Evidence of meeting #15 for Natural Resources in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was resources.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Duguid
Okay, colleagues, let's have some order.
Mr. Danko, if you could get to your major point, that would be appreciated by all of us.
Liberal
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Thank you, Chair.
I'm just stepping into this committee, and for the last half hour, I've been looking at what's going on. I'm amazed. If you think that this is all a hoax and there's nothing there, then you should agree with the motion and actually come through, and then the committee will have a chance to deal with it. If they want to cleanse their name and their reputation, that's the best place to do it.
Let the witnesses come forward. Do you think it's a conspiracy theory? Well, bring your witness in, let them look at it and dispense of it, but to make accusations based on your own conspiracy theories and to insult your fellow members on the committee is totally unprofessional.
There was no apology given, Mr. Danko, which I find totally unprofessional. As someone who's been in municipal council, you should understand that there are places that you can and can't cross. I've been here for 17 years. I have never insulted a Liberal member like that in my life, and I never would. There is a level of professionalism that usually shows up in the committees. You've broken that level of professionalism, and I expect an apology—I do.
Liberal
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
Thank you, Chair.
This was referred to as a competitive bidding process that we can't get involved in. Well, it's done; it was awarded. We are investigating why billions in Canadian taxpayers' money is going to flow to American companies, with no safeguards that our technology and our secrets will not be used for the benefit of a different country.
We talk at length in this committee and in the chamber about looking out for Canadians' best interests. I'm asking for three meetings to investigate how this travesty has occurred, that there's no Canadian component.... We heard the rationale that there are Canadian employees. Well, they work for American companies. We know there have been other concerns about American companies—associated with our data being stored on American servers and in foreign countries—demanding access to secrets. This contract is in the billions, and the technology drain is such that we could also be talking about billions of dollars of technologies that Canadians have paid for, that should be for our benefit, just getting swept away under the cover of night into servers located in the States.
We're asking for some answers and some accountability on how this happened. How did only American companies win a tender to manage Canadian Nuclear Laboratories in Canada? Those answers, I believe, have to come under oath from the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources himself.
We also heard a bit about how they can't touch this because AECL is an outside organization. Well, it's taxpayers' money that pays for this contract and those workers. In this committee, we should be able to ask questions on value for Canadian taxpayers' money when we know that it is just going to be paid to American companies. Officials from Natural Resources Canada should also be at this committee.
On top of all this is the Treasury Board Secretariat, because, once again, there are thresholds of money. We're talking not about $16 glasses of orange juice but about $1.2-billion contracts. We may think of all the troubles we have in Canada and how many millions of people are lining up at food banks, yet right now we're stroking a cheque annually for $1 billion to American companies to manage our labs. Something stinks here. We then find out some of the ownership structures of these companies.
These are questions that I think Canadians should be asking. What is happening in Ottawa? We are running out of money because we have billions of dollars going to contracts such as these. The documents that we're asking for are basic documents that would shed light on this. For weeks we've been blocked on this motion. This motion was put on notice on October 17, and it's taken until today to see the light of day. As long as I'm a member of this committee, I'll keep bringing this up. I'll keep fighting to find the answers on what is happening with Canadian taxpayers' dollars.
Liberal
Corey Hogan Liberal Calgary Confederation, AB
Thank you, Chair.
This is a highly integrated sector. There's incredible strength here in Canada. There's incredible strength of Canadian companies in the United States and of United States companies here as well. Ownership and benefits on both sides of the border have flowed literally for decades since the creation of nuclear energy. We have our problems right now with the United States, but they are still a friend and ally. Many of us have relatives down there. We have friends down there. We have connections far and wide, and the rhetoric has gotten a little superheated here. Words like “cover-up” are a bit silly. Suggestions that anyone is running out of money, particularly the Government of Canada, which has the strongest balance sheet in the G7, are a bit unserious.
We're currently in a forestry study. It's a very important study. As the opposition was discussing even at the last meeting, this is a long-standing crisis that needs to be addressed with seriousness. In my opinion, this is not the time to address this motion. It is not a motion I would currently support. I would like to finish the forestry study; perhaps then we can take up consideration of the motion. For that reason I move to adjourn debate.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Duguid
That motion is in order, colleagues.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4)
Debate is adjourned.
Colleagues, we have the supplementary estimates (B) to pass. It's one of the purposes of our meeting today, along with seeing the minister and having him answer questions.
I am going to go right to the votes on the supplementary estimates, if I could have everybody's attention.
Does the committee wish to vote on the supplementary estimates (B) now?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Duguid
In all, there are three votes in the supplementary estimates (B), 2025-26. Unless anyone objects, I will seek the unanimous consent of the committee to group the votes together for a decision. Is there unanimous consent to proceed in this way?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Duguid
CANADIAN ENERGY REGULATOR
Vote 1b—Program expenditures..........$6,596,427
(Vote 1b agreed to on division)
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Vote 1b—Operating expenditures..........$1,323,339
Vote 10b—Grants and contributions..........$15,100,000
(Votes 1b and 10b agreed to on division)
Shall I report the votes back to the House?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Duguid
Colleagues, I have one last thing before we adjourn. The clerk prepared a budget in the amount of $500 for today's meeting. It's ridiculous.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Duguid
I guess it's for the ceiling. I haven't had my sandwich yet.
Is it the will of the committee to adopt this budget?
