Debates of Feb. 25th, 2020

Teck Frontier Mine Project

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I do not actually know if there was a question there, but I would like to follow up. Unfortunately, I do not think the member heard some of the things that I said.

I am deeply embedded in making sure that people in Alberta have an energy sector. I am not saying we need to turn off the pipes. I am saying that we do not have a reasonable plan that addresses the climate and ensures that we are heading into the 21st century with a diversified economy that looks at alternatives, like retrofitting our homes and massive infrastructure construction projects. We could be working on capping our orphaned wells.

There are a million things we could be doing right now, and doubling down and putting all our eggs in one basket is just hurting Alberta.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member raised points about Norway having a social democratic government that actually had less production over a shorter period of time, yet has saved up a trillion dollars to make that transition to clean energy. The Conservatives in Alberta have left the cupboards bare, basically gutted. After decades of production, Albertans have very little to show for it. That is tragic.

She also raised the point about climate change and its cost to our economy. In terms of insurance costs and economic costs, that is $10 billion a year. The Liberals do not seem to take it seriously, neither do the Kenney Conservatives in Alberta.

Why do neither of these governments understand that they need to be looking at Alberta workers and looking at Alberta jobs in a new context?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I wish had an answer for this question, and I do not. I really do wonder what would be wrong with diversifying our economy. Why would that not be a good thing for Alberta? How would investing in a whole range of different industries and technologies not help Albertans?

I can only suggest that maybe this is a question someone from either other side of the House could answer for me.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate both NDP members on their clear and courageous speeches.

Indeed, fossil fuels are a massive global problem today. Following his speech, I heard one of my colleagues ask an NDP member what planet he lives on. The real problem is that we all live on the same planet. Pollution created in Alberta has the same repercussions on Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The major challenges we face today are the same whether we live in Alberta or Quebec.

I hope my colleague will agree that there seems to be a bit of denial going on, and that is a serious problem. That is what I understood from her speech. Some people are not ready to acknowledge that the price of a barrel of oil will never go back to where it was and that the oil industry is causing substantial damage to the Alberta economy.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I also think that what we are seeing here is a lack of recognition that there is a need for action, and the action cannot come on the backs of Alberta workers. We cannot hang my people out to dry. We have to find a way to diversify our economy and find those jobs for Albertans that they so deserve.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would ask the member to clarify something. She made a reference to there being Albertans in this House who were not fighting for the best interest of Albertans. While I am—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

That is debate and not a point of order.

Resume debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise today on this important debate. Before I start, I would like to advise I will be sharing my time with the member for Niagara Centre.

I know that our government welcomes this opportunity to to hear from all parties in the House.

In many ways, Teck Resources' decision to abandon the Frontier project based on its own economic and operational interests has highlighted two of the biggest challenges of our time. The first is to ensure that our natural resources, including our oil reserves, continue to provide Canadians with jobs and opportunities. The second is to honour our commitments, both at home and abroad, to combat climate change.

Our government has been dealing with these two challenges since taking office. Canada is the fourth-largest oil producer in the world. Our oil industry continues to be a source of jobs and prosperity for the entire country. We also know that in this century of clean growth, economic prosperity and environmental protection must go hand in hand.

We have therefore taken a balanced approach. This approach uses revenue from our oil resources to invest in clean energy and the technologies of tomorrow. We know that, in the medium term, the world will not give up oil as an energy source. In fact, we expect demand for oil to increase in the coming decades.

Our goal is to make sure Canada produces the cleanest petroleum in the world, and we have already taken huge strides. Our petroleum producers have cut the intensity of their emissions by 28% since 2000. Many companies have committed to achieving net-zero emissions, including Canadian Natural Resources Limited, MEG Energy and Shell.

This indicates that major energy companies know the importance of establishing Canada's brand as the cleanest supplier of resources anywhere. We see the same thing happening with natural gas, where LNG plants are making greater use of electricity. One project, LNG Canada, will have “best in class” emissions. Other smaller projects will be even cleaner, with emissions as much as 90% below the global average.

Canadian innovators are also leading the way on removing carbon from the atmosphere and storing it safely. In fact, four of the largest-scale demonstration projects in carbon capture, use and storage are in Canada.

