Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Repentigny.
The agreement between Alberta and the federal government is a perfect example of what I believe is wrong with Canadian politics, and frankly, today's debate is only contributing to that. It is clear that our political processes are powerless before the almighty oil and gas industry, and that is the only lens through which the politics of the Canadian economy are viewed.
Every time a crisis arises, the government's response is to have more oil and gas. My Conservative colleagues are just the same way. I remember when we were emerging from the COVID-19 crisis, and the government created an economic recovery plan. What did its recovery plan call for? It called for more oil and gas. With regard to the conflict in Ukraine, the solution that my Conservative and Liberal friends came up with was to supply more oil and gas to the Ukrainians. I say this because it confirms once again what we going through today. It is something I have been seeing since I arrived here in 2019: Oil and gas are one of the strongest symbols of Canadian identity. This very fact makes Canada's clean energy transition all but impossible.
The idea behind the agreement between the government and Alberta was that it would strengthen national unity. The government basically decided to just give in: it dropped all of the weak proposals it had for fighting climate change, in addition to losing a minister who was back in the media this morning with an open letter, all to please Alberta and defend a form of national unity that aligns with its interests, and therefore with the interests of the oil and gas sector.
As public policy-makers, we have a duty to act. We have to act responsibly, and this means that we have to recognize that the climate crisis has not gone away just because there is a trade dispute with the United States. Sadly, wildfires remind us of that every year. Sadly, climate fluctuations remind us of that every year. However, the federal government is acting as though these issues have gone away.
Furthermore, there is a whole side of this agreement that is deeply problematic, because the government is giving itself the right to negotiate with a province about building infrastructure on another province's territory without consulting that other province. We have learned that British Columbia was not consulted at any point during the federal government's negotiations. B.C. was presented with a fait accompli. The government decided to negotiate an agreement at the expense of British Columbia. That is pretty scary for many Quebeckers. Does this mean that the energy east project will be revived?
I said that oil is a strong symbol of Canadian identity, so let me explain. Members will recall that the federal government agreed to purchase a pipeline for $34 billion. I have also lost count of the number of times since I first came here in 2019 that the Liberals have invested billions of taxpayer dollars in chasing pipe dreams under the guise of fighting climate change. They are still doing that. They are talking about carbon capture and storage. They claim that Canada will produce clean oil, net-zero oil, while in reality, the sole objective is to once again shamelessly support the oil and gas sector. I also remember that during the COVID‑19 crisis, the infamous emissions reduction fund was supposed to reduce oil and gas emissions. Ultimately, it became clear that the only thing it did was to increase the sector's production. In my opinion, it is clear that Canada has become captive to its own energy policy and it cannot find a way out.
I spoke about the COVID-19 crisis, the post-pandemic recovery and the economic plan that was tabled. Well, now the pretext has changed. Now it is the trade war. Under the pretext that Canada is caught in a trade war, the government has decided to take prompt action on one of Canada's biggest sectors: the fossil fuel industry. Meanwhile, we are still waiting for action on the forestry industry. I will come back to that later.
Speaking as an outside observer, I do not think the pipeline will be built. Albertans deserve to know the truth. Why do I say that there will never be a pipeline? I say it because there will never be a proponent, unless the Government of Alberta agrees to foot the bill in full. That would be a disaster because the project might end up like Churchill Falls, where the federal government ended up paying for a province's energy infrastructure. I see a disaster in the making. Otherwise, there will never be a proponent.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer has prepared many reports and has told the Standing Committee on Natural Resources over and over that Trans Mountain is not profitable. When this infrastructure was expected to cost $21 billion, before the price tag went up to $34 billion, the Parliamentary Budget Officer appeared before the committee and told us that the infrastructure would never be profitable. It would have to operate at full capacity for 40 years and with very high prices in order to break even. No private business would want to do that. This infrastructure will not break even for 40 years, so by building it, we are making ourselves captive to the gas and oil sector for the next 40 years. So much for the energy transition. That will not exist any more. New low-carbon technologies will not be developed. We are captive to the oil and gas sector. That is the message we are getting from the government.
I would like to get back to the issue of the day. While the pipeline may never exist, carbon capture and storage may. The federal government wants to invest in that as a solution to the trade war. Let us take a good look at this technology. The four members of the Pathways Alliance, which account for 80% of oil sands production, are Canadian Natural Resources, Cenovus Energy, Imperial Oil and Suncor. They represent 80% of the real force behind the oil sector, and they are 73% foreign‑owned and 60% American‑owned. The oil lobby wants to energize the Canadian economy, but it is doing so to serve American interests. I could not make this up.
This means the federal government is prepared to spend billions of dollars on infrastructure in response to a trade dispute, but who will actually benefit? American interests will benefit: 60% of all dividends paid by the oil sector between 2021 and 2024 went to American interests. We are paying for infrastructure in response to a trade dispute so that they can get even richer. From 2021 to 2024, these companies made record profits of $131 billion. The message the government is sending them today is that it is perfectly happy to pay for infrastructure and make their lives easier by passing a bill like Bill C‑5. The energy transition no longer exists. Environmental regulations no longer exist. All that profit can flow straight to the United States. It is utterly obscene.
Worse still, the Conservatives are adding fuel to the fire by saying that this is how we will combat inflation. What creates the most inflation is when the oil and gas sector boosts its refining margins. In 2008, refining margins were 9.4¢. The last time we studied this issue, in 2022, they were 48¢. This is a transfer of wealth from the general population to the greedy oil and gas industry, and both the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party are complicit.
Today they are trying to convince us that this is part of the trade war we are waging against the Americans. It is a scam.