Natural Resources Committee on Jan. 29th, 2024

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Yes. We worked very hard. Our officials worked very hard to ensure that we were in agreement with respect to all of this.

I spoke with both premiers on this legislation a number of different times. They are fully supportive of this. In fact, as you say, they asked for this. They have both put out public statements in the last few months asking this committee and this Parliament to pass this bill. That very much includes Premier Houston, the Conservative Premier of Nova Scotia.

[An hon. member]

Progressive....

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

There was a comment, Minister, just off-microphone: Progressive Conservative. I would agree with the comment made by my colleague because there is a difference. Nova Scotians at home do see the difference between the stance and positioning of the federal Conservatives and those of the Progressive Conservatives back home in Nova Scotia.

Mr. Perkins talked about the fisheries industry. I would agree with him wholeheartedly that that's an extremely important sector. However, what I didn't hear him talking about was the work of the Impact Assessment Agency on the regional review, engaging with fishing groups and engaging to identify areas with the ability to coexist with the types of technologies we're talking about and maintain that really important fishery. Can you reassure this committee that this work is happening?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

It is absolutely happening. The fishing community is extremely important. It's important economically. It's important for a whole range of reasons. I was Minister of Fisheries for almost two years, and I certainly understand and have met with many of the fishing organizations in both provinces and elsewhere in this country. We need to ensure that the voices of fish harvesters are heard.

We have been consulting in the context of the work that's been done here, but the regional assessment of offshore wind will certainly include the voices of fish harvesters. Any individual project assessment will also hear the voices of fish harvesters.

I will also tell you to look around the world. There are many places, including the United Kingdom, where offshore wind fully coexists, and well, with the fishing industry. You just have to be smart and thoughtful about how you do it.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Minister.

We will now go to Mr. Simard for two and half minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to take the witnesses in another direction, but there's still a connection with what we're studying.

I know that the clean hydrogen investment tax credit came into effect in 2023, if memory serves. The clean electricity investment tax credit is expected to come into effect in 2024.

Personally, I have a question. I know this may apply to Newfoundland and Labrador as well. A major company in our area, Rio Tinto, has a potential wind turbine project. They would like to make hydrogen for their own industrial processes. Does that mean that they would have access to a tax credit for the wind component and another tax credit for hydrogen?

Am I understanding that correctly?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

It's possible, but I'll have to know a little more about that project.

As for the tax credit, we'll provide details later. In fact, I believe the Minister of Finance will be announcing the details in the coming months.

Having said that, it is entirely possible, yes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I want things to be clear: Under Bill C‑49, a developer with a wind project and a clean hydrogen project would receive both tax credits. Is that your understanding as well?

Primarily, it gives me the impression that offshore wind projects are mainly set up to manufacture hydrogen. I'm giving you this example because, back home, if we don’t have access to Hydro-Québec's infrastructure, the wind project won't be profitable. What costs a lot is all the infrastructure, such as the power lines. What developers are interested in is access to that. They want to build wind projects, but they also want access to Hydro-Québec infrastructure if they want to sell their energy.

As I understand it, under the bill, Newfoundland and Labrador does not intend to build the infrastructure, but to manufacture wind turbines with a view to subsequently producing hydrogen. The province doesn't have the necessary infrastructure, and it's very expensive.

Is my analysis correct?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

These decisions will be made by the governments of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. Those provinces will probably use some of the electricity for the grid and some for hydrogen production. However, if we want to use electricity for the grid, we have to invest in the transition and other things, as Hydro-Québec has done.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Simard, and thank you, Minister.

We will now go to Mr. Angus for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Minister.

I want to reiterate my concern about delay. We know now that the Conservatives are going to oppose this bill, which Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia want to move ahead with.

My concern is again whether or not we're going to be in the game at all, given the massive investments in Europe, China and the United States. Our ability to compete is being put on the line. I ask that in terms of the issue of hydrogen, in which I know the Conservatives don't believe there's any economic case.

I was in Germany meeting with Chancellor Scholz. I met with the head of the chancellery, Wolfgang Schmidt. We met with senior officials. They were asking really tough questions: “Can Canada produce hydrogen? Can you meet our market demands?” Germany is an enormous market. It's an industrial powerhouse. Is it possible for us to meet the German opportunity or are we going to sit by the side of the road and let China or the United States take that?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Yes, but we need to get going. There are other countries, like Qatar, that are moving very rapidly to develop the production of hydrogen, particularly from solar energy there. We need to move forward in a manner that can meet the timelines as well as the cost expectations of the Germans. I think there is an enormous opportunity. I will be seeing Vice-Chancellor Habeck in the next couple of months and having this conversation. Yes, there is an enormous opportunity.

Similarly, in Alberta there's an enormous opportunity to produce hydrogen as ammonia and ship it to Japan, but an enormous amount of work has to be done. We need to get going.

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

Absolutely. The potential in Alberta for a clean energy economy is so evident, yet it has a premier who invites Russian propaganda to troll and people like Tucker Carlson. She spent the whole winter trashing the clean energy projects that are already on the ground in Alberta. My concern is that it's shifting certainty away from Canada and shifting investment away from Canada. How can we move to get these projects on the ground and tell our friends in Europe that we are going to compete?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

First and foremost we need to get this project through Parliament and implemented. We need to get the investment tax credits finished—and they will be in the short term. We need to get to the point where we have a Conservative Party that believes in climate change and has a plan to address it, and an economy that will thrive in a low-carbon universe. The lack of certainty, from a political perspective, is impeding investment, and that's the fault of the Conservative Party of Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

Thank you, Minister, for that.

We'll now go to Mrs. Stubbs for five minutes.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Minister, I would suggest that uncertainty is being caused by a government that has not moved in 108 days to fix a piece of legislation that you yourself claim is the cornerstone of your environmental and regulatory policies, one the Supreme Court said, in large part, was unconstitutional. Speaking of those unconstitutional sections, section 64 of Bill C-69 is in Bill C-49—

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Do you need me to [Inaudible—Editor] that?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

I'm sure you've read Bill C-49, which is what you're talking about, so you can catch up.

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

You said Bill C-69.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

It allows the minister to interfere in a project—and this is what my colleague Rick Perkins was getting at earlier—if they think it's in the public interest. There's no definition of that. Then any conditions can be created that are deemed necessary. That is exactly what has caused uncertainty in the Canadian energy sector, driving away billions of dollars in projects and private sector proponents. It's interesting to hear your counterpart in the government, your NDP colleague, worrying about missing the window. Well, now we know why he doesn't worry.

Of course, an example of your destruction is LNG. There were 18 proposals when you came to office, and only three are approved and one is under construction, which was previously approved by the Harper government. Then there's the fact that you keep talking about China with the same admiration that your Prime Minister once confessed to. Canada doesn't produce any lithium for Canadian use. It actually goes to China, and we can't get critical minerals or rare earth metals out of the ground in fewer than 25 years in this country because of your legislation.

I'd like to ask you some questions. Why are there no costs in this bill? Surely it's to expand the mandate, the roles, the responsibilities and the critical function of the regulator to assess risks to ecology, to marine wildlife and to habitat. These are related to offshore wind technology, which is new, rather than petroleum development in the past. Can you assure us that there are no costs involved in ensuring the boards have the resources and the skill set sufficient to execute their new mandates outlined in this bill?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

I'm not even sure where to begin on that monologue.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Why aren't there costs in the bill?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

A whole bunch of things were just—

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

My question is, why aren't there costs in the bill?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

—wrong in there, including the fact that there is an operating lithium mine that came on stream in Quebec that produces for North America. There's another one being developed. There's a whole range of things you just said that are factually inaccurate.