We have also put a price on pollution, we are phasing out coal by 2030, we are focused on helping remote communities move off diesel and we are making generational investments in clean energy, clean technologies and green infrastructure. That infrastructure includes a nationwide network of charging stations for electric vehicles and incentives for people to buy these vehicles.

Canada already generates more than 80% of its electricity with no emissions, and our goal is to get to 90% by the end of this decade. Those efforts are complemented by significant new investments in smart grids right across the country.

Two other areas where we see great potential are hydrogen and small modular reactors. We are in the process of developing a hydrogen strategy to grow production for use in transportation, mining and industry. Small modular reactors, as the name implies, are smaller in size and output than traditional nuclear facilities. Some can be transported on the back of a truck, making them ideal for remote areas. Because they are modular, they can easily be added to one another to meet changing demand. Best of all, they produce absolutely no pollution, making them a key tool in the transition to a net-zero economy.

All of these efforts, and more, are aimed at achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, making Canada one of some 77 countries to set that ambitious goal.

We are also active on the global stage through the G7 and G20 as well as through Clean Energy Ministerial and Mission Innovation, which Canada was proud to host last year. As part of Mission Innovation, Canada has pledged to double its investments in clean energy research and development from $387 million to $775 million this year alone.

We are also involved in the International Energy Agency, COP and the International Energy Forum. We are also engaging with international partners to position Canada as a player in establishing secure and sustainable global supply chains for the minerals that are powering many clean energy technologies, minerals that are in growing demand around the world. Recently, for example, we finalized a joint action plan to collaborate with the United States on critical minerals.

All of these actions are aimed at ensuring that we balance resource development with our environmental commitments. In its announcement withdrawing its application for Frontier, Teck Resources made it clear that it understands the need for that balance. As the president and chief executive officer of Teck Resources, Don Lindsay, said:

There is an urgent need to reduce global carbon emissions and support action on climate change....We support strong actions to enable the transition to a low carbon future. We are also strong supporters of Canada’s action on carbon pricing and other climate policies such as legislated caps for oil sands emissions.

We agree with Mr. Lindsay and other leading industrial groups that all levels of government must come together now to take climate action that will enable us to achieve net zero by 2050. It is time to make this objective a reality. In the days and weeks to come, our government will continue to work with our provincial and territorial partners, indigenous communities and all those who wish to join this discussion with open minds and open hearts.

In doing so, we will be guided by the principles that Canadians expect of us. We will be responsible for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to meet and exceed our Paris targets as we move towards net-zero emissions by 2050. We will enhance our competitiveness and the health of the economy to create jobs. We will collaborate by strengthening partnerships with the provinces and territories, indigenous peoples, municipalities and youth. We will be inclusive, by ensuring fairness and by preparing the workforce of tomorrow. We will ensure that our decisions yield affordable results for industry, families and the middle class.

Those are the values that have guided our government since 2015. They are the values and principles that will guide our efforts to develop a real climate action plan. Canadians ask no more than this. They deserve no less.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Madam Speaker, we are aware that just a couple of years ago the Prime Minister said that he wanted to phase out the oil sands. It has certainly been said by the Liberals that the vast majority of the caucus was against this particular proposal. We know that there were hugs and celebrating when the company decided to withdraw its application.

I have trouble aligning the parliamentary secretary's comments, in terms of being supportive and caring about the issue, with the actual actions and stated goals of his other caucus members.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, I can tell my hon. colleague that our government has been seized since 2015 with the issues going on in the oil patch and in the oil sands sector.

That is why we supported Line 3, which is actually completed on the Canadian side, as well as Keystone XL. I met with some governors and senators in the U.S. last year, and we talked about Keystone XL and the importance of getting that project moving forward. Let us not forget TMX. Last year I stood up in this House many times to answer questions from Conservatives who did not believe we were ever going to get it built and that we did not want to get it built. Now, there is pipe in the ground in Edmonton, and going all the way through. There are thousands of jobs being created.

