House of Commons Hansard #16 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was energy.

Topics

Commissioner of Official LanguagesRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I have the honour, pursuant to section 66 of the Official Languages Act, to lay upon the table the annual report of the Commissioner of Official Languages covering the period from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f), this report is deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Public Sector Integrity CommissionerRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I also have the honour, pursuant to section 38 of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, to lay upon the table the report of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner concerning an investigation into a disclosure of wrongdoing.

This report is deemed permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.

Priority Hiring for Injured Veterans ActRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Public Service Employment Act (priority hiring for injured veterans).

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

National Housing ActRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Bloc

Jean-François Fortin Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-550.

Mr. Speaker, the proposed enactment amends the National Housing Act to provide that part of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation’s retained earnings from its housing loan insurance business be transferred to the provinces, to meet their urgent needs for affordable social housing.

The bill will limit the potential equity of the CMHC to about 1% of its loan portfolio, in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions.

These measures would ensure that anything in excess of the amounts provided for in the reserve fund and equity would be returned to Quebec and the provinces, so that they could invest the money to meet their needs.

This new money from the CMHC could be added to the program already in place and would enable Quebec and the provinces to maintain current funding levels and to develop and reinvest in the construction, renovation and conversion of affordable housing.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

National Security Committee of Parliamentarians ActRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-551, An Act to establish the National Security Committee of Parliamentarians.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce a bill, which, if passed, would establish the national security committee of parliamentarians. I would note that this bill has been presented to this House on a number of occasions, beginning with Bill C-81, introduced by the then Liberal Minister of Public Safety.

This legislation would ensure that Canada's intelligence gathering community has the kind of proactive oversight already in place in a number of world jurisdictions. This legislation is required on an urgent basis.

I would remind the Minister of Justice, the Minister of State (Finance), and the member for Windsor—Tecumseh that they, on behalf of their respective parties, endorsed the national security committee of parliamentarians in a 2004 report. Therefore, I would hope that this legislation would move forward on an urgent basis.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

A message from His Excellency the Governor General transmitting supplementary estimates (B) for the financial year ending March 31, 2014, was presented by the President of the Treasury Board and read by the Speaker to the House.

Business of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

NDP

Nycole Turmel NDP Hull—Aylmer, QC

moved:

That, at the conclusion of today's debate on the opposition motion in the name of the Member for Burnaby—New Westminster, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to Tuesday, November 19, 2013, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders.

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you were to seek it, I think you would find that there is consent to adopt this motion.

Business of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

Business of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Yes.

Business of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Business of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Business of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

(Motion agreed to)

Sex SelectionPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

November 7th, 2013 / 10:10 a.m.

Conservative

Leon Benoit Conservative Vegreville—Wainwright, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition in which the petitioners call upon Parliament to condemn the practice of gender selection pregnancy termination, which discriminates against females. They call on Parliament to take this action. There have been statements in Parliament by all parties who have condemned this practice, yet Parliament itself has not passed a motion or taken a stance on this.

I am pleased to say that at the Conservative convention last weekend, they took a stand on this, and we are determined to, in fact, have Parliament condemn this practice.

Human RightsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

NDP

Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition addressing the homophobic laws recently adopted by Russia's Duma.

Dozens and dozens of residents of Toronto—Danforth and its neighbour, Toronto Centre, signed this petition at the Old Nick on the Danforth. They are calling on the Minister of Foreign Affairs to institute a visa ban for the Russian parliamentarians who originated these repressive laws that have so much potential to not only deepen hate but to give a green light to violence against the LGBTQ community. This visa ban request from the petitioners is supported by over 100 human rights organizations in Canada. The petitioners specifically note that the New Democratic Party, the NDP, has requested that the minister put this ban in place.

I would end by noting that the visa ban measure was dismissively ridiculed, on national news, by the Liberal Party of Canada.

Veterans AffairsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition today on behalf of hundreds of people in the industrial Cape Breton area. They are outraged by the closure of the veterans office in Sydney, one of eight offices being closed across this country. Sheldon MacNeil, the president of branch 3 legion in Glace Bay, and Tom Kennedy put this petition together. It sheds light on the fact that they are holding a huge rally on Saturday to voice their concern about the closure. It is with great pride and support that I offer this petition on their behalf.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, the Keystone XL pipeline would intensify the export of unprocessed raw bitumen and would export more than 40,000 well-paying Canadian jobs, and is therefore not in Canada’s best interest.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House to speak to this motion.

