Debates of Nov. 28th, 2018

Canada's Oil and Gas Sector

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I did not say that this was entirely a Conservative problem, as the member said I did at the beginning of his comments. It is quite the opposite. What I said is that there is blame to go around. There was a process that was followed, which the court decided needed to be re-examined and more attention needed to be paid to one particular area. We respected that. We respect it to this day, and we will move forward based on that.

The reality of the situation is there is blame to go around. All I was trying to highlight is that if one tries to put the blame squarely on one particular government based on certain timelines that fit a narrative, it just does not add up. Humility is a great lesson to learn in this job. If the Conservatives just starting saying that maybe they should take a little bit of the responsibility for this, perhaps it would go a long way in adding credibility to their arguments.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member said that some of the blame belongs to the government, and he is part right, all of the blame belongs to the government. From his speech, though, he does not actually seem to understand the process by which pipelines are built. Up until now, pipelines have not been built by the government, they have been built by the private sector. Under the previous Conservative government, every private sector project proposed was approved, which included four pipelines, which helped increase access to tidewater. A fifth was approved, and the Liberal government passed a tanker traffic exclusion zone, not only to prevent that pipeline from going forward, but to ensure no pipeline could go forward in the future, until that legislation is repealed.

He talked about the issue of climate change. His government took on the same targets we had, so for him to say that somehow something has dramatically changed is wrong. The only difference is that their plan involves a tax whereas ours did not. Can the member at least recognize the process by which pipelines are built, and the fact that under Conservatives—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

We are out of time.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the private sector builds pipelines, but the federal, local and provincial governments play a large part in determining the regulations behind that and how it is going to go forward. He talked about the success the Conservatives had in building pipelines. Yes, they had success in some areas, in areas that continued to deliver oil to the exact place we did not need to keep delivering it because we were already putting 99% of it there. What they needed to do was focus a little attention on getting it to new markets, and that is what they failed to do.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the challenge that we face today in the energy sector is very simple. It is a question of stability and a question of certainty, both for the people who are making the investment decisions to invest in production in Canada's energy sector, and the people whom I talk to every day, who have selected me to be their voice in Ottawa. It is a question of certainty, and it is a question of stability.

The colleagues opposite who are laughing at this tonight should give their heads a shake. When people are sitting around a corporate board table and trying to determine whether or not they should spend several billion dollars on a major capital investment, they look at several determinants. They look at labour availability, political stability, market conditions, and all sorts of things. They make a determination based on a set of information available at the time, but they have to be certain that the information is right and that it is going to stay stable.

If there is no certainty in an area, workers who are trying to decide whether or not to stay in a region, or whether or not to sell their house, or what sort of purchases to make, or how to make ends meet, are going to make a decision one way or another.

The problem we have seen with the government over the last three years is the question of instability. When we started to see a shift in the supply side model of energy products in North America, as the Americans started to come on stream with more energy supply—and of course we should spend a bunch of time talking about the demand side model internationally as well—what the government should have done at that point in time, when they the Liberals came into government in 2015, was to do everything in its power to make the situation more certain and stable for the workers in Canada's energy sector so that companies could stay and prosper in Canada, and for those who seek to invest in Canada's energy sector, to do the same.

What does the government need to do to rectify the decisions it has made that have led to instability, so that we can see projects built from here on in?

First of all, the government has to scrap its carbon tax. It creates investment instability in the energy sector and is a burden on energy sector workers. There is no economic modelling to show that it will actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions, because for the most part carbon in Canada is price inelastic.

The second thing that it needs to do is to repeal its cancellation, during a major downturn in the Canadian economy, of the oil and gas exploration drilling tax credit. It needs to reverse that decision that it made.

The government needs to reverse the tanker ban that it put in place.

The government also put in place a five-year moratorium on northern oil and gas exploration, giving the territorial governments less than two hours' notice. That caused instability. It needs to reverse that decision it made.

The government also need to reverse the decisions it made around the methane regulation framework that it put in place. That is an example of the instability the government caused when it knew that the energy sector was going through a downturn.

