Natural Resources Committee on April 14th, 2026

[Gurpreet Lail]

I think the federal government needs to start talking about the fact that there's a bright future for young people in trades and skilled labour in this industry now and moving into the future. They're a part of innovation technology. There's a lot of artificial intelligence being used, and people don't know that. For the last two decades, they've heard that this is a dead industry, that it's going nowhere and that we've burned the environment. That's simply not true.

We need to start switching to a more positive narrative, full of facts on where we are headed as an industry and on the kind of talent we need. In order for us to be best in class, we need younger talent coming into this industry.

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

I'm from Hamilton, the heart of the Canadian industrial centre with the steel industry. A lot of steel produced in Ontario, in Hamilton in particular, is used in the oil and gas industry, so there's a lot of momentum for the buy Canadian policy.

I want to extend the question about skilled trades to Mr. Buffalo. That's something I'm particularly interested in, having worked in construction.

How can we make sure that indigenous communities are directly benefiting, are participating in training and are part of the labour market when it comes to these large energy projects?

[Stephen Buffalo]

We can't help but notice the activity in and around our communities. Of course, we want our young people to achieve some sort of designation to continue their livelihood and to have the opportunity to collaborate with industry and maybe be provided with federal resources for more training.

During COVID, we had the site reclamation program here. Unfortunately with COVID, we were only allowed to do 20 students per classroom, but we educated over 300 students, and they were hired walking right out of the door to help with site reclamation in their communities. That's where the support should be.

Gurpreet and I are part of an organization called the Canadian Energy Executive Association. We've gone to post-secondary institutions and talked about how important it is that they take their place in the natural resource sector and energy sector. At one time, there was fearmongering about oil and bitumen, which were villainized somewhat, and about how bad pipelines are for the country, but we've realized that's the strength of Canada and of what we do here, so advocating in those spaces is very important.

We had some good outreach in all forms of energy, be it nuclear, hydro or whatever you talk about. It's important that the dialogue continue among the parties of government, industry and our communities to ensure that we take advantage of what we have in our areas.

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

Thank you.

I'm not sure how much time I have left, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

You have 10 seconds.

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

Okay. I'll just wrap up by saying that, obviously, we have some ongoing challenges in the energy industry, but our government is there to provide the world with what Canada has.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, colleagues, and thank you to our witnesses in particular. It was a lively round of questions, answers and comments.

I'll repeat what I said earlier. We welcome briefs. We welcome additional information from your organizations.

Really, thank you very much for spending time with us today.

Colleagues, we're going to suspend for about five to seven minutes while we get the next panel set up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Welcome back, colleagues. We'll resume the meeting.

I would like to welcome our witnesses for this second hour.

We have with us, from the Canada Energy Regulator, Darren Christie, chief economist, and Mike Johnson, technical leader.

From the Department of Natural Resources, we have Kimberly Lavoie, assistant deputy minister; Drew Leyburne, assistant deputy minister, energy systems sector; and Erin O'Brien, assistant deputy minister, fuels sector.

I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of the new witnesses. Please wait until I recognize you before speaking. As a reminder, all comments should be addressed through the chair.

You will each have five minutes for your opening remarks, after which we will open the floor to questions.

Mr. Leyburne, we're going to start with you. You have five minutes.

[Drew Leyburne, Assistant Deputy Minister, Energy Systems Sector, Department of Natural Resources]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, members of the committee, for the invitation to appear today.

I'd like to acknowledge that I'm speaking from the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation today.

In a world marked by rapid change and shifting trade patterns, Canada's energy resources across conventional, clean and emerging sectors give us a competitive advantage. Energy exports in fuels, uranium and electricity already represent more than $200 billion in value and almost one-third of the goods we export.

Today, nearly all those exports flow to a single market. Expanding our global reach strengthens Canada's resilience and creates new opportunities for workers, communities and industries across the country. Canada is stepping up as a reliable partner on the world stage. It has committed to producing an additional 140,000 barrels per day starting this month—a clear example of the role Canada can play when our allies face uncertainty.

