Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 30th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. McGowan.

[Gil McGowan]

Mr. Chair, our federation is funded by unions that voluntarily affiliate with our organization. There are 27 unions in both the public and private sectors representing about 140,000 Alberta workers. They pay dues to their unions, which in turn pay dues to us.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

I really would like the witness for Environmental Defence to have on the record, to name, if she can, some of the sources of revenue for the non-profit organizations.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Excuse me, Ms. Gallant.

Point of order, Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I understand where Ms. Gallant is potentially going with this, and I don't doubt that Ms. McEachern can answer it, but I think it's an attempt to seek to undermine the credibility of a witness before the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Cullen, that is a point of debate.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Hold on for a minute, Chair. This has come up before when we've attempted to understand the affiliation of different groups, and we've been ruled that the line of questioning hasn't been in order simply because today what we're trying to attempt is to get an energy security dialogue. If Ms. Gallant wants to go through the records of each of the witnesses—I know she didn't do that for Mr. Coutu and where his money comes from—I'm not sure this is a profitable path of discussion for the committee to try to—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Cullen, that's not a point of order.

Ms. Gallant, it's a legitimate question.

So could the witness answer the question, please?

[Gillian McEachern]

As I mentioned, I can submit for the record our annual report, which lists our funders. I can throw out examples, but I don't see how useful that is right now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Ms. Gallant.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to ensure that the list of funding sources is provided to all members of the committee. I haven't looked at the website. I genuinely don't know where the funding comes from. But I know that in the course of our studies, when different studies do arise—

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Point of order.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

—the allegation is made that—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

A point of order by Mr. Coderre.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

I will say this in French, in order to keep myself in check.

It is totally unacceptable to use the committee as a venue to insult credible people who are here testifying in good faith. It is fine to ask about substance, but when it comes to form, that is something entirely different. When a member goes so far as to question the source of funding, implying that these people may have ulterior motives related to goodness knows what, I think it is incumbent upon the chair to stand up for the witnesses in question. They are here in good faith. Democracy, as I understand it, does not allow for that kind of questioning.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Coderre. That was not a point of order.

Ms. Gallant, please continue with your questions.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

When studies are referred to in this committee—

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Using money from the nuclear—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Order, please.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

—the members always want to know if the oil companies have or have not funded all, or part, of these studies. So if it is good enough for one side of the argument to ask these questions, I believe it's fair for our side to ask these questions.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Ms. Gallant.

We go now, for up to four minutes, to Monsieur Ouellet. Go ahead, please.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am delighted to see you again in this committee. The way I see it, not much has changed in two years. We still do not have an energy security plan. My question is for Mr. McGowan, but Ms. McEachern can also respond.

I do not think we need to adopt a Canada-wide strategy. It could be done on a regional basis. Regardless, do you think it would be possible to come up with an energy security plan based solely on market relations? In other words, we are trying to achieve energy security with oil because it has a high price tag, rather than focusing, as my colleague said, on energy efficiency. But that efficiency has to be accompanied by a reduction in our energy consumption.

In Quebec, last week, a scientist said that if Quebec were to take everything it does not use and artificially convert it into methane, the province could meet 60% of its artificial and natural gas needs.

Can you suggest any ideas for replacing oil? Instead of always coming back to tailing ponds, let's leave them be and stop using that resource. Can you tell us what other solutions a country like Canada could adopt as part of a well-balanced energy security plan?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. McGowan, could you try to give an answer in a minute, so that Ms. McEachern has a chance as well?

[Gil McGowan]

There was a lot there, but the part of the question I'd like to address has to do with the member asking me whether or not we can have an energy plan that's created, as opposed to one imposed by government. My answer is that we already have a de facto energy plan that is the result of market decisions, and it's not serving Canadians well. In fact, basically what they're saying, through their investments and efforts to lobby the Alberta government, is that we should develop the resource as quickly as possible and export as much of it as quickly as possible.

A real energy security strategy from our perspective would look at things like the environment, like jobs, like providing energy first to Canadians, and then, second, for export. That can't happen in a model that's purely driven by the market.