Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2024

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

I just want to say that of course we support our colleague's motion to get this transparency and accountability that Canadians deserve. We of course absolutely support the Trans Mountain expansion, as we have done consistently, and we recognize the importance of energy transportation infrastructure to every single community across the country. Certainly Canadians deserve to have this review and to get these answers, so we Conservatives support our colleague's motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Ms. Stubbs.

I'm going to go to Ms. Goodridge and then I'll go to the other speakers.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm very grateful to my Bloc Québécois colleague for moving something that is really relevant to our study and the responsible thing to do for taxpayers. As my colleague said, we will support this common-sense motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Ms. Goodridge.

I'm going to go to Mr. Angus.

Mr. Angus, the floor is yours.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The reason I brought forward the motion on TMX is that we have to get answers as to why we are paying $34 billion to build it. The fact is that we are being asked to subsidize every barrel that is sent down the pipe by companies that continue to raise emissions, so we need to get answers. Canadians want answers, and boosterism isn't an answer; we need facts.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer said that there is no business case. He needs to come and explain to us, because our job is to hear the testimony and prepare a report for Parliament so that Canadians can make up their minds.

I certainly support my colleague.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

I'm going to go to Ms. Dabrusin.

Go ahead, Ms. Dabrusin.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I'll be fast so that we can get to the witnesses.

I agree with the motion, and I think that we talked about it when the PBO was here the first time, so I'm in agreement with Mr. Simard's motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

I don't see any more speakers, so let's call the vote.

(Motion agreed to)

The vote is unanimous. That's great. Thank you.

Mr. Simard, I'm back to you. You have about a minute.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Unanimity for Quebec; that's fantastic.

I have a very quick question for Ms. Yedlin.

Ms. Yedlin, in response to an earlier question, you said that you need certainty to move this project forward and that regulatory barriers were the reason the government had to get involved.

In my opinion, the first principle of capitalism is that private companies assume the risk. It strikes me as odd that, when it comes to oil infrastructure, apparently the government needs to assume the risk.

We've talked to many big oil companies about carbon capture and sequestration, but nobody wants to take a chance on improving their greenhouse gas reduction practices without government support. For major infrastructure like the Trans Mountain expansion project, or TMX, private companies seem unwilling to take on the risk.

I'm going to ask you a very simple question about something that's bugging me: Is Canadian oil profitable?

[Deborah Yedlin]

It is, but we also need to have an underlying policy certainty that is straightforward and not layered by other policies. Right now the energy sector is profitable.

I'll just put one thing in front of you. There was a time when the price of oil was $8.64 a barrel. That was in 1998. It took until 2005 before oil hit $60 a barrel and the oil sands companies and the energy sector started making some money.

Now, without policy certainty, if you have regulatory pieces—

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I appreciate that. I just want to point out that, at $34 billion, this is the most expensive certainty in history, in my opinion. Anyway, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you.

[Deborah Yedlin]

Can I just make one point?

In 1971, the Government of Ontario, the federal government and the Government of Alberta came together to support the ongoing development of Syncrude. At that time, the C.D. Howe Institute said that this was exactly the time for government to step in and share the risk to ensure the viability of the project. I would argue that the same thing has happened today.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Ms. Yedlin.

We will now go to Mr. Angus for six minutes.

Mr. Angus, the floor is yours.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

I'll start with the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. I'm sure you're aware of the Calgary Economic Development study that was done in 2021, the Alberta Energy Transition study. Do you remember that?

[Deborah Yedlin]

I'm sure I do.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Oh, good, because I remember in 2022 being in Alberta, and there was so much excitement. I mean, you are an energy capital. Nobody has the kind of skill that Alberta has. I'm saying that; my wife's an Albertan, and the old man worked in the oil patch. In terms of being in there and talking about clean energy, nobody knows it like Alberta.

The Calgary Economic Development study, done with Edmonton Global, predicted there would be “170,000” jobs in clean tech in Alberta, contributing “$61 billion in GDP...by 2050”. That was in the report. I would think you'd want to read that one.

The interim president and CEO of Calgary Economic Development said, “Calgary’s vision is to be the destination of choice...for innovators to solve the greatest global challenges, including the energy transition” and the “pursuit of net-zero”.

How do your members feel about the moratorium brought in on renewables by Danielle Smith?

[Deborah Yedlin]

I think the question really is about how we move forward with policy certainty. It's everything from investment tax credits to support—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I'm sorry. That's not the question. I asked how your members feel about the moratorium. You represent many people who would have been beneficiaries of this massive investment in clean tech.

[Deborah Yedlin]

In fact, investment in the renewables sector has continued, because there were projects under way. I think the uncertainty that has been created has caused people to sit on the sidelines, but that's not unlike what happens in any situation like this. Any time there is regulatory uncertainty, dollars sit on the sidelines—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I agree with you. I'm sorry; I'm running out of time here.

The issue of regulatory uncertainty is my concern here. There were 53 projects, representing 8,600 megawatts of power, shelved after the moratorium. There were 118 projects affected. The Pembina Institute—I'm sure you read that study from August—has counted out that $33 billion was lost, with an additional $263 million per year of revenue in municipal and land taxes in 27 different municipalities lost as well.

We've heard from businesses that say they just don't think Alberta is a place to invest in because they don't know what the rules are going to be. We've spoken with clean-tech people who go stateside. I mean, they're going to Texas. I don't want to be mean, but Texas has way more climate deniers than the UCP does, and yet our clean-tech economy is going there.

Without this regulatory certainty, what's happening right now in Alberta? What are your members telling you?

[Deborah Yedlin]

Our members are looking for certainty from a provincial standpoint and from a federal standpoint.

I will say that a lot of money has gone south of the border because of the Inflation Reduction Act. That's been taking place. I want to say that we need to have the underlying certainty to support investment. That is what we're asking for, both federally and provincially.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you so much.

Certainly we've lost to Biden with the Inflation Reduction Act and our lack of action. I'm still waiting on my Liberal friends over there to get those tax credits moving. We've heard a lot of great talk. We can't lose these jobs. I certainly don't want to see them leave Alberta.

Mr. Legge, you talked about the need to close the gap. Did you say it was $9 a barrel that TMX allows us to do? Is that the differential?

[Adam Legge]

It's an estimate of the differential, yes.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

We heard from the TMX corporation the other day that the barrels going down the tube right now are being subsidized by $13 a barrel. I'm thinking, “Okay, if this is such a great project, why do we have to pay the oil giants $13 a barrel through taxpayers' money to ship oil?” How does that make sense?