Evidence of meeting #39 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was alberta.
A recording is available from Parliament.
President, Alberta Federation of Labour
I refuse to answer the question that way, because it's a complicated question.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. Richards, please give the witness a chance to answer the question.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Well, I've asked a yes or no question, and he's refused to answer in that fashion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. Richards, I'm going to give him a chance to answer. Hold off a minute, please.
Go ahead.
President, Alberta Federation of Labour
First, in response to your long, rambling question, I will provide you more than a one-word answer. This is another example of the way the Tories try to bully people into having a discussion on their terms. You put people in boxes and you try to paint them as villains. Frankly, I think it's undemocratic and unbecoming of a member of Parliament.
In response to your comment about disparaging our resources--and in that regard I think you're talking about the resources of Alberta--I am not trying to disparage either the oil sands or any of the people who have worked with them. What I am disparaging is your government's approach to developing those resources, which I think is irresponsible.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Okay, Mr. Chair. I think he's had a chance to respond to the question. He's not really answering the question.
Conservative
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
I think I understand why he's refused to answer that question, because I believe in looking at—
President, Alberta Federation of Labour
Do you know what, Mr. Richards? I support value-added job creation.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. McGowan.
We're not going to go here, guys.
Mr. McGowan, please hold off until Mr. Richards asks his question. Thank you very much.
Go ahead, Mr. Richards.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
Thank you very much.
If you look at the website of the Alberta Federation of Labour—
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Wild Rose, AB
—during their recent provincial election they indicated support for six candidates, including two that are sitting MLAs, all of them NDP members, so I can understand where he's coming from.
I'd like to turn my attention now to our other witnesses, from the northern oil and gas branch. Obviously there are economic development possibilities here for all across the country, but let's focus specifically on the north. The north has been a big part of our economic agenda as a government, and we understand the importance of ensuring that we're developing our north in its economic development.
I wanted to see if you can give me some background and information on some of the benefits for northerners in terms of oil and gas development in the north. What would those benefits be? Give us some examples of that.
Director General, Northern Oil and Gas, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Thank you.
I'll turn to my colleague Michel Chenier, because we do have a legislative base for benefit plans from the industry, and he can explain how that operates.
Conservative
Director, Policy and Research, Northern Oil and Gas Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Yes.
In our legislation we actually call for the development of what's referred to as Canada benefit plans, so we require, actually, proponents to provide full and fair opportunities for northerners and local residents of the north. Basically, any time a private sector company wants to come forward and propose exploration and development activities, we require them to go out and produce concrete benefits and opportunities for northerners. On an annual basis, it varies, depending on the types of activities, but it is quite significant, given the total population that exists in the north.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Chenier.
Thank you, Mr. Richards.
We go now to Mr. Anderson for up to five minutes. Go ahead, please.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to talk about the north in a minute here, but first I want to pick up on something Mr. McGuinty had asked about, and that was to do with the price differential.
Mr. McGowan, I think what you're saying is that you believe it's in Alberta's interest to continue to keep the $30-per-barrel discount—in your answer to Mr. McGuinty—in order to try to force upgrading to be developed in Alberta.
Can you tell me how taking a $30-per-barrel discount—which is what it was yesterday—on each and every barrel of Alberta oil is going to encourage upgrading development in Alberta, especially when you say you want higher royalties to be taken by the government?
I'd like a short answer, please, because I have a couple of other questions for the other folks here.
President, Alberta Federation of Labour
We have a fundamental choice to make in terms of developing the oil sands: either we have an export strategy that chases high prices or we have a value-added strategy that promotes job creation in value-added industries at home. We have to choose between one or the other. Honestly, arguments can be made on either case, but unfortunately I don't think that debate has been had.
If we are going to have an export strategy at the expense of value-added development, then I think we have to have a discussion about higher royalties to make sure that at least we're getting money back in exchange for the jobs that are being lost down the pipeline.
Conservative
President, Alberta Federation of Labour
The problem is that we're not getting either right now.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
—on your oil because you don't want higher prices because that would discourage upgrading.
Your economics make no sense to me at all, and I don't think they probably do to the rest of the committee members. And I would also suggest that some of your comments about the labour market make no sense at all—