Madam Speaker, it is an honour, as always, to rise in the House to speak on behalf of the residents of Calgary Signal Hill.
Bill C-264 puts a tremendous opportunity before the House, which is to get rid of one more of the anti-energy, antidevelopment laws, which were put in place by the Trudeau Liberal government, that remain on the books today and continue to hamper and hinder economic development and business in Canada.
First of all, I want to note that the MOU, the memorandum of understanding, between the federal government and the provincial government of Alberta, which was entered into in late 2025, just about a year ago, states that it would “enable the export of bitumen from a strategic deep-water port to Asian markets, including if necessary through an appropriate adjustment to the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act.”
That makes clear the position of the government. Let us not go halfway, but all the way. Let us get rid of a law that has no purpose at all in environmental protection, in safety or in maritime shipping issues, but has simply been put in place to keep Alberta oil in the ground.
There are several red herrings, if members can pardon the limited pun, in the waters today in respect of this debate.
First, the oil tanker ban, Bill C-48, is somehow a logical extension of the voluntary exclusion zone that exists off Canada's west coast and applies to U.S. tanker traffic. Roughly five supertankers a week transit from Valdez, Alaska, to U.S. ports on the southern western coast of the United States. Those tankers stay offshore by agreement. This tanker ban, Bill C-48, covers only interior waters that those tankers do not transit on any regular basis.
Second, on indigenous participation, one of the members opposite has suggested over the course of the debate on this bill that Conservatives do not care about indigenous consultation. It is quite the opposite. Under the last Conservative government of Stephen Harper, the Eagle Spirit Energy project was well-developed. That was an indigenous-owned pipeline that would have put in place the opportunity to transport Alberta crude oil to the west coast. That project died with Bill C-48 and other anti-energy Liberal laws.
I believe in reconciliation, and true reconciliation comes from working together, particularly as economic partners. There is no effort on the part of this side of the House to limit that consultation and those processes to develop partnerships that would allow economic prosperity for all.
Third, with respect to the red herrings is the environment and safety, it has been suggested that we want to cut corners. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am as concerned about environmental protection as any other Canadian. Let me note something from a former Liberal MP, Ms. Martha Hall Findlay, who was pretty succinct on this subject in respect of shipping risk. She stated, “There are risks associated with any kind of transportation with any goods, and not all of them are with oil tankers. All that singling out one part of one coast did was prevent more oil and gas from being produced that could be shipped off that coast”.
Our west coast shipping industry, and indeed the Canadian maritime shipping industry writ large, is safe, capable and world-class. Perhaps the members opposite forming government at this point in time do not have confidence in that industry, but I certainly do. The ability for our industry to ship and ship safely is extensive.
Last, I want to quote from Greg Ebel, the CEO of Enbridge, Canada's largest crude oil shipper. He said, “The tanker ban is a great example of how things will have to change to allow our country to maximize its economic potential. Let markets and real demand guide routes and capacities while government focuses on enabling the conditions for success”. I could not agree more.
As my friends on this side of the House have made clear, Bill C-48 has never been about protecting the environment. It has never been about safety. It is only about keeping oil in the ground. It must be repealed.