The government needs to scrap and do everything possible to stop the passage of Bill C-69, which it has tabled. That bill creates instability. It creates a new regulator and an environmental assessment process with indeterminate timelines. If people are sitting at a corporate board table and trying to make a decision whether or not to invest, it is not about just getting to a yes, but about getting to a yes or no within a defined, clear set of timeframes. Bill C-69 completely undermines that.

Any investor who is looking at investing in Canada's energy sector looks at Bill C-69 and says, “No way.” The government put that in place in a time of economic downturn, and it needs to scrap that.

The Liberals need to scrap Bill C-48, which put in place the unilateral imposition of a ban on using B.C.'s north coast for oil and gas exports. They put that in place. They need to reverse that.

Bill C-86 gives cabinet the authority to unilaterally shut down the shipping of natural resources by water anywhere in Canada, including offshore oil and gas. That is instability that the sector looks at. They need to repeal that bill that they put in place during a major downturn in Canada's energy sector.

They need to repeal Bill C-68, because it dramatically increases the red tape on project development by adding a multi-month review under the navigable waters act for any water on a project site that is large enough to float a kayak. It adds instability. It is unnecessary red tape. They need to repeal this bill that they put in place during a major energy sector downturn.

They need to repeal Bill C-88, which politicizes oil and gas development in the Far North, by providing cabinet in Ottawa the unilateral power to shut down oil and gas development in the Far North.

As well, they need to stop the proposed fuel standards that they are proposing to unveil before Christmas that will equate to a carbon tax of $228 per tonne of fuel, which would almost certainly mean the end of the oil and gas sector.

They also need to apologize for standing here and applauding Barack Obama after doing nothing to prevent the veto or speak against the veto of the Keystone XL pipeline.

They need to apologize for the fact that they did nothing when they allowed Denis Coderre to dump millions of litres of raw sewage in Quebec and say that energy east was not in the best interest of Canada. Instead they stood up here and agreed with him. The speech by the member for Calgary Centre was such a disgrace. He said he was going to pound on the table for a pipeline. Where was he when Dennis Coderre was doing that? He got kicked out of cabinet. He was our supposed voice in cabinet for Calgary who did nothing to stop any of these bills.

They politically vetoed the northern gateway pipeline. In a political process, the government overturned a years-long regulatory review of the northern gateway pipeline that had over 200 conditions on it that was set and ready to go. That created uncertainty and instability, and politicized a system during a downturn in the energy sector.

They need to invoke section 92.10(c) of the Constitution Act to bring the Trans Mountain pipeline completely into federal jurisdiction so that B.C. cannot obstruct its building out through permitting or other mechanisms in their jurisdiction right now.

Mr. Speaker, I am sharing my time with the member for Peace River—Westlock.

They need to start building the Trans Mountain pipeline. If what the Prime Minister said is true, and it is in the best interest of this country, why are the Liberals kicking the can down through a potential spring election window? If they are serious about it they should be building it out today. There should be shovels in the ground tonight.

The last thing they need to stop doing, for the love of all that is holy, is stop abdicating the responsibility for getting these policies right. Every time, they stand up here and say that it is Stephen Harper's fault. They had three years to get these projects done. With that litany of lists that are nowhere near complete, all they have done every step of the way is add uncertainty and instability for the investors in Canada's energy sector and for the workers in my community. All the people in my riding want to do is get back to work. Everything the government has done has been to abdicate responsibility and create instability.

The last thing they need to do is the Prime Minister needs to stop going overseas and telling his true agenda to the world, which is that he wants to phase out Canada's energy sector. If I was a worker in Canada's energy sector or if I was looking to invest in this, I would be saying that is a pretty clear policy. He has backed it up with action. Every single one of these bills and actions has been anti-energy sector.

None of the Liberals can stand up in this place and say they have done anything for Canada's energy sector. However, they can tonight by undertaking to repeal all of these bills and standing up and saying that they were wrong, that this stuff was wrong, that it created instability and the death of Canada's energy sector.

We are out of time. The Liberals need to build Trans Mountain. They need to get the shovels in the ground tonight, repeal these bills, and start being serious about one of Canada's most prosperous and stable industries in this country.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I know there are many members interested in speaking to this as well. I wonder if I could seek unanimous consent for us to extend, by one hour, the period allotted for this emergency debate.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I thank the hon. member for the point or order. We are under what we call sort of an autopilot motion, where there are no dilatory motions in this type of debate. That order was passed by unanimous consent earlier.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Malpeque.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, I have not been here for whole night, but I hear a lot of politics and a lot of solutions. That last speech goes to the politics. Everything the Liberals have done is bad. It did not mention what the Conservatives had done. That is what the member tried to say.

