Evidence of meeting #133 for Natural Resources in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was community.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Kent Hehr Liberal Calgary Centre, AB
Okay.
In terms of capacity building, Mr. Ross, you said you had to learn to walk before you could run. I think you said that in your testimony. Was there a way that LNG Canada helped build capacity? Were there issues they assisted with in that? How did you guys develop the capacity to take on an initiative like that, to be able to negotiate your business agreements? How was that able to get to that capacity?
Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, Skeena
It was trial and error. They weren't the first proposal to come to our territory. We had the modernization of the smelter there. At the beginning, we had a pulp and paper mill. Back in those days, we were just understanding risk and title. We were using our risk and title lawyers' offices, and getting consultants who actually worked at the outskirts of these industries. By the time the major LNG projects came along, we understood that we don't know the language of oil and gas. We have no idea. We don't know that language of high finance. Even business people located in Vancouver couldn't engage with these high-level lawyers and financial people from Texas and Alberta.
At great expense to our band, we brought in finance people from San Diego. We brought in a corporate lawyer from Vancouver who worked on major projects. We brought in a lawyer from Alberta who lived within the oil and gas industry. At that point, it wasn't us engaging at the table anymore. It was these people, who understood exactly what these people were talking about. That's how we got the deal we have today.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
I would like to continue with Ellis Ross. I have a quick, straightforward question for you, which would probably seem like a miracle to my colleagues.
What is your view about what exactly the objective is of foreign and American-funded anti-energy activists, doing what they're doing in Canada? What are they trying to achieve?
Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, Skeena
They're trying to shut down the energy industry, the forest industry and the mining industry. If it were about raising the standards and actually addressing climate change, some of the measures that have been put in place in B.C. should have been enough. Even with a commitment to improve on that, it never seems to be enough. There are always other challenges coming up, whether direct or indirect. The latest one was because B.C., first nations and Canada agreed with the $40-billion LNG project. What comes next? A jurisdictional challenge on saying that Canada has some authority over the pipelines, because some of the LNG comes from Alberta.
Who thinks of this kind of stuff? A stall is just as good as stopping a project, in today's investment climate. That's what I see as the objective. I've talked to a number of these groups, and I've said it straight to their face. It's basically why my band wouldn't side with ENGOs.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
I think that's why you're one of the most important elected leaders in the entire country. You're leading a fight that is imperative for every single Canadian citizen in every community in every province.
You made an interesting point earlier in your comments in talking about the best practices and the successes of the B.C. government in your negotiations, in the context of best practices for indigenous engagement on major resource projects. This is actually a point of concern for the Liberals' Bill C-69. As you probably know, the definitions of major and minor projects, the potential of in situ development to fall under the legislation, and the potential for—exactly as you just said—provincial projects and provincial jurisdictions to actually get caught up under that legislation will not really be established until the details are, through the development of regulations out until 2021, so it remains a real risk.
There are also numerous indigenous leaders speaking out against Bill C-69, because in fact it really does nothing concrete in terms of expanding or increasing the rights of indigenous communities to a consultation or accommodation, nor does it increase the scope of the measures, really, or the imperative on government to fully meet the Crown's duty to consult. The removal of the standing test will ensure that literally anyone, anywhere, can intervene in Canada's review process for major resource projects, rather than having it be confined to locally impacted communities, Canadian citizens, locally impacted indigenous communities or subject matter and technical experts.
In the context of engaging best practices for engagement of indigenous communities on resource projects, would you agree that it is completely backwards that a major regulatory and impact assessment overhaul of research projects that explicitly relates to the duty of the Crown to consult with indigenous communities is actually in the Senate right now, weeks or months away from becoming law, and that only now is this committee actually doing an extensive review of best practices for indigenous consultation on major resource project development?
Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, Skeena
Well, it's not keeping up with what's happening on the ground in B.C., I can tell you that. It's interesting to see how first nations are viewing this, because everybody knows that in terms of rights and title, there is an economic component that has to be understood and realized by the Crown.
