House of Commons Hansard #136 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was ceta.

Topics

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

Order, please. I think the hon. member knows that I am not suggesting anything and that she must direct her comments to the Chair.

The hon. member for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:20 p.m.

NDP

Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB

Mr. Speaker, if the member had heard my speech, I listed a number of communities where we risk losing hundreds of jobs. I was talking about the mining sector and the forestry sector. What I referenced was the fact that the federal government is nowhere to be seen when it comes to protecting these jobs.

I would challenge the government on its figures. We heard earlier tonight that the numbers it is associating with these projects are not the actual numbers that will materialize. The situation remains that the jobs that are on the chopping block right now are ones the government should be standing up to fight for. Unfortunately, no minister has stood up to that challenge. People where I come from, and people across western Canada, are seeing the fact that the federal government is not standing up for them.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:20 p.m.

Conservative

Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to be here tonight to listen to my colleagues talk about an incredibly important issue, jobs in the energy sector.

I think policies are what we are looking for. It is not just about Alberta. We have had tremendous support from premiers in the prairie provinces who have fought for the energy sector, such as Lougheed, Klein, and most recently, Wall. They understood leadership. They stood up for it. People respected that.

That is one of the things that drives investment. We are looking for investment. That creates jobs. The government does not create jobs.

If we are the best drawers of water and hewers of wood, there is nothing wrong with that. Actually, we are the best in the world at it, so let us keep developing that. I do not like hearing that it is a bad thing, because it is a good thing. We are good at it. We have tremendous industries. Let us not take away from them.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:20 p.m.

NDP

Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it is okay to be known as hewers of wood and drawers of water. We should have jobs that depend on processing the wealth that is in our territories and provinces, working with first nations.

We can create wealth based on processing the raw materials that our country is so wealthy in. The fact remains that these are some of the best-paying jobs in our communities, whether in refineries or smelters. We need to stand up for value-added jobs. As I mentioned, this Liberal government has not. The previous Conservative government did not. The fact of the matter is that we are bleeding good jobs that are entirely related to the wealth our country has, and that is a crying shame. Canadians, Canadian workers, want their federal government to work with them to protect these value-added jobs.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:25 p.m.

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Speaker, the energy sector has long been an important source of jobs and wealth in Canada, and will continue to play that role for years to come. The oil industry is central to that sector. As we all know, the reason for this debate is that there has been in a serious downturn for the past two years because of low world prices for oil. Tens of thousands of workers have lost their jobs, especially in Alberta.

The natural resources committee recently completed a study on how the government could support the oil and gas industry to bring back those jobs. At the heart of this challenge is the fact that Canadian oil is expensive to extract and refine, since it is almost all in the form of bitumen and oil sands.

While we heard a lot of testimony at committee on the very innovative work the industry is doing to reduce costs and reduce the environmental footprint of the sector, many of the industry witnesses admitted that most of those innovations would not be built into the extraction plants until the price of oil was over $70 a barrel. There is little indication in world energy markets that this price is likely to be seen in the near or medium future. We cannot afford to sit back and wait for oil prices to increase significantly to create jobs in the energy sector.

One strategy would be to provide more initiatives to produce value-added products in the oil and gas sector. Refining our bitumen before we ship it would benefit both the economy and the environment. More of our abundant natural gas reserves could be used to produce the building blocks of plastics and other materials with a fraction of the carbon footprint compared to similar processes using oil.

As the natural resources critic, I travelled with the minister last year to the clean energy ministerial meetings in San Francisco, often described as the implementation arm of the Paris climate agreement. The mood at those meetings was positive and upbeat, because speaker after speaker reported that we had passed a tipping point, and the world was shifting quickly, more quickly than anyone had predicted, away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy. I heard exactly the same message this past Monday at the Energy Council of Canada meetings.

One of the obvious paths forward is for Canada to take bold steps to build the renewable energy sector in this country. Global investment in renewables has been skyrocketing and now outstrips investments in fossil fuels. Canada needs to catch up. I have tried unsuccessfully to have the natural resources committee study how the government can help Canada join this shift to renewables. I have talked to many workers in my riding, welders, electricians, and carpenters, who are working or who have worked in remote camps in the oil patch, but would rather live full time in their homes in southern B.C. They would welcome the opportunity to work in a distributed renewable energy industry, whether in solar, wind or geothermal, where they could go home every night to their families. This downturn, this crisis, offers an obvious opportunity to make significant investments in renewable energy.

