Natural Resources Committee on Dec. 11th, 2020

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

We got TMX approved. We'll get it built. It's 7,000 jobs. Line 3 pipeline—we approved it. It's 7,000 jobs. Our support for Keystone XL is unwavering. It's 1,500 jobs created so far. We approved NOVA Gas 2021. That's thousands of jobs to be created. LNG Canada—we are building it. That's thousands of jobs. Orphan and inactive wells are $1.7 billion and thousands of jobs to be created. With the wage subsidy, more than 500,000 workers were kept in their jobs in a pandemic in Alberta alone.

That's our record.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Minister, a subsidy is not a job. In your opening comments, you said that, most importantly, we must support our workers.

If you want to support workers, you have to create jobs. If you want to create jobs, you have to allow energy projects to go forward.

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Perhaps—

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Under the current government, that has not happened.

Minister, the floor is still mine. Thank you.

This phrase “to create good middle-class jobs” is interesting to me. What is insinuated is that the opposite exists and that somehow there are bad middle-class jobs. Can you give me an example of a bad middle-class job?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Chair, I don't think the member heard me when I cited the jobs that we have created by doing things that the government previous to us was unable to do.

We got TMX approved. We'll get it built. We approved the Line 3 pipeline. Our support for Keystone XL is unwavering. We approved NOVA Gas. We are building LNG. Orphan and inactive wells.... These are big jobs. They are important jobs. They are good middle-class jobs.

We're getting it done, Mr. Chair.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

It's interesting to me, again, that your government feels the need to distinguish between a good middle-class job and a not so good middle-class job.

It's so ignorant to classify jobs as if there are good jobs and bad jobs. It's up the Prime Minister and, I guess, you under your mandate letter to determine which is which. It's rich.

In Atlantic Canada, the Liberal energy ministers in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia sent you a joint letter with regard to the clean fuel standard, talking about the damage this is going to cause their economy and the impact it is going to have on Atlantic Canada. Have you responded to that letter?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

First of all, I would just like to address the fact that somehow or another I am distinguishing between good and not good middle-class jobs. That's certainly not how I would distinguish it at all.

I would remind the member, Mr. Chair, that I live in an oil and gas-producing jurisdiction. In fact, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador relies more on the royalties from oil and gas than Alberta does. This is a priority for my neighbours, my family and my friends—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Greg McLean]

Minister, could you wrap up your comments in the next 10 seconds or so, please?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I'm finished.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

You haven't responded to the ministers?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Greg McLean]

I'm sorry, that's the end of your questioning, Ms. Harder.

We'll move now to the next questioner for five minutes.

MP Patrick Weiler, please.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, Minister. Thank you for joining our committee today.

There are so many important measures in the announcement from today in “A healthy environment and a healthy economy” that I would like to look at in more detail in this committee.

Today, the matter at hand is the supplementary estimates and the important work that's being done to support our natural resources sector, as well as the work we're doing to support the economy that we're moving towards.

With that in mind, clean technology is an emerging sector and an area of opportunity for Canada. It's estimated that it is a $2.6-trillion economic sector globally, right now. Of course, it features very prominently in our announcement from today, as it should.

We need more firms that are active in clean technology to ensure that we have a wealth of technologies that will help us reach our net-zero targets. I know, because I have many in my riding. They are global leaders in direct air capture, carbon engineering and in green building technology, like Nexii Building Solutions. They have very innovative tools to get us there.

I see in the main estimates that we have set aside nearly $50 million for clean technology challenges. What are these challenges? What potential comes out of funding challenges like these?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

The Impact Canada challenges are great examples of using innovation that you find in the marketplace to find those solutions. You've got the Sky's the Limit Challenge, trying to find less-emitting jet fuels, which is hugely important. The Women in Cleantech Challenge is financing some great research from six women innovators to lower emissions in industrial activities. The Charging the Future Challenge on EVs, the Indigenous Off-diesel Initiative for remote indigenous communities, the Crush It! Challenge in reducing energy use in emissions, grinding minerals in mining, and the Power Forward Challenge, which is in partnership with the U.K. to design better power grids.

Yes, they're a bit of fun, but they're also incredibly important to focus our energy and our talent. We want Canada to be a world leader, I would like to be ambitious and say the world leader in clean innovation. We promised to cut the corporate tax rate in half for companies in this space. We're also looking to transform how we provide energy in a low-carbon economy in our communities by shifting to clean power. We're supporting manufacturing and the natural gas and energy sector.

I remember standing at Globe, the biggest clean tech conference in North America. I'm sure Patrick, as a member, has attended Globe in Vancouver. You were reminded when you went there as well. Back to the other member's point about how you balance all these things; 70% to 80% of clean tech in this country is funded by oil and gas. We're talking about a billion dollars a year. We can't get to net zero without the oil and gas industry, in the same way in the inverse the oil and gas industry needs net zero to continue to grow and prosper. That's two sides of the same coin.

This is not easy stuff and it doesn't make for a bumper sticker.

