Natural Resources Committee on Sept. 29th, 2016

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

In my riding there's a large proposed tungsten molybdenum project called the Sisson project. I've been meeting with them for several years now, and we've been working through the same environmental process that you have been working through. The current process is cumbersome. It really does put the burden of proof on the proponent to outline every extenuating circumstance that could come along, and I know they found it very frustrating. I know they are coming to the end of their EIA process, and I'm assuming you're in a similar position.

What are some things you think could be done to streamline the process in terms of environmental regulation, to make it so the process is as robust as possible but allowing at the same time to fulfill the process but for it to be more fluid in nature?

[Gregory Bowes]

Again I would say that, in terms of the actual regulations themselves, other than the species at risk one, I'm generally fine with them. It's the way they are implemented and the way that decisions are made that are problematic. Again, this is a provincial issue, but we dealt extensively with Natural Resources getting our mine closure plan approved, which is the major document. All the other ministries provide input into that document, and then you turn around and you have to do an environmental assessment with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, which is essentially the same process, and then there are more community consultations and more first nations consultations to do the same thing.

Streamlining the process, simplifying the process, taking a more balanced approach to it, and sticking to the rules and the timelines are important. As I discussed, there were a lot of decisions made that had nothing to do with the regulations, and none of the timelines were achieved. In my case, it's not that I don't like the rules, it's that I don't like the way the rules are followed and implemented.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

We haven't talked a lot about taxation, but there's been a lot of talk about a price on carbon pollution. There are two sides to that argument. I come from a farming background. In agriculture it's always believed that hardship fuels innovation. I don't think it's government's responsibility to put businesses in a position where they have to experience hardship in order to innovate, but I do believe that a price on carbon pollution, regardless of whether it's agriculture or mining development or oil and gas, is a distinct opportunity for that industry to innovate and grow to meet the demands of the future.

The way the federal initiative would work is, basically, if we were to impose a price on carbon pollution on the province, that money would actually stay within the province. The money wouldn't come back to the federal government. The money would stay within the province. It's the province's discretion as to how they want to allocate that fund, but it could be used to fuel innovation or it could be used to guarantee market certainty. I just want to get your thoughts on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

It's going to have to be very brief, too.

[Gregory Bowes]

I'm not a big expert in that field. I support the concept because even though Canada is a very small global contributor in terms of percentages to the problem, we all have to do something, and we all have to contribute to a solution. Again, it comes back to what I was saying earlier. We already have some provinces proceeding on their own. We have the federal government planning on doing something. Make it as simple and as painless as possible for a businessman. It's kind of already going in a different direction.

The other thing I would say is that, for commodity businesses, we are extremely cyclical. If you were, for example, to impose a flat 1% tax, there would be many years when that would not be a problem, and there would be many years when that might be a very big problem. If they could find some mechanism for commodity industries to build up credits in good years that could be used in bad years, that kind of idea, it would be very helpful to help to smooth out those cycles. Keep it simple would be my message.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Absolutely.

I want to thank you for your comments. That was really great. I appreciate your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Bowes, thank you very much.

Unfortunately, we're out of time. We are always limited in the amount of time we can spend with each witness, which is sometimes unfortunate. We appreciate your taking the time to come here and we very much value your input.

Thank you again.

[Gregory Bowes]

Thank you for the opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

We are going to suspend the meeting for about 30 seconds, and then we're going to go in camera for five minutes, which means I'm going to have to ask everybody else in the room to leave, please.

[Proceedings continue in camera]