Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 20th, 2025

[Kelly Levis]

We review any project that increases traffic on our network as a positive opportunity. To date, no study has been conducted on the cost associated with rehabilitating the corridor between Matagami and Chapais, in that northern corridor.

At present, it would be very difficult for us to invest capital in this rehabilitation without guaranteed traffic volumes. Financing would therefore need to come from other sources. It's important to note that from an operational railway standpoint, the shortest distance on a map is not necessarily the most efficient or fastest route between two points.

We do remain open to continued dialogue with stakeholders to identify potential rail solutions that could support regional growth. Some of the options today would be feasible using the existing network we have out there today. As I mentioned earlier, we are looking at many of these different projects based on transloading areas where product could be trucked into a transload...and then converted into rail.

I hope that answers your question.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Yes, partially.

I would ask the question to Mr. Ouellet. Who do we need to talk to if the Grande Alliance has done some studies? I think this committee would be more than anxious to get the conclusion. I'm assuming you also had commissioned some studies for the portion that is within your jurisdiction. Is that correct, and can the committee get access to those?

[Louis Ouellet]

Absolutely. Our studies and analyses are available. We'll try to obtain those from La Grande Alliance, meaning the ones on the missing section between Lebel-sur-Quévillon and Chapais. We can, of course, provide this information to the committee.

With regard to rail transportation, I understood from Ms. Levis's comments that CN will not invest if the project isn't profitable. I'm well aware of that. That's why we need to set up a project office that will conduct a comprehensive analysis of all potential users of this project.

As Mr. Girard said, companies in the critical minerals sector aren't large corporations. We need to find a way to enable them to extract their product at a reasonable cost.

The optimized rail network includes the Abitibi and Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean regions, where there are many projects. They aren't just mining projects, but also forestry projects. We mustn't forget that the forestry sector is also in crisis. It needs to diversify and find new products. In my opinion, two-by-fours, as we see in the United States, aren't the way of the future. We need to find a way to make everything that comes from the forest profitable. New products exist. Rail is essential for transporting all of our natural resources products.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

There are just 20 seconds remaining. Why don't we move on to Monsieur Simard?

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to take a few moments to respond to my friend Richard Martel, whom I greatly appreciate and love like a brother.

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

Me too.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

This regional project doesn't belong to anyway, but it's supported by all the stakeholders in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean. We mustn't act like a scorned lover who has sadly experienced defeat. The regions mustn't adopt this attitude. It's too bad for the LNG project. Some people were in favour of the project and others weren't, which means that the project won't ultimately proceed.

I'm going to use a sports metaphor now that Mr. Martel will understand immediately. Even though the Nordiques aren't back, he still watches hockey. Even though the LNG project didn't proceed, we can still think about his region's economic development.

What we want to do, what the people in the region want to do, and what Mr. Ouellet came to present to committee, is an infrastructure project linked to a deep-water port that would enable various critical minerals to be transported to Europe. The witnesses on the previous panel talked about setting a floor price for critical minerals. We're currently considering these issues. However, we still need to develop the necessary infrastructure.

Mr. Ouellet, the costs associated with this type of infrastructure would be lower than those of other types of projects that have appeared in the public sphere. However, another factor seems central to me if we want to carry out the primary processing of critical minerals: access to labour. In Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, access to labour isn't as problematic as it is in the north, where commuters fly in. I'd like you to tell me about access to labour in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean for the development of the critical minerals sector.

[Louis Ouellet]

I mentioned this briefly earlier. Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean has a population of 258,000. We could therefore support an initiative to develop or process critical minerals across the entire region.

In my opinion, a railway line, a section of railway, or any kind of road is an incredible opportunity for a community that wants to grow. The Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region has always been involved and particularly inventive when it comes to carrying out huge projects. In fact, this has been the case since World War I, when the decision was made to settle in our region to develop the aluminum industry. But it's not just aluminum. I could also tell you about the wind power projects currently under way in our region. In terms of energy production, these are huge projects.

We're talking about the region's energy capacity. There's a real focus on developing critical and strategic minerals, so that our NATO partners can have access to these minerals. I believe that the Saguenay port, our population, our knowledge, and our equipment manufacturers are there to support the entire industry.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Ouellet.