But when you are an energy country like we are, you have got to get it right. You absolutely have to. The world is watching us on this. And clean tech, given the fact that we have the most educated populace in the OECD, and given how vibrant our tech sector is in this country from coast to coast to coast, I think you'll see in smaller jurisdictions in cities like mine where Verafin has one of the biggest tech acquisitions in Canadian history, you are going to see tech in this country, and clean tech particularly, just blossom and grow.

As a government, we need to make sure we maximize that. Those are energy jobs, natural resource jobs. It's these sorts of things that will continue to keep Canada an energy superpower.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Minister.

That leads to my next question, because in your opening remarks you made an interesting note, that to get to net zero we need our resource sector, particularly oil and gas. It would be a massive understatement to say that the investment climate is starting to pay more attention to climate action.

In the supplementary (B)s, you are seeking $160 million for the new emissions reduction fund.

I was hoping you could share why this fund is so critical to the oil and gas sector, how it will lead to longer-term economic benefits for the sector by making us more competitive as the world continues to move to take more ambitious climate action.

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I will expand on that story I was telling you earlier.

It was interesting being at Globe and taking the position in front of the clean-tech sector that the only way we would reach net zero is with Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador. We cannot reach you without the oil and gas sector in this country. It's too big and too important.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Greg McLean]

Could you wrap up quickly, please?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

It is the driver in this country for our economy.

Very quickly, understanding that, making sure that we make investments in the oil and gas sector to lower emissions is absolutely essential to the economic competitiveness of Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Greg McLean]

Thank you, Minister.

We will move on to the next member, Mr. Mario Simard.

You have two and a half minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I know you are in somewhat of an awkward position, Mr. O'Regan, since my criticism of you may be a long way from that of my Conservative colleagues. I'm sure you don't want to shut down the energy sector, although I will be critical of you in that regard, because I feel you may be supporting it a little too much.

I wanted to come back to the hydrogen issue. We know that you intend to announce a plan for hydrogen. I wanted to know when you plan to announce it.

Will a significant share be for green hydrogen, that is, hydrogen made from hydroelectricity or from biomass?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Simard.

When it comes to hydrogen, we are impatient. I've said that I want to have it out by the end of the year, so I will stay firm on that. We think there's incredible potential for hydrogen. Hydrogen plays well right across the country. Different parts of the country have different assets that can be used in a national hydrogen strategy. I'm not going to scoop myself, but these are things that are fairly evident.

In Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador, you have incredible natural gas resources. You have incredible hydroelectric resources in Manitoba, British Columbia and Quebec. All of these can be used, whether it be for blue hydrogen or whether it be for green hydrogen. Green hydrogen, as it is right now, which hydroelectricity in Quebec would be perfectly suited to, is more expensive right now to produce, but part of that strategy will be looking at ways to lessen that, because the world is increasingly demanding green hydrogen.

It will be demanding hydrogen, but the premium product will be green hydrogen. We're seeing massive investments in Europe, and it will figure both as a competitor but also as a significant customer for Canadian hydrogen.

I hope that I will have that before you very soon.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Greg McLean]

Mr. Simard, we're out of time.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Do I have a few moments left, Mr. Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Greg McLean]

I'm sorry, but we're out of time. I'm going to move to the next questioner.

Mr. Cannings, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to move to the topic of retrofits. Obviously, energy efficiency will be needed in a big way if we're going to get to net zero. We simply can't create all the energy that we need for what we will be using without it. I was somewhat happy to see in the fall economic statement, and expanded today in the climate plan that just came out, an announcement around retrofit grants for Canadian homeowners. It basically brings up the Harper-era ecoENERGY retrofit program.

I had a private member's bill in the last Parliament to bring that back, so I can't criticize it from that sense, but in this day and age, 10 years after the Harper government introduced it, we need something bolder. Efficiency Canada had a 2020 budget request for 10 times that amount for energy retrofits in buildings across Canada. That is clearly what we need, not just to get to the energy efficiency that we need, but to create those good middle-class jobs that Ms. Harder was talking about, across the country. Efficiency Canada calculates we could create one million jobs in energy efficiency alone if we just lived up to our pledges in the pan-Canadian framework.

Could you outline if you have that 10-time vision in the near future, because this is nice, but it's only one-tenth of what we need?

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I have become a convert of energy efficiency, Mr. Cannings, partially through your efforts, but definitely just by the facts.

The International Energy Agency calls energy efficiency the hidden fuel. If we were to get it right, it would allow us to meet about 30% of our Paris accord commitments. What I really like about retrofits, as a guy who grew up in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Labrador, is that no matter where you live in this country, this program will affect you. It will actually physically affect the home in which you live.

It's not one of these programs that will affect that crowd over there, that province or that region. Growing up, you'd hear about ambitious government programs, perhaps, but they never seemed to affect your community. Retrofits would affect both commercial and residential buildings. They affect the communities, and they affect people living in those communities.

We are going to continue to work on an ambitious program in this space. We're making a significant down payment both in the fall economic statement and in our climate plan. We're going to keep pushing on this because it is effective, and it hits all Canadians.