I would like to preface my remarks by talking a bit about my past. I used to work in one of the now closed oil refineries in this country, the Shellburn Refinery in Burnaby, British Columbia. As a result of having worked with oil, having had to clean out the oil tanks at the refinery as part of my job, I developed a healthy respect for that substance. When cleaning out oil tanks, people need oxygen tanks and full safety equipment. If the safety equipment malfunctions or the oxygen tanks run out, the worker is not around any more.

That degree of danger and a healthy respect for a substance that can bring some benefit but also some danger is something I would like to bring to the debate.

Just to start off, I would like say that we are talking today about Keystone and value-added jobs. We are also talking, though, about the government's lack of action on climate change and the environment. That is part of the ongoing narrative. As President Obama said so well when he was looking at Keystone, the Conservative government simply has to start taking environmental measures.

As we will see later on, Canada is beyond being a climate change laggard; we are among the worst of the 60 countries annually surveyed on climate change. We are in 58th place out of 61 countries. It shows an appalling lack of leadership and an appalling lack of responsibility on the part of the government.

There are environmental issues we will be bringing to the fore throughout the course of the day while we are debating this issue. There are also economic issues, which I will come back to in a moment, and of course, safety issues.

One of the things I will be pointing out in my 20 minutes is the fact that under the Conservatives, there is not only increasing danger in our railway system, which has been sadly and tragically underscored by the appalling devastation in Lac Mégantic, but in pipeline management, as well. Under the Conservative government, we have seen a steadily increasing number of pipeline leaks and pipeline spills. In fact, there has been a doubling over the last few years on the Conservatives' watch.

When we are talking about the issue of Keystone, we are talking about value-added jobs, of course, but we are also talking about a complete abdication of responsibility by the government on the environment, on climate change, and on pipeline safety. I think those are important issues to bring to the fore.

Earlier I referenced that I was refinery worker. I would also like to flag that on natural resources issues generally, the Conservative government has been appalling bad.

I represent the riding of Burnaby—New Westminster. Many of my friends went to high school in New Westminster, at the New Westminster Secondary School. After high school, my friends went into the softwood lumber industry. They worked at the three plants that existed there: Interfor, Canfor, and Western Forest Products in New Westminster. There were hundreds of well-paying jobs and thousands of indirect jobs that depended on the softwood industry.

All of that was eviscerated and evaporated overnight when the government irresponsibly signed the softwood lumber sellout. Now we have Conservatives laughing at the loss of jobs. I am sorry, but I think we should be standing up for the workers rather than having Conservatives laugh at the loss of jobs. Two thousand indirect jobs were lost as a result of the signature on that agreement. They may laugh at those families, many of whom I went to high school with. Those families had to cobble together a couple of part-time jobs.

The one hope they have is looking to 2015 and looking to the election of an NDP government that is actually going to take workers seriously.

I have seen first hand the devastation in my community wrought by the incredible irresponsibility of the government, signing an agreement it had not even read and did not even understand. The NDP certainly raised this issue consistently in the House.

I saw first-hand in the natural resources sector the loss of jobs, which eventually added up to about 60,000 manufacturing and value-added jobs lost in the softwood lumber industry following that agreement.

When we look at that, when we look at the actual loss of jobs in smelting and refining even in the mining industry, it is a source of real concern. Because the number of mining and quarrying jobs has gone up over the last few years, but Statistics Canada tells us that the number of jobs lost in the smelting and refining sector, when we are talking about mining, has gone far beyond any gain of jobs in mining and quarrying.

If we look at the lumber industry, at the mining industry and now at the energy industry, this has been a dismal period for working families. There is absolutely no doubt. We have to come back then to the issue of the energy industry. The Conservatives messed up the two other areas. Why would they be pushing Keystone, which results in a loss of value-added jobs?

I will start off by saying two undeniable facts and a third one that really impacts on Canadian working families.

The first undeniable fact is that under the current government we have lost half a million value-added and manufacturing jobs. That is a simple fact. It is undisputed. Even the Conservatives admit to it. They say they have given a few part-time service jobs so that must compensate. The reality is that half a million value-added and manufacturing jobs being lost on the watch of the Conservative government is undeniably a sign of failure.