I'd now like to turn to our friends from CN.

In your presentation, you say that you're working in collaboration with indigenous nations. We know that La Grande Alliance, a memorandum of understanding signed by the Cree, includes a project to complete that section of railway that would serve Lebel-sur-Quévillon.

Are you in talks with La Grande Alliance partners, or have you already had talks?

[Kelly Levis]

To date, I personally haven't had any talks with them, but I could get back to you with more information, since we have a whole indigenous group working with the various communities.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

If I understood your earlier comments correctly, you currently have no data on the costs associated with this. I must admit that I only recently started working on this type of issue, but I know there are several types of infrastructure in northern Quebec operating on a user-pay basis. In other words, it's not just one large developer developing and deploying this infrastructure; rather, it's a series of projects coordinated by a project office in partnership with indigenous communities and people like you, CN representatives, who make it possible to put together the financing needed to develop this type of infrastructure.

Is this something that CN has already done?

[Kelly Levis]

I want to make sure I answer this correctly. I'm not 100% sure. I do know we look at working with different groups. We have worked in the past with indigenous groups and other partners in different areas to be able to put together projects, but I can't say specifically what has been done with those alliances. Generally, that goes through a different group.

We are working directly with the communities. We're working directly with the mining groups that are looking to develop, and we are working with the customers, who will be looking to purchase the products, to understand volumes and whatnot. We will move through those areas to understand what investment would be required.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

That's all the time we have.

Mr. Simard, please go ahead.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I'd like to very quickly ask the witnesses to provide the committee with an outline that would help us understand how their assessment process works for this type of infrastructure. It could be very useful to us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

We're happy to receive a written brief on that, Ms. Levis.

Colleagues, we're going to go to our second and last round. We only have time for three speakers. We are a little bit behind because of the vote.

We will have Mr. Martel for five minutes, followed by Mr. Danko. Mr. Simard, it will be back to you for 2.5 minutes. We have a travel budget to consider, which will be the in camera portion of our meeting.

With that, Mr. Martel, the floor is yours.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Girard, we want projects. If we didn't want them, we wouldn't be asking questions. However, this time, we need to tackle the real issues. We talk about roads and railways, but if we don't talk about regulations, bureaucracy, delays and costs, it will be difficult to implement these projects. Everyone tells us that the permitting process is endless. In fact, it takes between 15 and 20 years. You said that the last project dates back 40 years. We need to seize each development project at the right time. If investors are never able to seize these opportunities because the process is too long, they'll get discouraged and we'll get nowhere.

I'd like to hear your comments on this.

[Réjean Girard]

To be blunt, it's catastrophic. Delays cause companies to miss out on opportunities to develop projects. As you say, we need to seize the right moment. If someone else does it before us, we lose the market. There's no point in having infrastructure if we can't develop projects. Unfortunately, one of the major problems with granting permits lies in the provincial project approval process. I don't know what the federal government can do, but in Quebec, this process is a nightmare.

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

Mr. Girard, there must be harmonization between the federal and provincial governments. If they don't seek to achieve a common goal, success is almost impossible, isn't it?

[Réjean Girard]

I completely agree with you. Provincial governments should get guidelines from the federal government defining the process.

One of the phenomena we have observed at the provincial level is that it's impossible to obtain a building permit until everything's done. As part of the process, studies are conducted, and if changes are required, the permit won't be issued until more studies have been done to resolve the situation. This cycle derails the funding.

From what I've been told, in other countries, such as Australia, studies are conducted, submitted, and then a permit is issued on the condition that the required changes are made. From the outset, the permit is issued and construction can begin. Their process takes between five and 10 years less. In Canada, it doesn't work that way. Until every loose thread is perfectly tied up, construction cannot begin.

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

When it comes to mining projects, without processing plants, can we hope that resource extraction will be profitable?

[Réjean Girard]

I'll give you a cruel example.

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

Yes.

[Réjean Girard]

I have a cell phone here. The materials used to make it cost about $10, but the phone sells for $1,000 on the market. Could we pay $20 for the materials and save $1,000 on manufacturing?

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

I see then that—

[Réjean Girard]

Market price is an essential concept. Let's set a decent price for goods, and projects will fund themselves.