We understand the anxiety in Alberta with respect to jobs. That is why we are working hard, with Alberta and all the industry partners, to move forward in a constructive, sustainable way for the industry. That is what we are going to continue to do.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, if the Teck Frontier project had gone through, it would have actually permanently stripped away 14,000 hectares of wetlands, 3,000 hectares of peat lands and 3,000 hectares of old-growth forest. Then, of course, as we know, it would also generate over four million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually. That would have blown the government's ability to meet the climate targets, no question.

Aside from this project, the government is also proceeding with the Trans Mountain expansion. The government bought the pipeline for $4.6 billion, and the expansion has ballooned up to $12.7 billion in costs. That will not help the government address the climate emergency that we are faced with today.

What we heard and what we are hearing from people in this House and from the community is that we need a just transition plan. Will the government actually get to work and create that just transition plan?

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, since 2015 we have been working on the transition to a low-carbon economy. We have invested over $60 billion over the last five years and we are committed, down the road, to ensure that those investments are made, because we understand. At the same time, when we transition, we need to make sure that the jobs are there, which is what the anxiety is all about out west and across Canada when people do not have jobs or are afraid to lose their jobs.

Basically, we are making sure that we are making the proper investments in clean tech when it comes to transition. At the end of the day, we know that the oil and gas sectors will still be required around the world for decades to come, so we need to balance out the environment and the economy.

NDP members are saying not to do anything on the economy, and to let it drop. What we hear from the Conservatives is that it is all about the economy, and to forget about the environment. However, we know that we need to do both, which is what Don Lindsay from Teck Resources told us. We need to do both, and Canada has the ability to do both.

We need to make this a non-partisan issue. We are not there yet, but we need to work together to get there.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, the first investment made by the Liberal government was $2.65 billion to the UN's Green Climate Fund. Can the member opposite explain what projects were funded by Canada's initial investment and whether it actually reduced emissions?

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, the debate today is with respect to the Teck decision. However, I will take this opportunity to highlight the words of Teck president, Don Lindsay, when he said:

Resource development has been at the heart of the Canadian economy for generations. Resource sectors including the Alberta oil sands create jobs; build roads, schools and hospitals; and contribute to a better standard of living for all Canadians. At the same time, there is an urgent need to reduce global carbon emissions and support action on climate change. As a proudly Canadian company for over 100 years, we know these two priorities do not have to be in conflict.

That is what we are aiming for. We believe what the industry is saying, the signal that it sent, and we are working towards that goal.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to contribute to the debate this evening. Let me remind the House that over the last four years, our government's plan has been focused squarely on investing in the middle class and helping people who are working hard to join it.

We believe all Canadians should benefit from our country's economic success. Cutting taxes for all but the wealthiest, and giving more money to middle-class families and those who need help the most, are only the first steps in our new mandate.

We will also make it easier for people to get an education, buy their first home and find care for their kids. We will help workers enter the workforce, grow their skills and transition between jobs. We need to continue to build confidence in Canada's economy, making sure the world continues to see our great nation as a great place to invest. We are building this confidence with targeted support for businesses, which will encourage more job-creating investments.

To make it easier for small businesses to succeed and create more jobs, we have cut taxes for small businesses not once, but twice. This is part of our government's responsible plan to build a strong, growing economy. We will build on the progress of the last four years and continue to make a real difference in the lives of Canadians today but equally, if not more importantly, well into the future.

Part of that means acknowledging the regional challenges that exist, particularly in the oil and gas sector. For that reason, we are moving forward with the Trans Mountain expansion project.

At a time when most of our energy exports go to the United States and the economies of Alberta and Saskatchewan are struggling, Canadians know that we need to open up new international markets. The Trans Mountain expansion project will create thousands of good, middle-class jobs, accelerate Canada's clean energy transition and open up new avenues for indigenous economic prosperity.

Today, construction is well under way and thousands of Canadians are hard at work. Contractors have started work at the Burnaby terminal, the Westridge Marine Terminal, the Edmonton terminal and pumping stations in Alberta.

In October, construction began on segment one in the Edmonton area after the Canada Energy Regulator released land for construction. The work on segment two started immediately.

This has allowed the company to start putting pipe in the ground. The goal is to have the expansion project in service by the latter half of 2022. In the short term, this is creating good, well-paying jobs. So far, over 3,000 people have started working on this project. At peak construction, there are expected to be over 5,500 people employed on sites across Alberta and British Columbia.