This crisis has been a long time coming. This government has worked hard to try to get pipelines in place. I do agree with one thing the member said. She said to make it more certain and more stable with respect to where we were going with the energy industry and with pipelines. In fact, Bill C-69 is designed to find the balance between the environment and the energy industry and give that certainty for the future.

I am pleased to have been in Alberta and across the country as chair of the finance committee. I have heard a lot from the energy industry in Alberta. It does need that stability and that certainty. I agree with that point. However, the only way we will get there is to find solutions in this place rather than playing this partisan political game, which comes as much from that member as anyone in the House.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will agree with the member for Malpeque on one thing. Bill C-69 does provide certainty for the energy sector; certain death. That is what every industry leader has said about creating the most politicized process, which is indeterminate in length with no particular reason as to why, outside of to kill the energy sector.

I stood and I said all the things the government needed to do to create certainty in the sector for the people in my riding who were out of work and for the investors who needed to invest in these projects to make them go forward. The government will not admit responsibility or failure. It needs to do that. It needs to repeal these bills and it needs to bring back certainty and stability in Canada's energy sector.

I will not apologize for being good at my job.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member called on the government to get the shovels in the ground tonight on the Trans Mountain pipeline project. I do not know what part of the law she does not understand. Right now, the court of appeal has struck down the permissions that the government gave to the Trans Mountain pipeline. If shovels went in the ground tonight, we would be in court tomorrow and back at square one.

This rhetoric about trying to rush things through, trying to repeal laws that are in the way, that is how we got here in the first place.

In what world does the member think those things would create the confidence of Canadians in this process, in our laws to get things actually going? This is what has caused the problem.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we could be debating legislation tonight that would retroactively remedy or say that the tanker ban analysis that was done was complete and get the shovels in the ground tonight. If the government had appealed the Supreme Court decision and ordered a stay, we could have had shovels in the ground tonight.

The reality is that the Prime Minister and the finance minister expect to go to Calgary and be met with adulation, and thanked for their presence. The people in my community are smart. They understand what the government could have done if it had the political will to get this thing done. It is either in the national interest or it is not. We cannot have it both ways.

If Liberals are serious about building these things, they need to use every tool at their disposal to get this done, including having the political will to legislate on these things. They cannot let the court do their dirty work for them in the long-term, without taking direction here in this place. That is what they failed to do. It is unconscionable. It is unacceptable, and they need to go.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

There are eight minutes remaining in the time allocated for the debate this evening and we will resume debate with the hon. member for Peace River—Westlock.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to be able to participate this evening, regardless of how much time is left in the debate.

One of the things that happened in 2015 is that I was elected. One of the reasons I ran to get elected was that I always felt that Alberta was getting a raw deal when it came to its resource development. This is a vast and great country, but I felt that there were parts of this country that were not fair to Alberta in saying that we were not doing our due diligence when it came to developing our natural resources. I wanted to come here to champion the Albertan way of life and the fact that we develop our resources in the best way possible.

What I do remember from before I was elected is that it was Liberal Party members who went around the country discrediting whatever we were doing in Alberta. They went around saying that we were polluting the environment when we were not. They went around saying that the processes for developing pipelines did not meet with the approval of Canadians when, in fact, they had for a very long time. They went around saying that the Navigable Waters Act was an environmental policy when it was not. Those things got me frustrated enough to get involved with the political process, to buy a party membership, put my name on a ballot, win a nomination and come here to this place. It pleases me greatly today to be able to stand and defend the interests of Albertans, particularly in the north.

