Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 12th, 2026

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Yes. I will be splitting my time with Mr. Malette.

Minister, thank you for joining us.

Despite the expanded eligibility for the mineral tax credit in the budget, phosphate is yet to be added. Given its strategic importance, will you commit to working with the Minister of Finance to have it added to the list of eligible critical minerals?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Mr. Martel, is this about LNG?

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I asked that question because the minister has a very good understanding of critical minerals. Would you like—

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Colleagues, this is degenerating a bit.

We can invite the minister back on these general topics, but we have a very specific job that the Department of Finance has given us.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

All right, Mr. Chair, if that is your wish.

Minister, as you know, the northern regions of Quebec have a lot of critical minerals. It is also no secret that some northern parts of Quebec don't have access to natural gas. Are there plans to connect some northern parts to natural gas, given that the region has a lot of critical minerals?

For instance, building processing plants in Chibougamau would cut transportation needs, and critical minerals wouldn't have to be shipped long distances for processing. Do you have a strategy or plan to take natural gas to these northern regions, which are well endowed with critical minerals?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

We respond to private sector proponents. If a private sector proponent brought a project to take LNG to that region of Quebec, we would obviously chat with the affected province and understand its desire for that project. We would talk with affected first nations, and we would look at the five criteria in Bill C-5. We would evaluate it against them.

If the conclusion was that we had support from the province, we had support from first nations and, in going through the five criteria, which are strengthening Canada's economy, providing economic and other benefits, having a high likelihood of successful execution, advancing the interests of indigenous peoples and contributing to clean growth.... If we concluded there was a net benefit there, we could look at that.

I'm not sure it's terribly productive to think in hypotheticals. We really need to look at real projects that you can evaluate in a real way against the criteria.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Minister, what would it take for a critical minerals project to be designated in the national interest? As you know, many countries are likely to be our customers if things go well on the critical minerals side.

If a project is in the national interest, would it be possible to pursue this kind of natural gas infrastructure without having to deal with all that the regulations involve?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

I'm sorry, but can you repeat the last bit of your question, please?

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Yes.

What would it take for critical minerals to be designated in the national interest for us?

We are endowed with significant critical minerals. We have an abundance of these minerals. What would it take for these minerals to be designated in the national interest so that instead of having all these conversations, we could—

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

Canada has a series of minerals that it has designated as critical minerals. Each of our G7 allies has a series of minerals that have been designated as critical minerals. Our NATO allies have laid out a series of critical minerals.

As we look at Canada's need for secure and sovereign access to critical minerals and our allies' needs, we would be looking at rank ordering projects. We would be looking at which projects are going to meet that critical need for us and which projects are going to meet that critical need for our allies. Then we would start talking, often with our allies, because we have a finite demand here in Canada. Many of the mines and processing facilities we would bring on are typically going to meet our needs and often our allies' needs, and we look for where our allies are willing to help us.

We did 26 of those in October, and we're going to do more at PDAC.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you both.

Unfortunately, Mr. Martel, that's your time. Perhaps Mr. Malette can share his time later with Ms. Stubbs. We'll see.

Mr. Danko, you have five minutes.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for joining us this afternoon.

We've heard in the House several times members of the opposition say that they would use the federal government and leverage the authority of the federal government to override indigenous rights in order to move projects forward.

You started an answer talking about building LNG in partnership with first nations and the importance of economic reconciliation. I want to give you this opportunity to expand on how our government is working with indigenous peoples and indigenous rights holders as we develop the LNG sector. Can you share more about the opportunities you see with building these collaborative relationships?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

I like to say that we're all prisoners of our own history. In my history, I was the chair of the largest publicly traded transmission and distribution company in the country. When I took over as chair, we had not built a new transmission line in 10 years. We had not built them because we were trying to build around first nations and in spite of first nations, and it clearly wasn't working.

The history I know is that we decided at that corporation to change our approach and proactively engage with them at the start of the process—to not view first nations as a risk factor, but to view them as a strategic opportunity to advance projects. When we chose to partner with them at the front end of projects, what we found is the projects started going ahead of schedule as opposed to behind schedule and under budget as opposed to over budget, because our partners, the first nations, had the same objectives we had.

In my history, we went from, as I said, being a corporation that hadn't built a new transmission line in 10 years to building more transmission lines than any company in North America, and that's because we were doing it in partnership with first nations, not in spite of first nations.

If you look at what's happening specifically in LNG, there were false starts before. MP Stubbs referred to some of those false starts. What you see today are things like LNG Canada, which is in full partnership with the Haisla Nation; Ksi Lisims, which is in full partnership with the Nisga'a Nation; Woodfibre, which is in full partnership with the Squamish Nation; and Cedar LNG, which is actually the first majority-owned indigenous LNG facility in the world.

We've come from a place where LNG was not getting built—because in many cases, we were building around or trying to go through first nations—to a place where, today, we have their support and we are getting things built.

I come back to what I tell any proponent I know, which is that in my experience, if you do the right thing up front and you engage early, first nations can help you accelerate projects and get them done on time and under budget. In my view, first nations engagement is an opportunity, not a risk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

You have 40 seconds, Mr. Danko.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, up front, we heard a desire from our side, and also from the opposition side, to get major projects moving forward as quickly as possible. Obviously, the first step for that would be to get the budget implementation act passed. In the short time I have, would you be able to share any further steps that we are taking to accelerate energy and natural resources projects?

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

In the case of both LNG Canada's train two and the Ksi Lisims project, the MPO is working on a daily basis to make sure that all of the different requirements to build are being coordinated from a permitting perspective across the various ministries. There can be as many as 16 different ministries touched. The MPO provides a one-window approach to those.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

I'm sorry to cut you off there. We're a little over time, but thank you both.

I will now give the floor to Mr. Simard for two and a half minutes.

I want to thank the first two speakers for making links to LNG, which is the subject of today's meeting.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Minister, earlier, you said you don't like to think in hypotheticals.

If I look at the construction of a gas pipeline, and I know this because I followed an LNG project back home, it takes a minimum of 10 years before a gas pipeline can be built. The fact is that the gas market is likely to have changed from its current state over the next decade.

I understand that some European countries have told you they will need Canadian LNG. Perhaps they need it now. However, in 10 years' time, knowing full well that some superpowers, such as China, are changing the energy landscape considerably through electrification, LNG prices will probably have changed. Will the projects still be as competitive?

Aren't the large corporations that are ready to build these projects doing this math? Are they not going to ask you for tax dollars for this type of construction?

I can see a lot of hypotheticals in the construction of a gas pipeline. Perhaps you can provide us with more information.

[Tim Hodgson, Liberal, Markham—Thornhill, ON]

If I understood your question, it was that some pundits don't think there's going to be demand for LNG, so why should we build? I love pundits who have no skin in the game and who produce lovely reports that have zero economic impact on anything.

As a business person, my experience is that I like to talk to customers. If a customer tells me they're willing to pay for something and provide a long-term contract for it, I look at that as a lot more valuable signal than a pundit's opinion.

I believe you were a professor previously. There is a wonderful place for professors to talk about things, but if someone is going to pay me to do something and provide me with a long-term contract to do it, I will value that signal far greater than a pundit's opinion.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

You know—

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

I'm sorry, Mr. Simard, but we have to move on to Ms. Stubbs.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

There's a point of order.

What is your point of order, sir?

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Simard is a lecturer, not a professor.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Mr. Martel, that is not a point of order.