Second, is our current account deficit. What we are doing increasingly is exporting raw materials and importing the value-added products and the manufacturing products from overseas. In 2011, that deficit on current accounts was $49 billion and it gets worse. Last year, it went to $62 billion. That is a record. We have never had a deficit that large in our nation's history. That is directly related to the government's failure on value-added jobs, its failure to understand that we need coherent policies and we need to put those policies in place to ensure that Canadians get to work.

The third point I would like to make and the third undeniable statistic is that the working families across this country, so many of whom are represented by NDP MPs in this Parliament, are now struggling under a record debt load. It is a burden that we have never seen in our history. It is actually highest in Alberta. Those working families struggling under a burden of massive debt because they have seen an erosion in real income at the same time as expenses continue to climb, that is something that is extremely germane to this debate. We are talking about Canadians over the last seven years getting poorer and poorer, and more and more in debt every year that the Conservatives are in power.

When we talk about value-added jobs, we are talking about something that has a profound impact on the quality of life of ordinary families right across this country.

Here we have the failure of the Conservative government in a whole range of sectors, a failure to create value-added jobs, failure to create manufacturing jobs, crippling debt loads and a current account deficit that is by far the worst that we have ever had in our history. What is the Conservative government's solution to all the problems it has inflicted on Canadians over the last seven years? Its solution seems to be to move to raw bitumen exports, and somehow that will address what has been the chronic mismanagement of the nation's economy for ordinary working people, families that simply are working with a lower quality of life than they had before.

Then we have to look at what the actual impacts are of this strategy for raw bitumen export. That brings us back to the issue of Keystone. In speaking about Keystone, I would like to start by citing some of the Albertans who have raised real concerns about what the impact of the Keystone pipeline is. We are talking about a pipeline that exports raw bitumen out of the country. What have some Albertans said about what this means in terms of good, well-paying, value-added jobs?

Former Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, who certainly seemed to understand that issue, said the following. I will read the quote slowly because it is important to have it on the record:

...shipping raw bitumen is like scraping off the topsoil, selling it and then passing the farm on to the next generation.

He said that in 2006.

That is really what we are talking about here. We are not talking about creating value-added jobs. We are talking about scraping off that topsoil and then sending to the next generation a farm that has no topsoil left. We have basically gone through the resource. We have not gotten the value-added jobs that should be coming with that, and yet at the same time, we have a government that is absolutely obsessed with the idea that this is the only way for Canadians to prosper.

Obviously, if that type of approach has not worked in a whole range of other sectors, Ed Stelmach is absolutely bang on in saying that this is not an appropriate response from any government that wants to create well-meaning, value-added jobs.

Gil McGowan, the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, said the following about Keystone:

What we fear is that the consequence of this particular action will be to deny Albertans literally thousands of high-paying, long-term jobs in upgraders and refineries....

...[every] barrel of bitumen shipped down the Keystone pipeline or other similar proposed pipelines is a barrel of oil no longer available for value-added production and job creation here in [Canada].

Gil McGowan, the president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, in other words, the president of a federation of workers who work in the energy industry, said that in December 2007.

Those are two Albertan voices saying, very clearly, that the idea of sending raw bitumen out of the country means that literally we are sending jobs out of the country. This is a matter of real concern.

As far as the figures given and the approach given by the current government, I would like to cite a few other voices.

Robyn Allan comes from western Canada, like myself. She is a well-known economist in western Canada, as well as the former CEO of the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, who is well-known for her commentary on the energy sector. She said that:

Chopping local downstream expansion projects....

In other words, not having value added but looking to export raw bitumen.

...breaks the value-added chain. Canada's oil resources increasingly become a pool of raw crude waiting to be siphoned off along pipelines serving economic development and energy security needs of other nations. These nations are smart. They know controlling the supply chain mitigates the pain of rising oil prices.

If more bitumen upgrading was undertaken where it comes out of the ground, we wouldn't need as many new pipelines. She references that about 30% less capacity is required when we are moving upgraded bitumen, as opposed to exporting raw bitumen.