Once completed, the project will open up new international markets, get us a fair price for our energy resources and provide much-needed relief to the economies of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

The project, as it stands today, is very different from the project that was originally planned by Kinder Morgan. It will now support more union jobs in B.C., as well as in Alberta, and the project has been designed to a higher standard for environmental protection.

As the company has been working on the engineering plans for this project, environmental protection is always at the forefront. Trans Mountain has a robust safety regime, with important risk controls for all traffic and oil tankers in particular.

Over the last 65 years, Trans Mountain has developed comprehensive safety, spill prevention and emergency response plans to make sure the company is protecting the public, the environment and its employees.

The project will also help move less oil by rail and more by pipeline, which is the most economic, environmentally sound and safe mode of transportation. Our government remains confident that the project is commercially viable. We are comfortable that Canada will see a positive return on its investment when it comes time to sell.

Once completed, the pipeline's capacity to move Canadian oil will almost triple, unlocking potential to meet the world's demand. This is a monumental project, one in the best interests of the entire country. The project will also create economic benefits for many indigenous communities. To date, Trans Mountain has signed agreements worth more than $500 million with 58 indigenous communities.

It will generate new revenues for all levels of government for the betterment of Canada and Canadians. Over the course of this project's construction and the first 20 years of operation, the Conference Board of Canada estimates that this project will add over $160 billion to the Canadian economy and add $46 billion to government revenues.

Almost half of these revenues, $19.4 billion, will go straight to Alberta, supporting provincial and municipal programs that Albertans depend on each and every day. Every dollar the federal government earns from this project will help fund new technologies and green energy solutions that will ensure Alberta remains an energy leader as we work together to fight climate change.

Let us make no mistake: In a world where Canada makes a rapid and decisive transition to a low-carbon economy, the oil and gas sector has an important role to play. In 2018, we announced an investment of more than $1.6 billion for Canada's oil and gas sector. It included measures designed to support workers as well as their families, foster competitiveness and improve the long-term environmental performance of the oil and gas sector. Investments have already been made to support oil and gas companies, reduce their carbon footprint and develop alternative uses for their products.

To conclude, by building the Trans Mountain expansion project, we can make sure we are able to safely get more Canadian resources to world markets where we can get good prices for them. That increase of revenues will benefit everyone. It will mean more money for businesses to create good, well-paying jobs for Canadians. That is more money for hard-working families, money that can be spent to help local communities and grow our economy.

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

Madam Speaker, the member talked about Trans Mountain a lot instead of Teck Frontier, so I will ask him about that.

He said that it was basically a good economic investment as well, yet we have just heard that the price of expanding that has gone up to about $13 billion. When Kinder Morgan first proposed it, the price was somewhere on the order of $5 billion. That is quite a jump. It will affect the profits of the producers who will be using it because the tolls will go up, but it is also increasing the cost to Canadians. About $8 billion of that we will never get back, even if we sell the pipeline. However, there probably will not be any opportunity for that.

Poll results on public approval of the pipeline are showing a real increase in people who do not want the pipeline. How much are Canadians going to pay for this pipeline?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to reiterate. Over 3,000 people have started working on this project. Over 5,500 people are expected to work on this project. The Conference Board of Canada estimates that this project will add over $160 billion to the Canadian economy and add $46 billion in government revenues. Almost half of these revenues, $19.4 billion, will go straight to Alberta, supporting the province, supporting communities and supporting Canadian families.

Therefore, the investment that we are making today is an investment that will be sustainable for the future and sustainable for three provinces in particular: B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan. It will ensure that people get back to work, that revenues get back to these provinces and communities and that revenues come back to the federal government for further investments, once again, to all Canadians.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member for Niagara Centre is totally mistaken. The Trans Mountain pipeline was not a government investment; it was a government buyout for a private sector investment that wanted to employ people in my riding, which the Trans Mountain pipeline runs through. Because of the Liberal government, British Columbians, Albertans and western Canadians are furious because nobody has certainty in the western Canadian economy anymore.

