Industry Committee on Oct. 6th, 2022

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

Thanks very much.

I want to get back to this idea of an energy transition, because this is not a partisan issue.

I'm going to read from the Alberta Geological Survey, part of the Alberta Energy Regulator. This is on their website:

Critical minerals are the minerals essential for sustainable economic success, economic security, the energy transition, and a reliable resource supply chain.

They are referencing the energy transition.

I wonder if we can start with Safety First and Ms. Ness.

What is the Alberta Geological Survey speaking to when they talk about “energy transition”?

[Justine Ness]

I would assume we're all trying to find the greenest solutions to move forward on, because everybody's worried about climate change, and rightfully so.

However, we have to make sure it is reasonable. Having that transition is a great initiative, but it is proceeding at a pace that is—

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

Let's pause. There's no timeline in this bill. This bill is specifically saying we need to support the Prairies and, of course, this energy transition—which, by the way, the Alberta Geological Survey and the Alberta Energy Regulator are, themselves, identifying.

I want to go to the Alberta Enterprise Group and Ms. Brownlee.

Do you support this bill?

[Catherine Brownlee]

No, we do not support it.

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

Could you reference the specific section of the bill you disagree with?

[Catherine Brownlee]

It's the entire thing. I see it as a framework to create yet another layer of bureaucracy. I don't—

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

What bureaucracy do you mean, though?

I want to get to this, because Mr. Bewick talked about red tape, too.

The government is going to create a framework, and the framework is going to require consultation with the relevant provinces. What red tape and bureaucracy does it create for a business? This is presumably creating a framework for government policy action, so what bureaucracy is this going to create for a business in Alberta? Point me to the section.

[Catherine Brownlee]

Is that still directed at me?

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

Yes.

[Catherine Brownlee]

Thank you.

Specifically, we're creating yet another layer of reporting, so the red tape you're referring to.... I think that's exactly what this is.

We're already doing all these great things in Alberta now. I've already referenced them in my five minutes. We've constantly been doing that. My first job in oil and gas was in environmental sales, and that was 30 years ago. We've been doing this all along.

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

If this were business reporting, I could understand it would be an imposition on, and obligation for, businesses. This is the minister reporting to Parliament. What red tape does that create for a business?

[Catherine Brownlee]

The minister would need to receive something from all businesses to have that reporting. It always starts with the business. We are going to have to report yet another layer of information. The red tape you referred to—

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

There's no obligation for business, though.

Could you point to that? I'm very interested in the specific section, because we're here to amend and improve the bill, or decline the bill if there are particular sections that are so problematic that they can't be improved.

Could you follow up in writing with the specific sections you think you're challenged by?

[Catherine Brownlee]

I would be happy to.

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

With the final minute I have....

By the way, Mr. Orb, I appreciate your comment about zero tillage, because, while I'm an urban MP, when I met my wife 18 years ago.... She's from Camlachie, Ontario, and I would take the train to visit her. My father-in-law still lives on the family farm. It's been in the family since 1834. I met a farmer on the train who told me all about no-till farming 18 years ago. I had something to talk to my father-in-law about after that train ride.

When you say it's a one-size-fits-all approach.... I think amending the bill to include municipalities, as part of the consultation processes that Mr. Sohi suggested we do, sounds eminently reasonable. Why wouldn't you foresee an alternate approach? We could consult with municipalities, both small and large, and say, “Here's our framework.” The framework would have a section for smaller municipalities and a section for larger municipalities. Why couldn't the framework accommodate many different approaches, depending on the sector and the size of the municipality?

[Raymond Orb]

Well, just to make it clear, and I appreciate the question, SARM represents rural municipalities in Saskatchewan, but we also have a mandate in agriculture. The idea is that it would always be a good idea to consult with people ahead of time. In this case, agriculture needs to be consulted as well, and I think that point was made.

We did notice as well that the Minister of Agriculture wasn't included in the preamble of the bill, and that raises a concern for us.

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

We'll fix that, Mr. Orb. I really appreciate the feedback.

[Raymond Orb]

Yes. That's a concern.

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

I also think, by the way, and I say this as someone who cares about the future of food, that in Saskatchewan, you guys are going to be a superpower in the future of food, in pulses and everything else. I appreciate the work that you do.

Thanks very much for your time.

[Raymond Orb]

We actually are already. I think we are a superpower. It's true.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you.

Mr. Lemire, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Seagrave, in 2009, Stephen Harper pledged to end fossil fuel subsidies on the grounds that they did not work. Since then, however, oil companies have been getting more and more assistance.

How do you think fossil fuels on the prairies would survive without government support? Isn't it time to begin a real energy transition?

[Meaghan Seagrave]

Thank you so much for the question.

We've been collectively subsidizing the oil sector for decades. Maybe to drill down a bit into the point that I think you're trying to make, to me this bill is not about defunding oil and gas. This is about prioritizing clean energy and green tech, and about competitiveness for Canada. There seems to be a consensus across the board here with regard to the questions that are coming not only from the members of Parliament but also from the witnesses.

Canada needs to remain competitive with other jurisdictions in all sectors, including oil and gas. This bill is helping to lay a bit of a foundation to do that, because we're missing the boat. If we look at what's happening in the U.S. with regard to the Inflation Reduction Act, the climate-smart commodities investments, the bioeconomy and global competitiveness investments, we're losing ground.

To go back to your question, this isn't about defunding oil and gas or taking away subsidies to that sector. It's about helping increase our competitiveness moving forward.

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

Thank you.

On September 22, Jim Carr appeared before this committee. In response to a question, he said the model for this bill was not exclusively regional or specific to the prairies, but could be a good example for other parts of the country.

Do you think Canada would benefit from establishing an economic cooperation framework in other regions too?

[Meaghan Seagrave]

I think all regions need to move toward net zero. You're an MP for the region of Quebec. Quebec is probably the next logical choice for developing a framework similar to this.