Another point that I heard at the clean energy ministerial meetings was that the best new fuel is efficiency. The federal government could take one simple step, which is to reintroduce the eco-energy program to provide incentives to homeowners to retrofit their houses to be more energy efficient. This program was so successful that the previous government cancelled it in 2012 before it ran its course. When I talk to construction groups, such as the Canadian Home Builders' Association, they would be ecstatic if such a program were reinstated. It would bring good jobs to communities across the country, and reduce our carbon footprint at the same time.

We cannot wait for oil prices to rise another $20 or so to let the market revive the oil industry in Canada. We may be waiting a long time for that to happen. We should provide incentives to refine our bitumen here in Canada, and we must take bold steps now to diversify our energy sector and create jobs across the country, joining the rest of the world in the shift to sustainable renewable energy.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:30 p.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

Mr. Speaker, the member beside me has talked extensively about the need to diversify the economy. I would argue that the Alberta economy is one of the most diverse economies in the country, just due to the luxury of having immense amounts of capital that have flown into our province.

The good jobs that have come with the oil patch have often spun off into other things that have gone on. Most of the oil patch work tends to be shift work, 10 on and four off or two weeks on and two weeks off kind of thing. That has allowed for a lot of people to have two different jobs. They make their money in the oil patch and then they invest it in a different side company that they are trying to get off the ground, and they have the capital to do that. Often people learn skills in the oil patch that they are able to spin into projects around the country.

A lot of the innovations happen in the oil patch. For example, there are the wellings and there are the flare pipes. I know we started out with just a pipe and then we would have a flame at the top of it. Now we have very sophisticated machinery that makes sure we burn all the natural gas completely.

I would challenge my colleague to investigate what actually happens in Alberta, to investigate the logging industry and the chips. Ninety-nine per cent of the tree that comes into town gets used for one product or another. I challenge him to investigate the farming industry, where some of the most advanced farming techniques are used in Alberta.

I would just challenge my colleague for that, and I would ask for his response. I know he is from the Okanagan. The people have some of the best things there as well. I challenge him to come to Alberta and check it out.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:30 p.m.

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Speaker, as an ecologist, I would challenge the statement. If they have an economy that is brought to its knees by the change in price of one commodity, that is not a very diverse economy. It may be doing lots of different things, but it is reliant solely on one product. That is not a good thing.

The member talked about forestry. In British Columbia, we felt the effects of the same kind of thing about 10 years ago when we lost 40,000 jobs in the forest sector in British Columbia. People in British Columbia know what it is like to have communities that are hollowed out, with numbers of mills just vanishing. We are facing that again with the softwood lumber agreement. With an annual allowable cut in British Columbia that is now set to decrease over the next few years, people will suffer there as well.

It is because we are reliant in Canada in far too many places on this rip and ship economy of just being hewers of wood. It is good to be hewers of wood, but we have to do other things with that.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:30 p.m.

Liberal

Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments made by the member with respect to government attempting to be an enabler and giving incentives through different programs that we are offering to the good folks of Alberta.

My question is on that same subject. The member is correct. The expense of oil has risen, and diversity is the order of the day. With that, added-value products and investing in areas such as innovation, research and development, and diversified energy sectors to be more sustainable, once again is something in which the government is investing.

Does the member feel that it is imperative that we, as the federal government, work with the local jurisdictions, not just provincially but also locally and municipally, to further invest in their community strategies, to further be an enabler, to enable them to enter into the research and development markets and the innovation markets, and of course supplemented incentives as identified in our infrastructure plan? Does the member feel that in fact we should continue to make those investments?

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:35 p.m.

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Mr. Speaker, yes, I obviously think it is a good idea for governments to work together, to have a plan, to institute that plan, and to carry it out as expeditiously as possible. We have heard all the wonderful things that Albertans stand for and what they are good at. I have had well drillers come into my office and ask for the the opportunity to go out there, that the technology exists now where they can use those abandoned wells for geothermal projects. Let the government provide some incentives to that industry. We have all the knowledge and know-how in Alberta to work on those projects, to get jobs again, to create energy in a new way that does not rely on the price of oil.

