Industry Committee on Oct. 20th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Lemire and Mr. Austin.

We now go to Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses.

I'll start with the Alberta Beef Producers.

I commend your efforts with the tallgrass prairies. We have them in Windsor. There are only two places left in North America. My private member's bill looks to protect them. They're just city land, right now, but they're very rare and delicate.

I want to get this from you, specifically: Do you support Bill C-235 and its specifics? If not, why not? Are there improvements that can be made to the bill? That's what we're figuring out here—whether or not this is actually an improvement. I'd like your opinion on that.

[Dr. Melanie Wowk]

The beef producers of this province are focused on continually improving the sustainability of our industry. That is why we are very happy to be part of this discussion today.

We would like it to consider the environment, social responsibility and economic viability. I think Tyler made a very good point; for us to pursue it, it has to be economically viable. We are constantly evolving as an industry, and we look forward to continuing to do so. Being here today is really to emphasize the importance of the grasslands—their importance to the environment. We really can't afford to have them shrink any more.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Does that mean you support the bill?

I appreciate this. It's been interesting testimony, because it has highlighted something that doesn't get a lot of attention, I think. It's new testimony for me.

However, do you support the bill? Are there a couple of amendments for the bill, or do you just not know? It's okay. I'm not trying to pin you down on anything in particular, but we're trying to figure out exactly where we all stand on this one.

[Dr. Melanie Wowk]

That's the difficult part for us. There isn't a whole lot of agriculture in the bill, but there's a lot related to forestry. I'm going to say that, right now, we're just trying to make sure we are at the table and able to give our input about how this bill could possibly work for our producers.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's a very fair answer.

What we've discovered through the process—we had Mr. Carr here, as well—is that there wasn't a lot of outreach to organizations, so you're not alone. Your testimony is very valuable. You don't have to take a position right now. It's up to us to decide later what we do here.

Perhaps I will shift over to Mr. Austin.

With nuclear power, there's responsibility for what takes place afterwards. I've been involved in the nuclear deep repository in the Bruce area, which is causing quite an issue. Are you aware of the legacy cost there? When you're looking at nuclear.... The United States has asked us to stop doing it there, because we're building a deep repository they oppose. It's right next to the Great Lakes, and the costing hasn't been factored in.

Is there a plan to do it differently? The whole community is ripped apart. In fact, the Saugeen First Nation rejected it. What ended up happening is that they decided to go next door and try to do it there. Is there anything in the model they're dealing with now, in terms of new nuclear, that's going to take into account all of the things that weren't planned for? A lot of this used to be secondary stuff—it's your coats, chairs and other stuff. Everything gets radioactive.

Please go ahead.

[Dale Austin]

I won't comment on the deep geologic repository and the discussions happening in Bruce, because I'm not familiar enough with it to comment.

I will say that, in terms of the discussion on spent fuel, nuclear waste or however you do it, it is a fully costed part of any nuclear facility. Dealing with our spent fuel or nuclear waste is already factored into the costs. It is stored safely on site at nuclear power plants in Canada and has been for many decades. If and when there is a deep geologic repository built, that will be a safe storage and retrieval opportunity for spent fuel.

Retrieval is important, because we use very little of the energy in a fuel bundle when it goes through a nuclear reactor. There are new technologies being developed that may be able to reuse that fuel and put it back and generate fuel. It is fully managed and well monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and this will continue to occur in the absence of a deep geologic repository.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Unfortunately, I think the fourth one in the world just came online. There are three others. Two of them caught on fire. This is the length of the CN Tower into the ground next to the Great Lakes, so there's a lot of concern with it.

It's good to hear about the costing.

Those are all of my questions for now, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much to the witnesses. I appreciate your testimony.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

Go ahead, Mr. Kram. You have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much to all the witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Austin, it's good to have you here in person. I'll begin with you.

Cameco is certainly checking a lot of check boxes that governments tend to look for. You are already transitioning to a low-carbon economy. You talked about indigenous partnerships and businesses that you're already working with, and then Bill C-235 comes along and refers to nuclear power as a new form of energy.

What do you really need from Bill C-235 to continue the work that you're doing? Would it be easier if the government just stayed out of your way and did not add a new level of bureaucratic burden that you have to deal with?

[Dale Austin]

That's a fair question. Thank you very much.

We could continue on our way and continue to do the good work we're doing. We are firm believers that, any time we can talk about our industry, the role that it plays, and the role that it plays in western Canada and Saskatchewan in particular, that's useful.

If there are tables where the federal government and the provincial government can sit down and work together with industry, those are also useful. As you know, it is sometimes challenging for all levels of government, industry, indigenous groups and the public to get on the same page. This is an important issue. An opportunity to have frank conversations about what might be possible is useful.

Could we do it without it? Yes, we probably could, but we would end up—or someone else would end up—being a convener of this type of conversation.

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

Would it be possible to have these conversations without the legislation?

[Dale Austin]

I would say yes. It would be possible to have them without the legislation. The legislation, from my point of view, puts a finer point on the need and the desire to have these types of conversations among the various interested parties.

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

You mentioned the Impact Assessment Act, and you had some concerns about the timelines that projects can take stemming from the Impact Assessment Act. I tend to be of the view that everyone comes to politics with good intentions and that there isn't the intention to add an additional layer of bureaucratic burden, but, with the Impact Assessment Act and with Bill C-235, could we agree that there is at least the potential for additional bureaucratic burden as an unintended consequence?

[Dale Austin]

That is fair to say, yes. I think that I would agree with that as an unintended consequence.

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

Could you elaborate on the indigenous partnerships that Cameco has for your business and how you established these partnerships in the first place? How did that all come about?

[Dale Austin]

It's been a long time coming. Over the entire more than 30-year existence of Cameco, we have been working with our local indigenous communities. It has been a long journey to get to where we are. We have been remarkably successful, I would say, in developing these relationships, but it has not been easy.

Currently we have 18 communities in northern Saskatchewan that are part of Cameco's collaboration or partnership agreements. They are based on five pillars: community engagement, business development, community investment, environmental stewardship and workforce development.

We cannot operate where we do in northern Saskatchewan without the support of our indigenous communities. They provide a significant number of services, and they are a very reliable workforce that we require. It takes time. It's based on trust, and it's based on open dialogue.

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

Would it be fair to say that you achieved this success because of mutually beneficial economic interests and not necessarily compliance with any particular federal government law or program?

[Dale Austin]

I would say that it's more than mutually beneficial economic interests. I would say there are mutually beneficial economic, environmental and social interests. It runs the gamut. We identified early on that, without the support of the northern communities, we would not be successful. That is why we pursued it.

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

Okay. It wasn't to comply with this law or that law.

[Dale Austin]

I would say no.

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

Okay.

I think I'm out of time, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Yes, you are. Thank you, Mr. Kram.

We'll now move to MP Dong for five minutes.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for coming to the committee today.

I first want to say that you're doing something very wise in joining the process early to give us advice on this very important bill; this is one of the few meetings we've had. We've heard different aspects. To me, the core or the spirit of this bill is development and consultation, so you're doing the right thing by being here and giving us advice.

First of all, it's on the record and everyone's clear, but I want to hear from all the witnesses. Do you believe that this bill is going to build collaboration—perhaps co-operation—between provincial, federal and municipal governments and industry partners to benefit the future prosperity of the Prairies? One by one, maybe witnesses can give me their very short answers.

[Dale Austin]

I believe it has the potential to do that.