In this case here, I see that the Crown is actually ignoring that economic component that first nations are looking for. I know that it has probably advanced in terms of what's coming down the pike, but a lot of first nations are a lot different from what they were talking about 10 to 15 years ago, when they were actually just fighting for a chance to be heard.
Now, they're fighting for a chance to be heard and saying, “Let me be a part of developing the economic future of B.C. in Canada.” That doesn't seem to be happening when there are basically going to be restrictions on what they can do in terms of exports on all commodities, not just oil and gas. There's this vagueness and lack of direction when it comes to aboriginal issues, especially economic issues.
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
I want to invite my colleague Mr. Whalen to ask the first question.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
Thank you, Mr. Tan.
Mr. Andreassen, I'll get you involved in the conversation here. One of the issues that our committee grappled with early in this study was with respect both to opening and to closing new areas to development. There's an obligation to consult with indigenous people, and there's some question on whether or not we've done as good a job as we should when we're closing an area to development as when we're opening it.
In Alaska, there are a lot of issues in the news today regarding whether or not President Trump has an ability to end the moratorium on Arctic drilling, but I would like to get a sense from you. To what extent were indigenous folks in Alaska involved in setting up the prohibition or the moratorium on Arctic drilling in the first place? How have they been involved with President Trump in removing it now?
Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League
Certainly, Alaska is not any different in terms of the conflict that might be in place in a region, to the extent that President Trump is trying to remove the moratorium that President Obama put in place. Both had different levels of input from peoples in the region and conflicting input from peoples in the region.
I was going to suggest this earlier, in relation to the ways to increase indigenous corporation participation in projects, that one of the conversations about offshore development in Alaska....The indigenous peoples have village corporations and a regional corporation that engage in economic development activities. They became carried partners in offshore development or the potential there. That's one way, maybe, to approach that question: carried partners. There are no capital requirements up front, but they are able to be included in the process and can build capacity. Maybe there's some consideration for scaling that percentage of carried partnership down over time, as additional projects come forward.
I was going to throw that out as one answer to that question, but again, when it comes to limiting development in a region, I think we're talking, at least in Alaska's Arctic, about a region the size of a few, three or four, of the larger U.S. states. A moratorium or a removal of a moratorium for a region that extensive doesn't always make sense. What we've heard from many people in the past is that looking at a region at a more micro level might be more significant.
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Let me ask a very general question to all of you. The committee has heard from many witnesses that indigenous communities have embraced the energy development project to improve their quality of life; however, this energy development project may also affect the cultural rights and identity of those indigenous communities. How can we address both at the same time? Are there good or best practices or bad examples that you can share with us?
Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League
Probably Mr. Sullivan should start, but I think that, if a community indicates interest in a project, then it's up to that community to determine and evaluate how their interest and their lives are changed. I think that's part of empowering a community or a group of indigenous peoples: They get to choose and determine where energy development or economic development impacts their culture and their livelihoods. Really, that's part of the decision-making process.
I would also say, as an example from Alaska, that we have the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska where there's increasing petroleum development. An NPR-A working group directly involves indigenous peoples in decision-making related to projects in that region. There are also NPR-A impact mitigation grants. As production increases in the region—I think next year they're talking about $20 million U.S. being available for those communities—it's directly up to those communities how they use those funds and how they mitigate negative impacts and also work toward positive solutions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
I can give you another couple of minutes, and then I'll give you corresponding additional time, if you want, rather than do another round.
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Let me ask one more question to Mr. Sullivan.
You mentioned that there are applications for renewable energy in your community and also in a couple of other communities. You have lots of experience with the Indigenous Clean Energy Network. In general, do you foresee less reliance on diesel and more on renewable energy sources such as wind, solar or SMRs in Canada's remote north?
Executive Director, Gwich’in Council International
I see a more diversified energy picture in our north. I don't think electrical generation diesel will ever be not in the picture for our communities. Diesel just has so many advantages. It's transportable, it's shiftable, it's high butane. There are a lot of gigajoules per litre of diesel fuel—it's a great fuel for that.