Studies have been done along the Keystone pipeline. Informetrica, in 2006, studied the issue of exports of raw bitumen and came to the following economic analysis. At a rate of 400,000 barrels per day of export of raw bitumen, 18,000 jobs are lost. Here is an indication, by Informetrica, that for every 100,000 barrels of raw bitumen that are exported, we are looking at 3,000 or 4,000 jobs that are lost, which could be there. The building trades could be there and the energy sector could be there, both in terms of upgraders and refineries as well.

We are not talking about figures such as those sometimes cited by our friends on the government side. They will throw out studies that are promptly dismissed, because unfortunately in each of those cases, when we look at the studies themselves, they are not credible. When we have the credible studies that show what the economic impacts are, we have simply not had any understanding from the Conservatives of what the impacts are of putting all the eggs in the basket of raw bitumen exports.

The Alberta Federation of Labour also did an economic analysis, which they submitted to the National Energy Board, on Keystone XL. It showed that, as a result of the raw bitumen exports going through Keystone XL, we would be losing at least 40,000 Canadian jobs. That is a considerable amount. When we think of the growth in the energy sector, the loss of 40,000 potential jobs is extremely significant for our economic future.

What we are seeing in study after study, whether it is done by Informetrica, Robyn Allan or the Alberta Federation of Labour, is that we are simply giving away a resource without putting in place the smart economic policies that allow for the value-added jobs that need to come with that resource. We can talk about the shut down of Interfor in New Westminster, B.C., and the subsequent export of raw logs that resulted, or the shutting down of smelting and refining of our minerals, losing more jobs than we have gained in the mining and quarrying sector. We can also talk about the export of raw bitumen, and losing as a result tens of thousands of potential jobs.

In every one of those cases, we are talking about ordinary families struggling to get by under phenomenally heavy debt loads that get worse every year as a result of the policies of our federal government. Rather than those families getting relief and an economic plan in place that would actually make sense to fully develop those resources and have value added, we see a government hell-bent on exporting those jobs. We have seen from a number of very credible observers and analyses that, obviously, there is an impact.

I would like to come back to the issue of climate change and pipeline safety because those issues are also germane to the debate that we are having today.

As I mentioned earlier, there is an annual evaluation of how Canada is doing called the “Climate Change Performance Index”. In 2013, out of 61 countries evaluated by the Climate Change Performance Index, where do members think Canada stood? Do members think Canada was in the top 20? Well, it was not. Was it in the top 30, 40, 50? No. We placed 58th under the current government.

Placing 58th out 61 countries in the 2013 Climate Change Performance Index is not an “F”, it is being thrown out of the program. It is lamentably bad. There were countries that did worse. There were three of them. Kyrgyzstan was 59th, Iran 60th and Saudi Arabia was 61st.

Obviously, if what we are seeing around the world are other countries taking climate change seriously, we have to get with the program. It is not just Canadians who feel that way.

President Obama referenced this in connection with Keystone. He said very clearly that Canada, being a climate change laggard, had to start taking very concrete action on climate change and the environment. President Obama could not have been more clear. Therefore, if Keystone is not approved, it is as a result of the failure of the Conservative government to take any sort of action on the environment and climate change. Being 58th in the world clearly shows that.

I also mentioned pipeline safety. We have seen a doubling of the number of spills across Canada, which is of increasing concern to Canadians.

We believe in our leader, the member for Outremont and Leader of the Opposition, who has said repeatedly that we need to put in place a national energy strategy. We need to ensure value-added production in this country. We need to ensure that we have the top level of pipeline safety, and take action on climate change, of course, but also take action on the environment. We need to start transitioning to clean energy.

There is a trillion-dollar market worldwide, which is going to double over the next decade. Canada gets very little of that. In fact, in very real terms, the hundreds of thousands of new jobs that are coming from clean energy simply are not reflected in the Canadian economy. Therefore, folks across the country who will be looking in 2015 for real leadership can look to the NDP to put in place that national energy strategy in co-operation with the provinces, which will bring those value-added jobs and clean-energy jobs for all Canadians.

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Newmarket—Aurora Ontario

Conservative

Lois Brown ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development

Mr. Speaker, I listened quite carefully to the comments on climate change made by my colleague. My question is simple. Could he table in the House the number of flights he has taken back and forth across the country this year. Also, when is his flight, either tonight or tomorrow?