Those are the kinds of things we have to look for. When we talk about innovation, let us be innovative. Let us think of new things.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:35 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources. It is a very odd relationship, but we are here as a team tonight.

It is a pleasure to be here to speak about this very important issue. Throughout the debate tonight we should be talking about the jobs crisis in the energy sector. Specifically, we have talked a lot about Alberta. However, our colleagues on the other side in the Liberal government, tonight their discussion has been about what they have done to improve EI. They have talked about trying to diversify Alberta's economy, like Alberta is really excited about not having jobs.

The key for Albertans is not to have extended EI. We appreciate when we work here together to come forward with a plan to address the unemployment situation in Alberta, but what Albertans want are jobs. What sets us apart from other parts of Canada, in my own opinion, is our entrepreneurship, our risk-taking mentality. That is what drove the oil sands, a very unique industry in the world.

We have also talked about diversifying Alberta's economy tonight, as if all it has is oil and gas. Alberta has one of the most diversified economies in all of Canada. To talk about Alberta, we should talk about our coal industry, our forestry sector, our agriculture sector. There is a reason that everybody knows about Alberta beef. We have an incredibly diverse economy.

What we have seen over the last year and a half is that Alberta entrepreneurship, that Alberta advantage being sucked dry by a provincial NDP government, which has implemented a carbon tax, increases to minimum wage, increases in taxes on small businesses and entrepreneurs, and a federal Liberal government that is doubling down on that. Despite a very difficult time in our energy sector, they are plowing ahead with additional carbon taxes on Alberta's energy industry. Not only is it Alberta's energy industry but it is an energy industry which is a nation builder. It impacts every province across this country.

I spent several days in Nova Scotia earlier this year, and it was amazing how many people came up to me and said that we needed to do something to get energy east up and running. They said that they were depending on that. Their friends and family had been flying back and forth to the oil sands in northern Alberta, but now there was nothing there for them. They are back in Nova Scotia, but there are no jobs in Nova Scotia either. They need those energy sector jobs.

To say that this is an Alberta-centric issue, I appreciate that, and it is true that we felt it maybe more than other people, but this is also a pan-Canadian issue. Energy workers across the country are feeling the pinch of what is going on right now.

What makes it that much more frustrating tonight is we have a Liberal government that is saying that it has increased EI, and that it has approved three pipelines. Let us be clear on what has actually happened in the last year and a half. The Liberal government did not approve three pipelines. The government approved two pipelines, which were already in the system. The National Energy Board approved those pipelines. They are not new. They are expansions of existing pipelines. For the government to say they have actually been built and those jobs have been created is disingenuous. We have a long way to go before we get there.

The one pipeline which I think should stick out the most for us is Northern Gateway, which was approved and put forward by the Conservative government under the former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. It was approved by the National Energy Board. It should have been one of those three that were approved.

However, the Liberal government made a political decision to say that it does not like that pipeline, and despite it being passed by the National Energy Board, it was not going to go with that. What that has done to the industry is it has caused a lot of uncertainty. If I am an investor and I want to invest in Canada, I am not going to do that, because there is a carbon tax, but also because there is no certainty for me to know where the approval is. I could meet every National Energy Board regulation, every environmental standard, which are the best in the world, but when the time comes, the Prime Minister and his cabinet could say no.

When energy east passes through the National Energy Board regulatory review, which they have delayed, will the government support it? Will the government support it or will it make a political decision, like it did with Northern Gateway, and deny it, putting Canada's energy industry further behind and causing more stress, when we have given them some great options to turn things around now?

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:40 p.m.

Northumberland—Peterborough South Ontario

Liberal

Kim Rudd LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, I was happy to share my time with the member opposite from Foothills.

We keep hearing about the carbon tax, and the way it is being talked about, as an imposition and something new. I want to take members back to 2007, when Premier Ed Stelmach put in a carbon tax at $15 per tonne. This is not something new.

