Industry Committee on Sept. 22nd, 2022

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your bill, Mr. Carr. One senses the influence your career has had on this one, but one also recognizes in it a dream to be realized. I'm disappointed that it's for the Prairies. I'm from a so-called resource region, and mining, forestry and agriculture are particularly important to us. There are a lot of similarities between the Prairie economy and ours.

I feel that a government could even use a bill like this as a blueprint for reforming Canada's and Quebec's economies by building on the strength of the territories. We need to focus more on the royalties that we can give to these places and the economic development tools specific to each of them.

I'm appalled that we're unable to build a normal everyday abattoir in Quebec with help from the federal government. It would make a world of difference to the 100 to 200 beef producers in Abitibi‑Témiscamingue. They have to drive over eight hours and 800 kilometres to have their livestock slaughtered. We know that affects product quality, the environment, etc.

In my opinion, your bill should be more national in scope because it could benefit the whole country. However, the Bloc Québécois supports it because of the solutions it may bring. That could lead to other reforms that could drive economic development across Canada.

I would add with sincerity that one of Bloc Québécois' initiatives would be to have Canada sell the infamous Kinder Morgan pipeline. They said it cost $14 billion, and that figure has now risen to $18 billion or more. The proceeds from that could be used to set up an economic development fund for the Prairies.

Of course, at the Bloc Québécois we'll say that some of our money was used to buy that pipeline but at the same time, if it's resold it might become a driver for economic development that could fund university research, and more specifically green initiatives, as you say. That would be a plausible option for a bill like yours, giving it more depth.

First, how do you see these financing tools? Would it be through banks, insurance companies or federal transfers?

You spoke of working with the provinces and municipalities and financial products, hopefully outside the oil and gas industry, to diversify the economy. How do we do that?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

The bill is not prescriptive because that would undercut the very idea that we spend these months determining what the priorities ought to be in building this framework. However, let me agree with the premise of your introduction that this way of making decisions and coming up with what I hope is enlightened public policy is not restricted to one region of the country. If this is going to work in the Prairies, which is as diverse as I've been suggesting, why won't it work in other regions of the country, including Quebec? I think it will.

This could be seen as a template. It could be seen as a way of experimenting with a new way of going about public policy-making that could be equally applicable.

I wouldn't have any comment to make about setting up a fund of economic development on the basis of selling an asset, but I hope that the framework will include commentary on investment tools and ways in which we can properly fund the next chapter of energy development and sustainability in prairie Canada.

What you're doing is challenging the team of federal ministers, given the mandate that will be part of Canadian law if this bill passes, in order to do exactly the kind of investigations that you're calling for.

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

You're suggesting we take an interest in several new energy sources, including nuclear energy.

Can you tell us more about how you see nuclear energy being used in the Prairies?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

We didn't want to exclude anything by virtue of including a list of possibilities. The framework will establish recommendations on the precise way in which various sources of energy might be used, but it didn't make any sense to me or to those of us who were involved in drafting to exclude any possible source of energy. Maybe it's there to be rejected by others at a later date, but it made no sense to leave it out.

That's why it's there. Let them have a go at it. Let them explore it. Let the controversy be joined. Let the debate be robust, as I'm sure it will be. We know people are of different views.

It was my judgment—and I still say it's a good judgment to make—to have a go and to have a debate. I think the country needs it. It's timely.

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

I have one last question to ask.

Why do we need to go through a bill, like you're doing now? What's the added value compared to other initiatives that have been carried out?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I don't know that we can assume partnerships will happen all on their own. I think to mandate the kinds of conversations that will have to happen is to concentrate the public mind. And let me say the private mind, too, because the role of the private sector in making these policies breathe life is essential. Without it, it's not going to happen. You're not going to have governments acting on their own to tackle all of the problems that our region is facing. It has to be in concert with the academic community that's going to drive research and development, the private sector that's going to drive investment patterns, and the public policy environment that is the responsibility of government to set.

I think we have to have a certain amount of confidence that what we're creating here is going to allow for all of those conversations to happen in a way that's going to lead to a better result than we've had before. People will say, “Yeah, but you had all this time to do what it is that you want this bill to accomplish, but it hasn't happened.” They ask, “Why hasn't it happened?”

I'm not interested in why something hasn't happened. I'm interested in helping things happen, and that's what this bill seeks to do.

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

I didn't dare ask you that question.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to MP Masse for six minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome back, and thank you for your service over the years in Parliament.

I'm going to go through an idea here. Your summary talks about local co-operation, engagement and a number of different things. Do you have any municipalities that are supporting this bill?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I've had conversations with mayors and reeves, and organizations of municipalities. I think there is a consensus among them that to be a part of this kind of conversation in itself....

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

There have been no endorsements yet—

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I haven't sought endorsements. That's something that the....

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Other than Saskatchewan, is there any provincial support for it, any premiers or provincial explicit support from ministers?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I haven't sought that.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Okay. How about first nations?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Yes, I've had conversations with first nations communities. They are mentioned explicitly in the bill.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Right, but have you an endorsement from them for the bill?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Again, I'm not seeking endorsements—

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Okay.

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'm seeking agreement from this committee in the first place, and then subsequently by the House to mitigate those conversations—

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Do you have any citizen petitioners who have been in favour of the bill? Do you have petitions running or public support?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

You're giving me lots of great ideas, but as I said, I've not sought at this stage to do any of that.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'm looking for consistency here, and here's the reason. I have a private member's bill, too, Bill C-248, that you voted against. It's been accused by the government side, by some members—not all—of being top-down.

I have, as converse to yours, the City of Windsor's actual explicit endorsement for the bill, including the mayor and all of council unanimously. It's the same with the Town of LaSalle. I have not only just the first nations that are supporting it explicitly. Caldwell First Nation historically used this bill, and my bill, as part of their actual reconciliation process. I also have the Province of Ontario that just passed a motion in the legislature in their first weeks of the House sitting in favour of what's taking place. I have thousands of petitioners. I have almost 10 years in the making of the entire idea for the national urban park. I have Unifor onside, the Windsor and District Labour Council, and I also have the Wildlands League, NGOs, all universally in support of it. The only opposition comes from you and government members.

I want you to reflect on that, and if you're open I want to find out—what do you think is top-down? It appears that your bill here is a little more top-down than my bill, which actually comes from the community.

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I wouldn't purport to be able to compare these two bills from that perspective when the objective of my bill is to end up exactly where you are now. We're just starting from different places.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

If we are, I started from the other place, so I'm curious. This is what has been spoken in the House of Commons against my bill. It was voted against by your members, and I still think that I want to reflect on this in terms of the accusation that mine is top-down, whereas yours does not have explicit support from anyone yet, and this appears to be more top-down.

I think we need consistency.