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am saddened by that. We are having a serious debate on value-added jobs and the environment and, as usual, the Conservatives do not seem to have anything to add to the debate.

It is sad when we think of the hundreds of thousands of value-added jobs we have lost under the current government and the appallingly poor reputation this country has now as a result of the Conservatives' inaction on climate change. Out of 61 nations worldwide, we rank 58th; however, all they can do is bring ad hominem attacks on individual MPs. That is exactly what many people have referred to as the “bullying” that takes place from the Conservative government. The Conservatives attack people. We had the Minister of Natural Resources say that anyone opposed to the northern gateway pipeline was some kind of a radical. In my province of British Columbia, that is three-quarters of the population. Three-quarters of the population are saying that it does not make sense to threaten thousands of jobs that depend on a clean environment for the 104 full-time on-site jobs that we would get through the northern gateway project.

The Conservatives need to start listening to the public, and they can start by listening on the topic of value-added jobs.

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my hon. colleague's speech today. I find the motion and his speech somewhat contradictory. On the one hand, he is saying that the New Democrats are bringing forward the motion because they want to have more jobs, processing and upgrading this product here in Canada. On the other hand, he is saying that they are bringing the motion because of their concerns about the environment and greenhouse gases. Surely, if we do more processing and upgrading, that would contribute to emissions. I don't know what his solution to that is.

I am also concerned that the NDP wants to manage the economy and make decisions for the private sector about where it should do things, and so forth. That is somewhat contradictory and confusing. At the same time, the New Democrats are saying their concern is that this will increase oil sands production. They have said before that they are against the Keystone pipeline because of that. They say it will increase it by 830,000 barrels per day, yet they support the energy east pipeline, which will carry 1.1 million barrels per day. In other words, it will carry more than the Keystone pipeline, which would carry 830,000 barrels a day.

How does the NDP explain these contradictions? I must say that it leaves me a bit baffled.

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is a difficult task, but I will try to make the Liberals a little less confused. They do seem to be very confused on the policy positions they are taking.

I would start off by saying we have been clear that we think west-east pipelines, with refining and upgrading taking place in Canada, will reduce a huge dependence on foreign supplies of oil. Oil is being produced in the Middle East and shipped around the world, which is not a smart environmental initiative. That is happening on an ongoing basis. The Conservatives are looking at exporting raw bitumen. We are saying that a sensible national energy strategy would reduce our dependence on foreign supplies of oil and increase our energy security while we are transitioning to a clean environment economy. We have made no secret about that.

What I find confusing is that the Liberal leader has said, on the one hand, that he is for the environment. On the other hand, he has said that he is for Keystone. He says he believes that the CNOOC takeover of Nexen made good sense, even though most Albertans were opposed to that as well. We have a Liberal leader who is all over the map. I am certainly hearing that when I go door-knocking. The reality is that we do not know where the Liberals stand, yet they seem to stand with the Conservative government pretty well every day. What Canadians are looking for is a new government that will take a new approach and listen to Canadians. Canadians will say no to the old rhetoric of the past that came from the Conservatives and Liberals. I am convinced of that.

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague if he thinks the environmental and safety risks create a deficit. The environmental repercussions come at a real-life cost to Canadians.

That cost is not offset by the jobs that are created from developing these resources, even if the people with those jobs invest in the local economy when they do their shopping.

Does it not create a deficit when we decide to develop something without taking full advantage of the gains available to us?

Opposition Motion—Keystone XL PipelineBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to salute my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue, who is now part of our natural resources team and who, each day in the House, stands up for the people of Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

There is a real contradiction here. There is no balance right now. As the member just said, pipelines are not as safe. The number of pipeline leaks has doubled. Our record on climate change is horrendous. We rank 58th out of 61 countries, just above Kazakhstan. Canadians know full well that we can do better and that we need to do better.

We need a government that realizes that we can take care of our environment, create jobs with green and clean energy—which has enormous potential—and that we can also upgrade the value of industries such as the oil industry, where those value-added jobs are currently going.

The majority of oil used to be refined and produced in Alberta. Now, with the Conservative plan, very little of it would be. We are concerned that tens of thousands of jobs will be lost. We need to take a balanced approach, and the NDP will do just that in 2015.