Madam Speaker, yes, we will be looking to use more Canadian steel and more Canadian materials in general as the Minister of Industry has said. Yes, the government will support pipelines that are in the national interest and meet environmental and social standards, as well as those that meet the bedrock requirement for meaningful indigenous engagement. ln fact, Ksi Lisims LNG, recently approved, will see Canadian natural gas produced and liquefied at the highest environmental standards, and this will travel by pipeline to access new markets.
I want to take this opportunity to talk about business more broadly, and the One Canadian Economy Act. I think it is pertinent to the overall thrust of the query. With the support of members opposite, our government has created a clear pathway for projects of national interest. Practical changes mean approvals are faster and simpler, and proponents are provided more certainty while standards are upheld. The member opposite may not know this, but l have done work for many energy companies and worked on many major pipeline projects in my career, such as northern gateway, energy east and TMX, to name the most notable. If we are moving oil and gas, pipelines are the safest, most economical and most environmentally friendly way to do so, and they require a lot of steel.
The energy industry will be healthy if we continue to develop our resources to high environmental and social standards, as our trading partners increasingly demand and as Canadians expect. Courts have also demanded, and rightly so, that we meet our moral and treaty obligations to first nations, and the Prime Minister has been clear that this will be an expectation for all major projects. I want to caution, though, that a blanket “yes all pipelines, all the time, without a thought to the specifics” approach is not what Canadians call for or what the courts will allow, and that would not serve Canada's energy sector or Canadian workers, whether in steel or in other sectors. Projects must be reviewed on their merits: economic, social, environmental and legal. A balanced Canadian approach is called for, such as the one laid out in our new One Canadian Economy Act.
Results are already showing; this is the positive. Investment and investor interest are being drawn to Canada. Projects are being advanced all the time. These projects mean jobs. I already mentioned Ksi Lisims LNG, but we also have LNG Canada phase 2 and Cedar LNG as concrete examples. Pathways plus, a strategy with the Major Projects Office, would increase global competitiveness for the oil and gas industry and support market diversification by positioning Canadian energy as the cleanest barrel of oil on the world market.
Talking of ripping up environmental assessments is a move that would only drive investment away and increase risk for Canadian workers. It is not accurate to say that no pipelines were built by the last Liberal government, as was in the original query. The most economically consequential pipeline in decades, TMX, was built, but it is true that pipeline projects have faced challenges. An honest assessment will include that the Harper government fought too much with provinces and courts. They put too little attention into the duty to consult, treating it superficially, as well as too little care into the environment and due process. As a result, not one pipeline to tidewater was built in that time.
Let us calibrate on a balanced Canadian approach. We must respect provinces and indigenous rights holders. We must have clear timelines and certainty, and we must go faster. We must do the things that are now possible under Bill C-5 and the new Liberal government. Our new approach means workers in Regina producing the steel, indigenous communities partnering as owners and Canadian innovators providing to the world the innovations we will compete and win on. I think that is something we can all support.