When we talk to global investors, they do not want to come to British Columbia and it is because of the Liberal government taking advantage of British Columbia by buying the Trans Mountain pipeline when we had private sector investments with private sector jobs to fulfill that project.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was waiting for a question from the member, but I will try to anticipate what he meant by his statement.

I will make it very clear for the member from B.C. that this is a different project than was originally planned by Kinder Morgan. In fact, it will now support more union jobs in British Columbia. It will support more economic prosperity for Alberta.

The project has been designed to be of a higher standard, with more environmental protection. It is different and it will add more sustainability not only in terms of the economy, but also in terms of the social benefits as well as the environmental benefits for B.C. and all of Canada.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Speaker, the member spoke a great deal about Trans Mountain. What I would like to say is that the government is reaping what it sowed. It talks incessantly about reconciliation and respect for first nations, while making empty promises about the oil industry.

What we often hear from first nations people is that they are among those who pollute the least and are affected the most by the current climate crisis.

I believe that the government is reaping what it sowed.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, there is no doubt that this government is showing a great deal of respect for indigenous communities by working with them.

I appreciate the comments made by the member for Edmonton Strathcona, particularly because she is from Alberta. She rightly points out the effects of this decision primarily with respect to the realities that the Premier of Alberta and others are giving to this situation.

The global price of oil is well below the point that would make this project not profitable, with no increase in sight. Investors are fleeing the industry not only in Canada but globally. The global consensus is that climate change must be addressed. This process is doing just that. We are moving forward in an economically, environmentally and socially responsible way for all of Canada.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon member for New Brunswick Southwest.

There is a war on the working men and women of this country. If people do not believe me, just ask the 7,000 would-be workers at the now cancelled Teck Frontier mine in northern Alberta.

If people do not believe me, ask the thousands of workers who would be on site now, finishing the construction of the northern gateway pipeline.

If people do not believe me, can ask the 200,000 out-of-work Canadian energy employees who sit staring at their phones, waiting for it to ring with a job offer across northern Alberta.

If people do not believe me, ask the more than 20% of young males in the province of Alberta, who are unemployed and desperate for opportunity.

If people do not believe me, speak to the 14 first nations communities around the perimeter of the Teck Frontier mine, whose leaders had signed agreements for that mine to provide opportunities for their young people to escape the clutches of poverty.

If people do not believe me, then talk to the steelworkers who would have provided steel for the energy east pipeline, which is now cancelled, ensuring that the insanity of selling our oil on the cheap in the west, while buying it at a premium in the east, will go on for an indefinite period of time.

If people do not believe me, look at the footage of the fitness instructor in Victoria, B.C., who arrived at a blockade and begged protesters, saying to them over and over again, “I've got to get to work. There are 40 people expecting me to teach a class. Can you please get out of the way and let me do my job. I don't even know what your political cause is about, but surely it can't be about blocking a middle-class fitness instructor from going to work.”

If people do not believe me, ask any of those thousands of people if there is a war on the working men and women in our country.

Let us be clear about what this dispute is not about. First, it is not about the environment. The blockaders who are stopping the Coastal GasLink pipeline, many of whom think it is an oil pipeline, are standing in the way of the construction of the pipeline and the LNG Canada plant, which would ship Canadian natural gas to China and other Asian markets to replace coal-fired electricity and reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, by some estimates as much as 30 million tonnes per year. That is because natural gas emits half the greenhouse gases for each unit of electricity that it generates versus coal.

Canada is perfectly positioned to reduce global emissions by shipping our natural gas. Why? We have 1,220 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. We have a cold climate, which makes it easier to cool and therefore liquify and transport natural gas. We supply our LNG facilities with clean, green, emissions-free British Columbia hydro-electricity. We are closer to the Asian markets, significantly closer, than the Gulf of Mexico, which would be our principal competitor.

In other words, we are perfectly positioned to ship clean, green Canadian natural gas and reduce global emissions, but these blockaders do not want us to. They would rather see coal combustion in Asia pump millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, coal being the single biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions anywhere on planet earth. However, these protesters would like to continue to see dirty foreign coal, as long as it demobilizes our population and prevents our people from getting to work.