To respond to that uncertainty at home, the federal government announced earlier today that it is providing relief to Canadians through the pausing of the excise tax on fuel.

However, our long‑term ambition goes well beyond responding to crises. Canada's energy exports can advance global energy security, accelerate climate change progress and create good jobs here at home, while deepening partnerships with indigenous communities and expanding opportunities in every region.

The memorandum of understanding with Alberta is one way for the government to develop Canada's full energy potential and expand access to global markets. Under that agreement, the government anticipates new applications for a privately funded east‑to‑west pipeline by July 1.

Both governments agree on the importance of the pathways plus carbon capture project and industrial carbon pricing, reflecting a shared commitment to responsible development. Alberta has also committed to working with British Columbia to ensure that benefits reach communities in that province.

Taken together, these steps show how Canada can modernize approvals, strengthen infrastructure and expand market access, delivering more Canadian energy to global customers. These actions form part of a broader shift to show how Canada is positioning itself for the future not only by expanding the energy we can deliver abroad, but also by ensuring that what we deliver is cleaner, more reliable and able to compete in a rapidly changing world.

The government's climate competitiveness strategy lays out a clear objective to make Canadian energy products more competitive in a world that values low‑carbon, reliable and responsibly produced energy. To that end, budget 2025 includes measures that strengthen Canada's ability to expand energy exports, in particular the $5‑billion trade diversification corridors fund. Budget 2025 also invests $4 million to maintain Natural Resources Canada's capacity to promote nuclear energy exports and engage with priority markets.

Moreover, the budget reinstates accelerated capital cost allowances for low-carbon LNG facilities, making new investment more attractive and rewarding projects with strong emissions performance.

Amendments to the Canadian Energy Regulator Act extend LNG export licences to 50 years, giving project owners greater certainty for long-term planning, phased investments and competitive returns.

These changes directly benefit the two LNG projects currently before the Major Projects Office, which plays a central role in unlocking export opportunities. Together, these two projects represent tens of billions of dollars in potential investment and thousands of good-paying jobs during construction and long-term operations in both B.C. and Alberta. If all planned LNG projects proceed, Canada could export up to 100 million tonnes of LNG a year by the 2040s, which would be a significant opportunity for workers, industry and our national economy.

Exporting energy only matters if there is global demand. That's why the government is also building strong international relationships.

In early March, Canada and India signed a new strategic energy partnership focused on LNG, petroleum, uranium, solar energy and hydrogen. Through other recent international engagements, agreements and memoranda of understanding, the government is expanding market access, building new partnerships and ensuring that Canada's energy industry and the communities that depend on it are positioned to succeed in the long term.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, Mr. Leyburne.

Now we will go to Mr. Christie for five minutes.

[Darren Christie, Chief Economist, Canada Energy Regulator]

Good afternoon. Thank you for inviting the Canada Energy Regulator, or CER. In my opening remarks, I'll briefly describe the CER's mandate and discuss our recently published report entitled “Canada's Energy Future 2026”.

Before going further, I would like to acknowledge that I'm on the unceded, ancestral and traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation.

The CER's mandate is clear. It regulates energy infrastructure—specifically international and interprovincial pipelines and power lines as well as offshore energy projects in areas not covered by a federal‑provincial agreement—in a way that prevents harm and ensures the safe, reliable, competitive and environmentally sustainable delivery of energy to Canada and the world.

The CER is also responsible for regulating the export of hydrocarbons and electricity from Canada.

Pipelines are, of course, critical for accessing export markets. The CER understands that regulatory efficiency, clarity and predictability can affect project viability and timelines. The CER's ongoing commitment to regulatory improvement and efficiencies supports timely decision-making while maintaining strong protections for the environment, the rights of indigenous peoples and all Canadians.

