Gary Lunn

[Forestry Industry, November 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I and the Minister of Industry met with CEOs of the forest industry earlier this week. We had a very productive discussion. They have been very supportive of our approach. They are very supportive of the money we have spent to expand market opportunities and to develop strategies and innovation.

We recognize we do need to do more. This sector is in a difficult situation. That is why we are working directly with it to look at options. The sector has been very supportive and pleased with the approach our government has taken to date.

[Forestry Industry, November 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, we understand these are very difficult circumstances for the forestry sector in every part of Canada. We have acted. We invested $400 million in a number of programs in the first few years of our mandate, and we are looking at other options.

We have rattled off a list before, $127 million for a competitive strategy and $72 million to help older workers. It is making a difference.

We recognize some of the challenges. We are working on them. We are working with associations like the Forest Products Association of Canada, which has said that we have invested money intelligently. They are working with us.

[Natural Resources, November 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. First of all, certain parts of Canada, such as Quebec and British Columbia, are blessed with a lot of hydro and it is up to the provinces to decide on their own energy mix. We do not take any say in that. But where there are provinces that choose nuclear, as does Ontario, it is important that we provide leadership in the safety and security of all Canadians.

With respect to the global nuclear energy partnership, we made it unequivocally clear that we will under no circumstances ever accept any nuclear spent fuel back from any other country. This is a good initiative and Canada should be at the table to ensure that we have a voice.

[Nuclear Energy, November 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, this is about leadership. There are 17 or 18 countries that have now signed on to this partnership to develop technologies, to minimize waste, to recycle spent nuclear fuel and to develop proliferation resistant technology.

This is exactly the type of thing where Canada should be at the table. We are a player. I find it completely ridiculous that the NDP would not want us to be there. Canada can show leadership. We should share these experiences with other countries.

[Nuclear Energy, November 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership that we are signing on to is a voluntary agreement to actually expand technology, to reduce spent nuclear fuel and to develop technology that is proliferation resistant. This is very important. Canada is a serious player as the largest producer of uranium of any country in the world.

We would welcome the opportunity to address the committee, if I were invited, to discuss these issues at any time. It is great news for Canada to be part of this partnership.

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the response is as follows:

a) While the federal government has important responsibilities relating to nuclear energy, electricity and the ownership and management of natural resources are under provincial jurisdiction. As such, provinces and utilities, acting under provincial laws, are responsible for determining the generation mix. As well, the provincial jurisdiction over resource management includes the technology by which extraction is performed, including the method of steam production for a steam-based process. Thus, it will be industry, working within the framework of provincial laws and regulations, that will determine whether nuclear energy is used to extract oil from the oil sands.

The Government of Canada regulates all aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle including activities, materials and facilities. To this end, the Government has established one of the most stringent regulatory regimes in the world, administered by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, CNSC. Any proposal to build new nuclear power stations in Canada would have to meet all requirements of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act in addition to relevant provincial laws, regulations and policies.

The response to b), c), d), e), f), and g) is as follows: Natural Resources Canada has joined with the province of Alberta and oil sands companies to sponsor an independent study to assess the technical, practical and economic application of nuclear technologies in the oil sands. It is anticipated that the first phase of the study will be completed late this year. The cost of the study is $384,000 with the federal government contributing $96,000 towards the total. The study is part of the “Alternative Energy Solutions to Replace Natural Gas for Oil Sands Development” study. This study on nuclear does not have a title of its own at this time.

h) No Environmental Assessments, EA, have yet been initiated with respect to the use of nuclear power in the oil sands. However, on August 27, 2007, Energy Alberta Corporation, EAC, filed an application with the CNSC to prepare a site for the potential construction of new reactors near Peace River, Alberta. The CNSC will be able to initiate the EA process when EAC’s Project Description is filed with the CNSC. The CNSC has extensive experience with EAs, the first step of this regulatory process, and works closely with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and other federal and provincial agencies to ensure an effective and efficient EA process that follows the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. The EA must be completed before the commission can issue a site licence, the first licence in a series for any new nuclear power plant.

i) In 2002, the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act came into force and required nuclear energy corporations to establish the Nuclear Waste Management Organization, NWMO, to manage all of Canada’s used nuclear fuel waste– that exists now and that will be produced in the future.

