Industry Committee on Sept. 22nd, 2022

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

Fair enough.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I will move on with regards to canola. It's one of the things that I think has been underestimated in the Canadian economy. Can you maybe highlight a little bit about how this could help with that? I know that in the past we had the Wheat Board that would push out policies and so forth, and that's changed over time. Canola has emerged as very much a dominant staple market export. Maybe you can explain how this will help on an issue like that in a more practical sense.

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

I think it just underlines the importance of converting our natural resources not only into traditional sources of energy, but also into alternate sources of energy in demand worldwide. We produce much of it. We have to be more aggressive in the way we market it, and that's an obstacle.

When I was minister of international trade—you notice they added the word “diversification”—as Shannon knows, we travelled around the world looking for new markets, and there was a reluctance among Canadian entrepreneurs to get out of their comfort zones: We speak the same language as the Americans; they're comfortable; we've done business with them forever. Business was okay, and people were risk averse. They shouldn't be risk averse; they should embrace the challenge. You say that canola is a good example of that, and I agree with you.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

With regards to the transportation of goods and services to the product destination for international trade, often pipelines are focused on, but the other modes of transportation are CP and CN, and there are container issues right now. I know that in a number of different areas they're not getting out to the different markets. Is this a forum where transportation to market can also be addressed?

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

Absolutely. You may have read the one example. There hasn't been a train to move from Calgary to Edmonton since 1985. You probably know—members around this table will know—that bus service is almost unavailable in prairie Canada. The airline connections are inadequate to say the least. So, who is grabbing that? This could easily be a forum where the interests come to the table and say that this is unacceptable. I mean, our people.... Imagine seniors in rural prairie Canada trying to go from one place to another, and there's nothing available to them. Who's debating it? Who's looking for public policy solutions? This offers them an opportunity.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Lastly, with regards to the groups and organizations I referenced at the start, do you think there are many out there that want to testify to this committee, and do you have a list to help us to gain access to those organizations, whether they be municipal, provincial, first nations and so forth? Can you provide that?

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

I'm glad to work with you on the lists. I'm happy to do that.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witness.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to Mrs. Stubbs.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Thank you, Chair. It's nice to see you again. I enjoyed working with you on the public safety committee.

Mr. Carr, it's nice to see you again. I did enjoy working both with and against you on natural resource issues during your years as natural resources minister. I also want to recognize your service both in Manitoba and to Canada, and it's nice to see you well and in person.

Far be it from me to be surprised today to agree with an NDP member from Ontario, but I'm just here to speak on behalf of the Alberta constituents I represent. Following up on the point that our colleague from Ontario made and also our Conservative colleague here from Saskatchewan, I think your bill, seven years into the Liberals being in government, is quite a negative commentary on this federal government's track record on negotiating and consulting with prairie provinces. It seems to me that your aspirations and intentions in this legislation, which I know are good, would imply that consultations so far between the various levels of government have been ineffective or lacking.

I guess what I'm curious about is how you sort of reconcile what you clearly have identified as a need for this sort of legislation against a federal government that is, for example, facing lawsuits from all three provincial governments on the carbon tax, on the shipping ban, Bill C-48, the “no more pipeline spills”, and Bill C-69, which will also have major consequences, of course, not just for resources projects but all kinds of other economic development.

On those three issues, the vast majority of prairie representatives who happen to sit federally in the Conservative caucus as well as those prairie provincial representatives say they are among the top threats destroying economic development in their provinces and livelihoods of their citizens and of the people I represent.

It just seems that you are asking for a committee and politicians to create a framework and a mandate, which I presume is going to cost something, to enable a process to occur, which clearly already should be happening, but we are sitting here where we are in reality with the federal government that is being opposed on all kinds of major pieces of legislation and their policy agenda by those very provinces.

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

We all could look backwards together and determine where we've gone wrong, and we might even agree, but that's not what I want to do. I want to look forward, and I want to take accomplishments where we can find them and parlay them into a bit of a road map, acknowledging that there have been mistakes made and that there are relationships that should have been developed that haven't been developed.

I spent most of two years on the second floor of my house on my little computer traversing the Prairies. Do you know what I found? In spite of all of the noise and all the confusion about political messaging, I found alignment everywhere, including in Alberta. I was surprised by it, not only because of some demographic changes that have occurred over the last number of years, but because the very nature of the way in which we organize ourselves as provinces has changed.

I was surprised that, in the course of the day, I could, through the magic of my Surface Pro and not getting on an airplane, visit cattle ranchers in the morning, talk to the chamber of commerce at lunch and then talk to power producers in the afternoon. I would come out of that day and say that we agreed on four or five things. Why isn't anybody talking about the agreement across unions, industry, academia and government officials, a lot of important conversations with ministers of the Alberta government, as an example on issues that really matter?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

This is what is confusing about this initiative. Those provinces, their federal representatives, their provincial representatives and their citizens, by and large, are speaking loud and clear about these consequential aspects of the cornerstone of the Liberal government's policy agenda, and they're being ignored. I guess the Liberals can take up your individual initiative to consult, but if that two-way dynamic and listening to what is being said continues to be ignored, we will gain nothing.

I think the central issue with this bill is that if we need it, it's an indictment of the current government. If the government wants to contend that consultation is already happening, it's not necessary.