Do I think we could use it a lot better? Absolutely. Can we derive our energy from other sources? For sure. It's about the complementary package that we're bringing together. It's not just about the demand for the energy, but it's also about the supply. We need to address this with a holistic approach. It needs to be about how we use that energy and how we're getting that energy. Yes, it will always be part of the solution, but it's how we use it and how much we use.
Conservative
Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
Thank you very much, witnesses, for appearing.
I'm not sure who to start with because you both talked about very interesting things.
You spoke last, Mr. Sullivan. We'll start with you. You were talking about local priority section and how important that is in empowering your communities and about coming up with solutions that fit your needs and are able to help the people within the community. You mentioned the current situation. In some cases you don't have a seat at the table; it's very difficult to get in. Maybe you could expand more about how local input is very important and how, when you have a need, whatever it may be, the community comes together. They start driving that forward rather than coming from the top down.
Executive Director, Gwich’in Council International
The Nihtat Gwich'in were able to secure both feasibility studies of the wind project.
I'm going to give you another example of the value added that we bring as a community. I think this is the really important part. As part of the feasibility study, we needed to put up a meteorological tower. A met tower measures the wind speed on the site. Our met tower is still standing. It's the third one there. The Nihtat have done this type of work before; we work in the region. We recognize that global warming is happening and the tundra is heaving all over the place.
The way they were putting in met towers was as follows. They were 200-metre towers attached to cables with an anchor of about eight inches. That was what the spec was. Then they had three companies come up and put them in and they all fell down. These are all in remote locations, needing a helicopter to get into.
We talked to all the local contractors about what we thought about this and how we would solve the problem. Our solution was to have deadman anchors. They were actually two feet by six feet, each one, and there were 32 of them. It's still standing. We're getting the data we need.
If that approach had been taken right from the start.... This wind regime program has been going on for the last eight years. One of the reasons they couldn't actually develop the project is they couldn't get the data. They couldn't actually say, “This is the wind speed that's going to happen and this is the energy production.”
If they had talked to us first and put that in first, the project probably would have been built already. We were actually adding a lot of value. If we weren't at the point where we are now with the wind project, you would have an indigenous group leading the feasibility study and the development of the project. You would have an indigenous group working in the project as a proponent, possibly in the project, and the benefits would be coming back to the indigenous population. It's really unfortunate that this project didn't happen. To me, it could have been the perfect example of a case study that I think we all wanted to see moving forward.
Conservative
Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
I think local knowledge is a huge part of it. I'm pretty sure many of us around the table have seen situations in our own community where some local knowledge would have helped push a project or make a project more efficient in terms of getting it completed.
When you talk about using wind power, given the fact that you just talked about data, were there any other options you were looking at in terms of energy generation in your community?
Executive Director, Gwich’in Council International
The Nihtat Gwich'in have basically tasked me with looking at all different types of renewable options. Like I said in my earlier comments, Inuvik has sun for basically 24 hours a day for two and a half months, and it's there all the time. It's consistently good.
In terms of solar irradiance, we compare it to Victoria. Now, it is very concentrated in that time frame, so our business model is basically that we're looking for clients that have high electrical consumption throughout the summer. We look at places with refrigeration—our local grocery stores, our hotels—and air conditioning.
The new client there, which should be of interest to Canada as a whole, is Canadian satellite stations. Inuvik is in one of the key locations for satellite reception. It's one of the spots where we can always pick it up, and the reception is amazing. NRCan has put in significant money there. We're currently working with them, because every time one of those satellites moves, it consumes a bunch of energy, and the computers within them need to be cooled all summer long.
It's a really great business model for us. Canada has an initiative to push the satellite industry, and we have our solar to provide the energy to keep those buildings cool. It's a great relationship there, and we're only in the early stages of that happening.
Conservative
Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
Also, I think, when you're talking about economic activity, having a reliable source of power is one of the first steps in order to start the different pieces moving. It looks like you're able to provide that for the most part.