On June 14, 2007, the Government announced its decision to select the adaptive phased management, APM, plan that was recommended by the NWMO for the long-term management of nuclear fuel waste in Canada. The APM plan was primarily designed to handle nuclear fuel waste coming from Canada’s existing reactors. The approach was tested against many future nuclear fuel waste scenarios and it was found to be technically capable of dealing with additional quantities of nuclear fuel waste. The NWMO will continue research and testing to ensure that its plans and programs address new circumstances and remain robust.

j) Energy Alberta Corporation has made presentations to the federal government as well as the House Standing Committee on Natural Resources regarding the company’s plans to bring CANDU technology to Alberta. The government has also received copies of an AREVA presentation, which outlines the potential they see for nuclear in the oil sands. The Government has not received any presentations from oil and gas companies.

k) The applications received for site licences for new nuclear power plants from Energy Alberta Corporation, in Alberta, and Bruce Power and Ontario Power Generation, in Ontario, are the first ones to be considered under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act. Given the fact that it has been over 30 years since such an application has been submitted for review it is difficult to predict the time that will be needed for regulatory review for these. In the time since the last application was submitted, the technology has changed, the understanding has changed and the requirements and expectations have changed. The review period is also very dependent on the details of the EA and the completeness of the applications for the two subsequent licences, construction and operating, assuming the site licences are granted.

l) According to its application, EAC is planning to build its proposed nuclear power plant on land adjacent to Lac Cardinal, near the town of Peace River, Alberta.

m) The cost of building a reactor in the oil sands will be determined through negotiations between the vendor and proponent; and accordingly, any estimate of construction cost by the Government would be speculative.

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 20th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the response is as follows:

Government of Canada is committed to building a strong and distinctive energy advantage. We understand that energy is critically important to our Canadian way of life and long-term economic growth. Canada is the only stable, democratic country in the world with growing energy export capacity.

Our energy policy is guided by the principles of a free and competitive market, respect for the provinces’ jurisdiction as the direct managers of Canada’s resources and targeted initiatives to protect the health and safety of Canadians, e.g. pipeline regulation, and environmental sustainability.

We recognize that the production and use of energy, particularly fossil fuels, generate air emissions that contribute to smog and negatively affect the health of Canadians. Our challenge is to ensure that we become a clean superpower. Canada has a responsibility to produce and use energy wisely.

Initiatives under our government’s ecoACTION plan are practical actions that combine economic opportunity with environmental and social sustainability. We are focused on three areas: renewable energy, energy efficiency and science and technology.

To promote renewable power, we have committed $1.5 billion through the ecoENERGY renewable initiative to put 4,000 megawatts of clean energy on the grid. In budget 2007, we increased access to accelerate capital cost allowance for industries generating cleaner energy and provided $2 billion over the next seven years to provide incentives to producers in the biofuel sector.

To improve energy efficiency, we have launched the $300 million ecoENERGY efficiency initiative which includes measures to encourage the construction, operation and retrofit of more energy efficient buildings and houses. We are also strengthening the energy performance standards under the Energy Efficiency Act and regulating fuel consumption in motor vehicles.

Our promotion of clean energy technology through the $230 million ecoENERGY technology initiative is focused on accelerating the development and market readiness of technology solutions in clean energy supply. We recently added $85 million through federal granting councils for research on key priorities on energy and the environment.

The federal energy policy will continue to serve Canadians well and to provide benefits in a number of areas, such as: maintaining and enhancing the prosperity of Canadians; providing a secure supply of energy for Canadians and Canadian industry; and producing energy in a sustainable manner consistent with our environmental objectives.

The elements that compose the federal energy policy will continue to evolve so that Canada can meet the challenges and benefit from opportunities that arise in international and domestic energy markets and accommodate new technologies and new cleaner energy sources as they become commercial. The federal energy policy is sound but not static and we will continue to look for ways to improve this approach through dialogue with Canadians, which include all levels of government, industry and other stakeholders.

[Canada Elections Act, November 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help myself but to weigh in. Here are the simple facts. At the procedure and House affairs committee, all four parties said that we needed to do something, including the hon. member's party. They said that we needed to bring a bill forward. They asked for it in the committee.

All of a sudden the Liberals have changed their mind. I am not sure if it is because they know the other three parties are all in favour and now they have an opportunity to stand up and vote instead of sitting down and abstaining.

I am not sure where they are standing but the record will show that in the procedure and House affairs they asked the government for this legislation and said that they would support it. It was unanimously passed at committee and now they are not sure where they stand. It is consistent with what we have seen from the Liberals in the last few weeks. They are not sure when they should vote and what they should vote for.

I guess it is not surprising that we are now seeing that they are somehow opposed to this when they were calling for it at committee and the government has given them the exact bill they asked for.

[Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, November 1st, 2007]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-17, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to a special order made previously, I would like to inform the House that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-57 was at the time of prorogation.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Forestry Industry, October 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. When we took office, immediately in our very first budget we committed $400 million to help the forestry sector across Canada: $72.5 million for targeted initiative to help older workers; $70 million to promote innovation; $40 million to expand market opportunities. The list goes on and on.

We are working with the industry. Members can listen to the Forest Products Association of Canada, which endorses our approach completely.

Again, there is another commitment in the throne speech where we recognize the troubles this industry is having. We are committed to working with it through this difficult time.