Also, about your aim.... In greening the economy—you and I have had this conversation many times—I agree with you wholeheartedly about the stereotypes that are applied to various provinces. You know it's a passion of mine to bust myths about Alberta, which, of course, was the first province to have an environment minister, the first province to set, report and regulate emissions, and the first province to have a major industrial emitter levy targeted to clean tech. The oil and gas industry accounts for 75% of investment in this country for clean tech. Alberta's the biggest hydrogen producer. We are the first province with a 100% renewable energy-powered LRT. We have the largest contiguous green space. We have the oldest commercial wind farm. We have the oldest and largest commercial solar farm.

The reality is that in the province of Alberta, this environmental stewardship and leadership has been happening already because of the public policy agenda of the provincial governments and a thriving private sector fuelled by energy and agriculture, so that money is available to invest in technology. Also, to your point, there's a co-operative development of public policy framework to allow these things to happen, just like when Prime Minister Chrétien worked with Premier Klein to bring in some fiscal policies to unleash the development of in situ oil sands projects.

Here we are now with four pipelines having been killed, because of the regulatory mistakes of the Liberal government, and 18 LNG projects that have gone by the wayside, killing Canada's opportunity to be both self-sufficient and a world-leading provider of LNG across the country.

I notice—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Mrs. Stubbs, we'll have—

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

—even in your bill, you are prioritizing nuclear—I agree wholeheartedly with you—but the sitting environment minister isn't interested in that.

I think the challenge is that we probably all agree with aspirations, but what's happening in real life and with the context of this Liberal government, I think, doesn't give Albertans very much confidence.

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

[Inaudible—Editor].

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I'd like to let you respond, but I'm sure you'll have other opportunities. We're way over time, but I wanted to give space for the passion that you both have for the Prairies.

We'll get back to you, Mr. Carr, for sure.

We'll go to Mr. Erskine-Smith for five minutes.

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

Thanks, Joël.

Thanks for being here and for putting this bill together. I've introduced a few private members' bills in my seven years—some successful and some not—but I always find when you've tabled something, there's something you wish you'd changed or you'd thought a bit more about, and you could have tweaked something. If you had another go at it, you would have changed it oh so very differently.

I wonder, when you look at the bill now, many months after you originally worked with the legislative drafters to put it together, are there particular areas we should be looking at to improve the bill?

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

Yes. The Minister of Agriculture should be specifically named as an implicated minister. He should have been. He wasn't. Let's change it.

I think, colleagues, that 18 months might be too long. Maybe we should think about making it a year, to give the impetus for speedier work.

Those are two examples of what I think we could streamline and tighten. Directly to your question, I've thought about those two issues quite a lot since the bill was tabled, so I would be happy if we bumped up the involvement, the participation and the naming of the Minister of Agriculture, and we reduced the time necessary for the framework from 18 months to one year.

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

In terms of the minister, the relevant minister will remain the minister of industry in your view. Are there other ministers? You mentioned the agriculture minister not being named. I presume in section 5, under “Report”, where it says the minister must....in collaboration with environment, transport, finance and natural resources, we would name agriculture. I think that's what you said.

Is there any other minister you think should be incorporated into this legislation?

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

Yes. The minister in charge of PrairiesCan and western economic development should be very much a part of it—even leading it. I think there have been some discussions with the ministry to see that it can happen. Somebody will have to draft an appropriate amendment, but that certainly would be fine with me.

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

This relates to the question that Shannon was asking you, because on the one hand we can acknowledge major efforts by Albertans and by industry in Alberta to advance emission reduction and to work together, both to grow the economy, but to do their part. At the same time, as a country—and this includes Alberta—more broadly, we aren't yet doing enough, and I think there is more to be done.

How do you square this idea of respecting the traditional energy industries that Shannon wants us to respect to a great degree while also moving to a net-zero economy? You've said very clearly to foster “job creation and retraining”, for example:

in regions that rely on traditional energy industries to enable them to build a zero-emissions green economy and mitigate their impact on climate change;

That's in paragraph 3(3)(b) in the bill. Have you seen opposition to that suggestion that we should be moving away from traditional energy industries to enable a zero-emissions green economy in the Prairies, or do you see that being welcomed by industry in the Prairies?

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

I see lots of evidence that it's being welcomed.

We shouldn't underestimate the capacity of leaders in that industry to lead the way. They are sensitive in detail that you and I wouldn't run into to the movement of capital flows internationally. They know how to anticipate markets. They can read the changing sentiment in the public policy environment, in the political environment and in the funding environment, so what do you do? You take advantage of that expertise and spirit, and you work with it. I know that there are all kinds of examples of where that's happening right now.

I have.... It's not just faith: I think it's interest that the established industries know what their balance sheets are going to look like in a year. They speculate on what they will look like in five years. They're in the business of anticipating trends, and their livelihoods depend on it. They also have the capacity to invest in their instinct and in their assessment of on-the-ground realities in their world, so what do you do? You don't set them up as opponents. You embrace them as allies. That, really, if I had to give a bottom line to this bill, is “let's embrace our allies”.

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

Thanks, Jim. I'm out of time.

I just want to say—and I wish, Shannon, that I were there in person with you—that you don't just have to work to agree with an NDP member from Ontario. You can agree with the Liberal member from Ontario on occasion too.

It's nice to see everyone.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you.

We now go to Mr. Lemire for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Carr, a lot of land is kept fallow in the northern parts of the Prairie provinces. One might be tempted to let the government plant its billions of trees there. However, in my opinion, any good sustainable economy plan has to include agriculture too.

Don't you think it would be a good idea to have a financial program that allows farming on fallow land? We have nothing like that here in Canada right now.