I will remind members, and I hope the member opposite will comment, the innovation that happened in the oil sector that we have been talking about tonight came about with a price on carbon. If we talk to those in the energy sector, they will tell us that they want a price on carbon, because it will innovate, and it will help them grow.

I wonder if the member opposite could respond to that.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:40 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my hon. colleague for bringing that up, because I really did not have a chance to talk about the carbon tax in my five-minute presentation. It was nice of her to put that ball on the tee and let me hit it off.

The member is exactly right. Actually, the carbon tax in Alberta was brought in before, in 2004. We were the first district in Canada to bring that forward. However, the provincial government at the time put in other stabilizers in the policy to ensure that the industry could grow, but it was stagnant, and business and industry knew where they were going.

I am glad she brought that up, because the Liberal government has made it sound like Alberta has this dirty oil industry, and we have to do everything we can to try and clean it up. In fact, it has been a trendsetter. It set the bar before any other district in the world. We have the most environmentally-friendly, and one of the strictest regimes anywhere in the world.

Instead of putting on a carbon tax, which further inhibits growth in the energy industry, why do the Liberals not stand up and be proud of the natural resources that Canada has? Be proud of Alberta's energy sector. Be proud of the technology and innovation that has happened in northern Alberta, because that is really where innovation and growth has happened in that industry.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:40 p.m.

NDP

Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Speaker, the main thing I want to ask right now is about jobs in the energy sector, and jobs in Alberta.

I have family in Alberta, including children, who are trying to make a livelihood, and they make observations. People look at the energy sector, young people who are risk-takers and entrepreneurs, and I celebrate them. Those Canadians are looking at the innovation. They are also looking at other ways that other countries are treating their energy sectors, and how they are value-adding, how they are working.

Young people in my life describe their kind of livelihood job as feast or famine. We call it the boom and bust economy” but it is either feast or famine. One is working overtime or one is laid-off. It is a shame that we have that kind of pressure on young people, let alone family people who have to make heart-wrenching decisions.

While we are talking about jobs here, I would like to hear an acknowledgement of the need for a long-term plan, that lessons have been learned from the past. Maybe moving forward, what are some of the things we can do when things are done right because of the positive results of this session here tonight? What are some of the lessons learned?

For instance, could we look at some of the lessons learned from other countries, like a royal—

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

Order, the member for Foothills.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:45 p.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Mr. Speaker, I think I have the gist of the question.

If we go through with what the NDP would like us to do, there would not be a boom and bust. There would just be bust. That is really what the NDP is advocating.

Our young people in Alberta are used to this boom and bust. The attitude in Alberta is work ethic. We work as hard as we possibly can for everything we can get. If we work hard, we are rewarded for that, whether in the energy industry, ranching, or dairy farming. There are good times and there are bad times, but the mentality that is there in Alberta is that if I work, I can do everything, and I if there are policies in place and a government that supports me, I will be successful. Right now, at the provincial and federal level, we do not have that.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:45 p.m.

Northumberland—Peterborough South Ontario

Liberal

Kim Rudd LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to rise today to reaffirm our government's commitment to the oil and gas industry, a vital part of our Canadian economy.

All members of the House recognize that recent years have been difficult for Canada's oil and gas sector.

The sharp drop in oil prices has taken a heavy toll on the men and women, and their families, who depend on the industry for their livelihoods, not just in Alberta, as we have heard tonight, or Saskatchewan or Newfoundland and Labrador, but right across the country.

Every job lost in the oil patch ripples across the Canadian economy, whether it is a manufacturing company in Ontario, an engineering firm from Quebec, or an oil worker commuting from one of our coasts. All of us understand that, just as we understand that we cannot move global commodity prices with a snap of our fingers, no matter how much we want to.

However, we can strengthen Canada's social safety net to help affected workers by extending employment insurance benefits for those in the hardest hit regions and by introducing the new Canada child benefit that provides greater financial assistance to those who need it most. That is what we have done.

We are also making unprecedented investments in vital infrastructure, such as public transit, roads, bridges, and water treatment facilities, to get more Canadians working, building the foundation that will keep Canada's economy growing for generations to come. It is a balanced approach that ensures that Canada's energy sector remains a source of well-paying middle-class jobs.

