Evidence of meeting #111 for Natural Resources in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was wells.
A video is available from Parliament.
President, Business Council of Alberta
I can't speak to the toll structure. That's not an area of expertise of mine.
What the construction of the pipeline does is enable Canadian product to get more global prices, which means Canadian producers can earn more and generate more jobs and investment and bring revenues to governments as a result.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I certainly get that. I guess my question is that the oil giants right now say that they don't like the tolls. They think they're having to pay too much when they're paying 48% of the toll, which means 52%, at $13 a barrel, is being paid by whom—by the public, by debt? I don't know. I don't know any business on the planet that subsidizes an industry like that.
The reason I asked the question is that this Simon Fraser study that just came out—I'm sure you've read it—has tagged this subsidy at between $581 and $1,248 per household. I'm being told that this is a nation-building project. Well, certainly it is, because everybody in the nation is paying up to $1,250 per household to run this bitumen down that pipeline while Suncor is getting it at a discount of over 50%.
Can you explain to me the mathematics of 21st century capitalism and if that's how it works?
President, Business Council of Alberta
I can't speak to the specific Simon Fraser study you're referencing, nor can I speak to the—
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Do you think they should pay their way? I mean, if this is such an important industry and if it's so profitable, do you think they should pay the full share?
I mean, this is how industry is done and this is how it's always been done—the tolls pay for the cost. Should they not pay the cost?
President, Business Council of Alberta
I would argue that the bigger picture needs to be viewed, in the sense that there is a lot of economic benefit that happens from the entire value chain, supply chain and government revenues, and—
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
There's a subsidy of $13 a barrel. What you're telling me is that this is not an industry that can make it on its own if we have to do a $13-a-barrel subsidy.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
Time is up. Thank you.
Mrs. Stubbs, I'll turn it over to you for five minutes.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Thanks, Chair. I'm going to cede to my colleague Jeremy, but I just wanted to correct some of the facts from our esteemed colleague, MP Angus.
Alberta, of course, has long been and remains the far-and-away leader in clean-tech investment and alternative renewable energy development. This includes before and after the pause by the provincial government, which was deliberately designed to work out the regulatory details and provide certainty and confidence, so that the government could be confident that Albertans could get to a yes and be confident with all of the new development. That is nothing new in Alberta, particularly among the traditional energy companies, which, as a sector in this country for private sector investment in clean tech, are far and away the private sector leaders on investment in clean tech right across Canada.
Jeremy will continue with questions.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Thank you very much.
Just building off that quickly, Ms. Yedlin, was it a good idea for the Alberta government to provide certainty for investors and for Albertans?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Calgary Chamber of Commerce
Absolutely. As I said before, you can't expect anybody to invest a dollar in anything without providing certainty. People don't risk capital on a promise; they risk capital on certainty. That's what we need in order to move forward, regardless of the industry that you're in.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Yes, that's it exactly.
In your opening remarks and in a different round, you talked a little about how an emissions cap would be a production cap. You had a short time frame to address that. I'm wondering if you can talk a little more about how damaging and harmful that would be to the future viability of this project, and also to any other projects that can and will and should be built in this country.
If we have an emissions cap in place, what would that mean to any future project?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Calgary Chamber of Commerce
That means there would not be investment in future projects.
I also think it's worth mentioning that the emissions cap will do nothing in terms of addressing global emissions. We are still a very small part of the global emissions picture. Having an emissions cap in Alberta, which would constrain oil production and natural gas production, would contribute absolutely nothing to decreasing the emissions on a global standpoint.
Why compromise our economy and the potential for adding more infrastructure to support the most productive industry in the country by having an emissions cap? It makes no sense.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Yes, exactly. This is the only government in the world that has one in place, and they seem to be bragging about how amazing it is. You've laid out quite clearly here the damage that it would bring.
On the tolls, in your opening remarks you mentioned there would be about $9 billion of value in the tolls. I'm wondering what number you were using to come to that conclusion on what the toll would be.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Calgary Chamber of Commerce
It's $11 a barrel. About 30% of the cost overages, or about $9 billion, are expected to be covered by the producers through the toll.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
The CER, the Canada Energy Regulator, hasn't actually made that official yet. Is that correct?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Calgary Chamber of Commerce
There's a hearing in May of next year.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Calgary Chamber of Commerce
However, until those tolls are decided and until we know what that number is, the valuation of the asset itself is going to remain uncertain.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Wow.
I'm just wondering about the impact assessment. Mr. Legge, you were talking about that a little bit and how the changes that the government made don't go far enough. I'm wondering if you could elaborate on that a little, because, again, we're trying to find certainty here.
What killed this project, in a sense, from being built by the private sector was a lack of certainty. Conservatives tried to address that when the Atlantic accord came through, because they still hadn't made any changes to it. They were going to try to pass a bill that had unconstitutional references to it, so we were trying to sort through that then. As we know, the Government of Alberta is challenging the constitutionality of the revised version of it.
I'm wondering if you could talk a little about what more certainty is needed, or, better still, about how we could fix the Impact Assessment Act, especially around standing and how that works.
President, Business Council of Alberta
Thank you, Mr. Patzer.
Our biggest concerns are the ministerial designation powers and the political interference that can come with a decision, which is why we saw the gateway project cancelled at the last minute.
One of the biggest concerns, which you raised, is also the concept of standing. With any of the projects that go before the agency, any member of the public, whether they are near or far, or directly or indirectly or not even remotely impacted by the project, has the ability to weigh in on the impacts. Therefore, changes to the act need to clarify the sense of standing so that only those who are materially and directly impacted have the ability to weigh in on the consultations.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
Thank you.
We'll now go to Ms. Jones for five minutes.
Go ahead, Ms. Jones, please.
October 23rd, 2024 / 5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank our guests for joining us today. I appreciate your feedback.
I'm going to start with Ms. Yedlin.
How does this project increase the competitiveness for Canada's energy in the world? I think that's been the catalyst for this entire project. Do you see it as infrastructure that is absolutely necessary to do that?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Calgary Chamber of Commerce
I think it's really important to recognize that it improves Canada's energy security, and it also accounts for 17% of total pipeline capacity. What it means is that we become a more reliable supplier of oil, which is crucial for energy security, broadly speaking, around the world.
We've seen the impact of what happens when there are geopolitical events. If we can be a supplier that is reliable and if this pipeline gives us the opportunity to play a larger role on the global stage, then that's why it's important.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
Thank you.
My next question is for Mr. Legge.
Over the years, we've repeatedly seen bottlenecks in the supply chain that seriously harmed Alberta energy workers in particular, as well as the economic benefits of the energy industry. How does TMX alleviate these constraints today?
President, Business Council of Alberta
The TMX expansion enables production growth to happen so that we can actually drive more jobs and more investment in the energy sector and decrease some of the bottlenecks that were happening in terms of the supply getting to market.
The biggest thing for Canada is to get its product to market. We produce more than we consume domestically. Finding new ways to build more access to international markets is an imperative so that we can enable the sector to grow. We can create more jobs and enable the sector to contribute more to Canadian prosperity.