On Saturday evening, I was standing in the lineup at a Subway and I saw Wade in the lineup behind me. I asked him how things were going. He did not remember me at all, but I had worked on his truck many times when I worked at Stephani Motors. He said, “Well, it's going”. I asked him if he was keeping busy. He said, “No, not really, but who are you?” I said, “Well, I'm Arnold, and I used to work on your truck at Stephani's.” He said, “Oh, well the truck is still working good, but I haven't used it in over a year. I gave up the oilfield contract that I had. I've been farming ever since, and so I don't need that truck anymore and it's been parked.” I asked him if he was going to go back. He said, “I'm getting too old for that game now and there's just not a lot of money in it.” He was quite dejected about the whole situation. It is with that conversation in mind that I stand, and for the people like Wade that I represent here, and really want to participate in this debate tonight.

Another fellow I met on the weekend was Roland. He runs a heavy-duty mechanic shop. I met him the other day at the gas station. I asked him how things were going. He said, “Well, it's going pretty good, Arnold.” I said, “Did you move into your new house? I saw you built a new house.” He said, “Yeah, we've moved in now.” I said, “Is it finished? I made the mistake of moving into my house before it was completely finished and it's been four years now and I haven't quite completed the basement yet.” He said, “Well, that happened to me too, but it's not for lack of time that I haven't finished my basement. It's for lack of money. Things are just tight nowadays. Since the oilfield dried up, there's just not a lot of money to do those things that need to be done.”

I recently took a cab ride in Calgary. I asked the driver where he was from, and he said he was from Pakistan. I asked what had brought him here. He said, “Oh, I had a great engineering job. I worked there for two years, but I was laid off two years ago. I've been picking up every job that I can find in the meantime.” Here he was, driving a cab. He did not see an end in sight. He said, “I think I'm going to be moving to Toronto or something like that.” He did not know where he was going to go.

This is not just an Alberta story. This is a Canadian story.

I remember working on trucks for people from Newfoundland, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. They would come to the shop to get their truck fixed. They were happy to have a job in northern Alberta. One of those people who was working in the oil patch in northern Alberta is the member for Tobique—Mactaquac. He has great stories about the money he made in northern Alberta, the times he had and the adventures he went on.

That is the story of hundreds of thousands of Canadians from across this country who have made their fortune in northern Alberta. That is the story of the 100,000-plus jobs that are missing. They are not only in Alberta. Those are people who were making money and sending it back home to Newfoundland. Those are people who were making money and sending it back home to New Brunswick. Those were the guys who flew in for 10 days on and four days off. Those are the guys who rode our airplanes.

Since being elected, I cannot tell members how many fewer plane flights there are going east to west. That has had a significant impact on every part of this country, not just northern Alberta. However, it does affect northern Alberta significantly. The hotels are now empty, the gas stations have about a third fewer customers. Depending on where those business are located, for some, their customers have been cut in half. The recreation centres have fewer people going to them, the highways are less busy and, therefore, there is less need for all of the services that come with that. Northern Alberta is seeing a trickle-down effect across its economy. I think about the guys like Wade and Roland, and my cab driver, and even the MP for Tobique—Mactaquac who had a great time there and the people of his riding who will not have the same experience he had making his fortune in northern Alberta.

It is a Canadian tragedy that we are not able to get our magnificent resource to market, a resource that has made Canada amazing, so we can share the wealth with all of Canada. I am proud to be Albertan and I am proud to be Canadian. Let us get Canadians working again.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about the experience of our colleague from Tobique—Mactaquac and how he regrets that other young people from Tobique—Mactaquac may not have the same experience. I can tell members that young people in Tobique—Mactaquac are employed in Tobique—Mactaquac. Small business is thriving in Tobique—Mactaquac. The manufacturing sector is thriving in Tobique—Mactaquac. Tobique—Mactaquac is home to one of Canada's global success stories, McCain Foods. As one of the leading innovative companies, it sells the world's best French fries to businesses around the world.

Businesses are in good shape in places around the world. We understand there is a challenge in Alberta, but there is job growth across the country and we cannot lose sight of that when we talk about the challenges we are facing right now in the resource sector in Alberta.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is right. The economy across this country thrives when we are able to take the money we make in northern Alberta and invest it in businesses back home. Every one of the truck drivers I talked to, whose trucks I worked on, had a side gig going back home in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. That is what they were doing. They were making their money in northern Alberta and investing it back home in New Brunswick. That is how the Canadian economy works and that—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

It being midnight, I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until later this day at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 12 a.m.)