The CER is also responsible for advising and reporting on energy matters. This includes developing a range of energy information products, such as provincial-territorial energy profiles, market snapshots that highlight key trends in Canada's energy sector, and oil and gas production statistics. This work also includes our energy futures series, which is our flagship energy information product in which we provide evidence-based analysis of how possible energy futures might unfold for Canadians over the long term.

Last month, the CER released the latest edition of the energy futures series, “Canada's Energy Future 2026”. The report explores four possible scenarios for Canadian energy over the long term.

Our baseline case, called “Current Measures”, uses only policies that were in place in November 2025 and applies moderate assumptions for factors like energy prices and economic growth. Our higher scenario and lower scenario vary some key assumptions to create a range around the baseline “Current Measures” scenario. Lastly, we include a scenario that shows a net-zero emissions pathway for Canada. All scenarios span every energy commodity and region across the country, using economic and energy models.

Our scenarios show that where Canada's energy system ends up depends heavily on factors like economic growth, international energy prices, climate action, technology and investment choices. The report highlights different outlooks for oil and natural gas production, which drives significant exports from Canada. In the case of Canadian crude oil production, it grows in the short term across all scenarios, but longer-term outcomes diverge, mainly due to oil price assumptions. By 2050, production spans a wide range, from 12% below 2024 levels to 18% above.

Canadian natural gas production increases from about 19 billion cubic feet, or Bcf, per day currently to between 21 and 32 Bcf per day in 2050 depending on the scenario. This growth is driven largely by assumed LNG export levels, which account for a growing share of total natural gas production by 2050.

With regard to trade diversification, the report finds that under all four scenarios, Canada continues to send most crude oil exports to the U.S., if existing pipeline infrastructure is used much like it is today.

Lastly, in the case of electricity, although generation is growing significantly across all our scenarios, exports to the United States are falling modestly, while flows between provinces are more than doubling.

Overall, the report entitled “Canada's Energy Future 2026” reinforces that, while the future is uncertain, the direction of Canada's energy system will be shaped by the decisions made over time. The CER's role is to provide the analyses that will help to inform those decisions.

In closing, I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak about the work of the CER. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, Mr. Leyburne and Mr. Christie.

We are now going to start our rounds of questions and comments.

We're going to start with Mr. Tochor for six minutes.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you to our witnesses for being here today.

What effect would the energy east project have had on our economy if it had been completed?

[Darren Christie]

From the CER's standpoint, that's not something we've taken under study. In our energy futures report, we don't—

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

You're the economist for the regulations. The Liberals have changed the regulations, which has hurt our industry, and you're saying that no one did the math on what happened when we killed energy east.

[Darren Christie]

The CER would have reviewed the application. It would have had processes in place to review the application and would have made the—

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I'll keep it simple. It's not just about how much the economy has been hurt.

Do you think energy east would have strengthened Canada's sovereignty and reduced our dependency on the United States, yes or no?

[Darren Christie]

In the recent energy futures report, we highlighted that central Canada obtains a significant amount of oil that is produced in the United States or, to the extent that it's coming from western Canada, that transits through the U.S.—

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Regarding the energy east project, which would have taken energy from western Canada and helped eastern Canada, you're not able to say that it would have strengthened our sovereignty and made us less reliant on the United States.

[Darren Christie]

To the extent that the barrels used in central and eastern Canada would come from western Canada and stay north of the Great Lakes rather than go through the United States as they are today, there's an energy security difference that would come from that, given that right now so much—

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Then we're less sovereign because of the decision to kill energy east.

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Now we have heckling from the Liberals. The track record of the Liberals is that they changed the regulation and killed that project, and there is no calculation of what that cost us in dollars by the chief economist for the regulator.

The simple question that no one is willing to answer truthfully is, are we less of a country because of it? No one at the regulatory body has an opinion on this.

[Darren Christie]

A crude oil pipeline from western Canada to eastern Canada would clearly provide the opportunity for central Canada and eastern Canada to receive barrels produced in Canada without transiting through another country for consumption in Canadian refineries.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

When oil goes through the United States, do we pay a premium?