elements are absolutely essential as countries around the world increase their defence spending. Most defence technology comes—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Minister.

[Greg Rickford]

Jöel, don't cut me off.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I know. I'm sorry.