We are striking a balance, approving the Trans Mountain expansion and Line 3 replacement projects and creating 22,000 construction jobs along the way. They were balanced decisions, and they were the right decisions.

The Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of Natural Resources is very clear on this approach. I would like to read an excerpt from it:

It is a core responsibility of the federal government to help get our natural resources to market, but that is only possible if we achieve the required public trust

That has been our approach since we took office, rebuilding trust and restoring faith by strengthening our environmental assessments and regulatory reviews, by expanding public engagement and consultations with indigenous peoples, and by ensuring that local communities and indigenous peoples are true beneficiaries of resource development. I believe it is an approach that has come to define our government: promoting clean economic growth by getting our environmental house in order and rallying Canadians behind us.

Our efforts started as soon as we took office, when the Prime Minister went to Paris with our provincial and territorial colleagues, and Canada helped lead the way on the global agreement on climate change.

The Prime Minister met again with the provinces and territories last spring and fall to launch the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change. This framework has set us on a clear path toward ensuring that Canada is a global leader in the transition to a lower-carbon economy.

All of these measures are critical to the long-term future of Canada's energy sector, including the oil and gas industry. How? It will be by making the industry greener and more competitive for a world that increasingly values more sustainable practices. This was reflected in our government's first budget, which featured significant investments in clean technology and new innovation.

Let me just add that no one understands the need for clean technology and innovation better than Canada's oil and gas sector. That can-do spirit continues in the industry today through the Canada's Oil Sands Innovation Alliance. It is a formal partnership of 13 leading companies that have invested, to date, more than $1.3 billion to develop and share more than 935 distinct technologies and innovations.

However, none of us can do it alone. We cannot work in isolation from one another. That is why the Minister of Natural Resources has been engaging with people across this country, bringing together environmental leaders, energy companies, indigenous communities, and municipalities.

That is what our decisions on the TMX and Line 3 pipelines do, and that is what has been the goal of the initiatives I talked about today: Creating jobs and prosperity through a stronger, cleaner, and more sustainable energy sector, one built for today and tomorrow.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:50 p.m.

Conservative

Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have enjoyed many of the hon. member's words this evening, but I would like to ask her some questions about an issue on which we have both been working over the past year, and that is the impact on policy decisions and on the regulatory process, and its direct impact on investment and jobs.

The acceptance of the independent expert recommendations for approval by the NEB of the two pipeline expansions were applauded, but for the first time in Canadian history, a Prime Minister actually overruled and rejected the recommendation for approval of a pipeline based on the same process, the same expertise, and independence. On top of that, the regulatory process for the energy east pipeline was stalled, derailed, and restarted. Another panel was appointed to hear it, and now it has to start at the very beginning.

Meanwhile, none of the regulatory reviews governing multiple regulatory processes are actually complete. There are undergoing consultations right now. Therefore, that demonstrates a clear lack of clarity for the process and for measures, and complete uncertainty in the approval process, which will deter investment and kill more jobs.

All of that being said and given the fact that the leader of our country said that a world-class asset, that any other country in the world would envy, should be phased out, how can she really suggest that energy investors, Albertans, or, indeed, the hundreds of thousands of Canadians who depend on the energy sector for their livelihoods can believe any word the Liberals say about supporting the energy sector and Canada's world-leading energy workers?

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:50 p.m.

Liberal

Kim Rudd Liberal Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have stood in the House many times, as has the minister, and said it is the responsibility of government to help get our natural resources to market. We recognize that we need to reach international markets.

I want to talk about some of the comments around the northern gateway pipeline. Indeed, the court found that there was not enough consultation with indigenous peoples through that process and that, in fact, stopped that process. The timelines have been very clear in terms of the process with the energy east pipeline, the 21-month timetable. We have moved to make things as clear as possible, while ensuring that we are building the confidence of Canadians in a review process that, in a perfect world, would not end up in court challenges, would have the confidence of Canadians, and would get through the process faster.

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

It being 10:54 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 53(1), the committee will rise and I will leave the chair.

(Government Business No. 11 reported)

Job Losses in the Energy SectorGovernment Orders

10:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 10:54 p.m.)