No, it is nothing to do with the environment. Nor was it anything to do with the environment when they, along with the help of the government, shut down the Teck Frontier mine, which had agreed to zero-net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. In fact, the company has already lowered its emissions to below the intensity of other competitors around the world. That oil will still be produced, it will still be burned, it will just come from outside of Canada.

It is not about the environment and it is not about first nations land rights. When it comes to the Coastal GasLink, 20 elected councils for first nations had supported and signed agreements to profit and benefit from that GasLink. They all support it. In terms of the hereditary leadership, many of them, too, support it. In referenda by local communities, there has been overwhelming support for these projects of which the blockaders are standing in the way.

With respect to the Teck Frontier mine, there are 14 first nations communities around the mine and all 14 support the project. The cancellation of that mine went not only against the wishes of the regulator, which recommended its approval, of the Alberta government, which has supported it, but all 14 first nations communities. Therefore, no, it is not about first nations land rights.

In fact, it is very clear that the cancellation of this project did not have the free, prior and informed consent of those first nations communities. The protesters and ultimately the government that killed the project went directly against the wishes of first nations people. First nations are being used as an excuse by anti-energy and anti-working class protesters and their friends in the government, by downtown, urban-dwelling Liberal elites who look down on the working class people of our country.

If members do not believe me, look at the Prime Minister's own remarks. He said that he wanted to phase-out Canada's energy sector. He did not say he wanted to phase-out global petroleum. He said that he wanted to phase-out Canada's oil sands. He is not concerned about increased production in the United States, where oil production has more than doubled in the last 12 years. He is not concerned about increased oil and gas production in Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya and other places. Those places can go on producing and burning oil. It is Canadian oil and gas he wants to phase-out.

However, it is not just oil and gas. He said that he believed southwestern Ontario should move away from manufacturing. He said, when he was abroad at a fancy conference, that he thought construction workers brought negative gender impacts to rural communities. That is the attitude of the downtown, internationalist, globalist elite who look down their noses at the working people of our country.

I will conclude on an optimistic note. Canadians are proud of working-class people and they are increasingly prepared to stand up and fight back. I believe we will have a renaissance of the working class in the country when we remove the government obstacles that stand in their way, unleash the unmatched power of free enterprise, remove the obstacles so projects can go ahead and our industries and our energy sector can come roaring back to life to give those young people the opportunity to put their God-given talents to work, to give indigenous people the opportunity to trade again in commerce and to exploit natural resources again in our country. I say again, because that had been the tradition of first nations people for thousands of years before Europeans arrived on this continent. That is the future we will fight for as a Conservative opposition and it is the future that Canadians, together with us, will win for our country.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Madam Speaker, there are some points the member for Carleton made that I could actually agree with. Sometimes we do agree at the finance committee. However, what I absolutely do not agree with is his comment that the demonstrators and the leadership of the government, meaning the Prime Minister, along with the government, shut down the Teck mine. That is absolutely not true.

Did the member for Carleton not read the letter from Teck Resources? It said this was the market. The member talked about free enterprise, and that is what free enterprise is all about. If the market is not there, the business plan does not go ahead. It is that simple. Do not try to play politics on this issue, because this is bigger than politics.

I congratulate the leadership at Teck Resources, because they laid out the facts and said something to politicians in the House: Find a way to get together, to work the environment and the economy together, so we can prosper in this country. Let us stop playing politics with this issue that is dividing Canadians.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I do want to remind members from the official opposition that the member for Carleton is able to answer this and does not need any assistance.

The hon. member for Carleton.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Madam Speaker, anybody who believes this mine was cancelled for market reasons is dreaming in Technicolor.

Let us look at the facts. The company invested $1 billion over 10 years. Companies do not make 30- or 40-year investments based on the daily price of crude oil. They know that prices fluctuate day to day, and they are not going to cancel a 30- or 40-year project on the spot price of West Texas Intermediate. The company knew the basic price of oil since 2014, when it originally dropped. That is not new information.

What changed the company's decision was that the government allowed for lawlessness to erupt like a volcano across the country, while imposing excessive regulatory delays. Since July, the government had a recommendation from the regulator to approve it. Until present, it had not done so. The company got the message that Canada was an inhospitable place in which to do business, and the Prime Minister got exactly what he wanted, which was the cancellation of this massive project.