Natural Resources Committee on Jan. 29th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Simard and Minister Wilkinson.

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

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

Thank you.

I just want to follow up on dealing with the need to put a sustainable energy future in place and being willing to face the climate damage being done in real time. We talked about methane, but we now see a really disturbing new report that says toxic emissions from the tar sands are 6,000% higher than has been reported.

It's not surprising that Suncor and Imperial Oil are going to downplay this, but 6,000% is a staggering number—

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Mr. Angus, I'll ask you to hold on for a second. We have a point of order from Mr. Ellis.

Mr. Ellis, go ahead.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Thanks very much, Chair.

There are those of us who aren't normally on this committee. Perhaps you don't talk about relevance much here, but Suncor doesn't exist in eastern Canada. This bill is very specifically about Atlantic Canada. Perhaps the member could get to his point of relevance related to this particular piece of legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you for your point of order, Mr. Ellis.

I would ask all members to keep their questions relevant to the conversation at hand today.

I'll go back to you, Mr. Angus.

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

Well, certainly the relevance is climate denial and obstruction of our bill. I just want to deal with this issue of the 6,000%—

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I'm sorry, Chair. I have a point of order again.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Mr. Angus, we have another point of order.

Mr. Ellis, go ahead.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I'm curious. This member keeps talking about climate denial. There's nothing in this bill about that—

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

That's not a point of order.

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

—but he continues to talk about it. Again, what is the relevance, please?

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Ellis. I believe Mr. Angus was just about to get into the rest of his debate.

I will ask members to be relevant but also not to use points of order to interrupt other members.

Mr. Angus, the floor is yours.

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

Thank you.

I'm certainly not surprised that when you ask tough questions on this level of pollution, it will ruffle a few feathers over there.

What I'm asking you, Minister, is, who is it...? Pathways Alliance claims that these emission standards and measurements are done in conjunction with the federal government. We can understand why Suncor or Imperial would lie about the facts. Why would the federal government allow this to happen?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

I have not seen that report, although I've certainly heard about it. Environment Canada would have a role to play in the context of measuring emissions and contaminants. I am quite certain that Environment Canada is having a look at the report as we speak.

I would say, though, to the earlier interjection by the colleague down the way, that Suncor actually does have an interest in the offshore. It is a player in the Newfoundland and Labrador oil and gas sector, so it is relevant to this conversation in that regard.

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

Certainly, Mr. Minister, I was aware of that, but sometimes when you get into those kinds of side arguments you're really wasting a lot of mental energy.

My concern is that we have an industry polluting 6,000 times higher and we're being obstructed in getting clean energy off the ground. I would just reiterate this simple question: How important is it that we get these projects off the ground, because we are losing competition around the world?

[Jonathan Wilkinson, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

It is enormously important. At the end of the day, the world is moving. Countries around the world, whether it's Japan, South Korea, China, the United States or various countries in western Europe, are looking to get ahead with the various opportunities that exist in the context of the transition to a low-carbon future. That is not exclusively electricity and hydrogen. It's critical minerals, batteries, electric vehicles and a whole range of other things.

Certainly, this is an enormous economic opportunity for Newfoundland and Labrador and for Nova Scotia. It's the reason that both premiers are pushing so hard to see this move forward. It's thousands of jobs. It's economic prosperity for communities and for indigenous communities. My goodness, it just boggles the mind that the Conservative Party is opposing something like this. I never thought I would see the day when a political party was fully opposed to an economic enabling piece of legislation that is fully supported by the provinces, including the Conservative government of Nova Scotia.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Minister. That's right on time.

We'll now go to Mr. Small for five minutes.

Go head, Mr. Small.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll let the honourable minister know that the Conservative Party opposes Bill C-49 because it breaks the spirit of the original Atlantic Accord—

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

—so much so that the Canadian Association of Petroleum—

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

I have a point of order.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

I'm pleased that I humoured my colleague from Labrador.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Mr. Small, I'll ask you to hold on one second. We have a point of order from Mr. Angus.

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

On the statement that they're officially opposing Bill C-49, is that just his opinion, or is that the Conservative Party—