House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 43% of the vote.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, our obligation is an obligation for the country, and that means that we all have to collaborate together. The natural resources sector is an area of shared jurisdiction, and in the case of the environment, it is directly shared, so of course, we expect and are receiving co-operative action from the provinces, and we are doing our part.
The emissions, as I said, from 2005 to 2011, fell by 4.8%, while the economy grew by--
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, frankly, I find it a bit rich to be attacked on this issue by the Liberal Party, which signed us on to an international agreement that it had no intention of complying with and that it did not comply with. During their tenure, the result was an increase in greenhouse gas emissions by, I believe, some 30%. We do not have to listen to belated comments from the members of the Liberal Party. The apologies are belated, and we are still waiting for them.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, our collective actions to date will bring us halfway toward closing the gap between what our emissions had originally been projected to be in 2020 and where we need to be to meet our Copenhagen target.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, it is 611 megatonnes.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, this is an historic moment. It is the first time since I was appointed minister almost two years ago that a Liberal natural resources critic has risen to ask me a question in the House. Now that it has finally happened, I had hoped it would be a matter of some moment. Alas, my hopes are dashed. In fact, he is not off to an auspicious start.
The question was already asked. The question was answered. The fact is that I have not and I will not avail myself of that service.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, there is not enough time to do all of that, but let me focus on a few matters.
Our government has created the largest freshwater protected area. We have expanded Canada's marine conservation area by over 10 times. We have increased pipeline inspections and audits. We have imposed new fines for companies that break environmental laws. We have strengthened tanker inspections. We require double hulls for large tankers. We have improved aids for navigation, including updated charts for shipping routes. We have invested in scientific research in marine pollution, and we have invested some $10 billion in green energy, in alternative energy, and in reducing the energy footprint of conventional and non-conventional energy expansion.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, the NDP has never been known for clear economic thinking. The Dutch disease theory has been debunked by economic history and by economists across Canada, including The Macdonald-Laurier Institute and the former governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney.
The crux of the NDP's argument is the supposed impact on the manufacturing sector. Of course, if the NDP had spoken to the manufacturing sector, it might have heard that resource development actually helps Canada's manufacturing industry. Let us listen for a second to what the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters had to say: “The fact is that all Canadians stand to benefit in very real ways from the wealth created by these developments”.
However, the biggest issue with the New Democrats' theory is the hundreds of thousands of jobs created by these developments, many of them union jobs. For example, Canada's Building Trades Unions, a union representing around 200,000 workers in our energy sector, says that the NDP would be very bad for workers and the entire Canadian economy.
I wonder when the leader of the NDP will finally admit to his erroneous economics, seek forgiveness, and support the hundreds of thousands of Canadians employed in our resource sector.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, the parliamentary secretary's question is very important and relevant.
Responsible resource development is a critical piece of legislation that makes reviews more timely, reduces duplication, strengthens environmental protection and enhances aboriginal consultations. Prior to our plan, thousands of projects with little or no environmental effect were being reviewed and reviews would take far too long, which resulted in a weaker economy and less jobs for Canadians. We accomplished this improvement, while ensuring that the environment was protected.
Our government is focusing valuable resources on projects with the largest possible environmental impact, while increasing pipeline and tanker safety. Indeed, in the main estimates for the National Energy Board before this chamber right now there is new funding to hire more pipeline inspectors to increase our pipeline safety. While the opposition would like to mislead the Canadian public by saying that we cannot both protect the environment and create jobs, our government will take a balanced approach that ensures we do both.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, I welcome this opportunity to discuss our government's commitment to responsible resource development. Canada's resource industries, energy, mining and forestry, are key drivers of the Canadian economy, accounting for $1.6 million jobs and almost 20% of our GDP. They generate $30 billion in taxes every year, revenues that help fund health care, education and public pensions. This is a pivotal time for Canada and the actions we take as a country will either set the course for future growth or consign us to watching opportunities pass us by.
Up to 600 major resource projects are under way or planned for the next decade, to the tune of approximately $650 billion. We are entering a development period comparable to the period during which our national railroads were built.
This truly contributes to building the country. Our government will not miss this wonderful opportunity. We are doing what is needed to ensure that Canada remains one of the most attractive sources of natural resources and investment destinations in the world.
Our government recognizes that climate change is a serious global threat and we support urgent action to mitigate its effects. Where we differ with the opposition parties is how to address this important issue.
The NDP seems to suggest that we should stop developing the oil sands and switch to renewable power. Such a policy is not economically feasible and would have dire consequences for our country's standard of living and security. According to the International Energy Agency, even under the most optimistic scenarios for the development of renewable energy, the world will have to rely on fossil fuels for 63% of its energy needs in 25 years. Globally, cutting off oil production would create severe, if not catastrophic, economic hardship, especially for the poorest nations that already suffer from an energy deficit. Indeed, 1.5 billion people are currently without electricity.
Our government believes we can generate economic growth, create jobs and assure prosperity for Canadians for generations to come, and we can do that while protecting the environment. Our plan is working. Without killing jobs or closing businesses, we are reducing emissions.
Ours is one of the first governments to grow the economy at the same time that we are reducing emissions. From 1995 to 2011, our economy grew by 8.4%, while emissions fell by 4.8%. Rather than strand our resources and relinquish our legacy, we have invested in research and development that makes resource development cleaner and greener. We have done that in coordination with our provincial partners, Canadian and international scientists and industry. We have provided incentives for consumers and businesses to enhance energy efficiency to make for a sustainable greener future.
The oil sands represent one one-thousand of global GHG emissions. Their development would not mean game over for the planet. We are continuing to reduce emissions, with a 26% reduction per barrel since 1990.
We estimate that we are halfway toward achieving our objective of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 17%. International statistics from the United States Energy Information Administration show that, between 2005 and 2011, Canada reduced its emissions by 11.4%, compared to 8.5% in the United States, 9.9% in Japan, and 7.9% in Europe.
Canada can be proud to be one of the only oil producing countries that have strong environmental protections.
The challenges facing Canada's energy resources are clear and urgent. The sole client for our oil and gas resources is the United States. In the short term, that has led to a drop in prices, which has meant a loss of some $20 billion in revenue for the Canadian economy. In the medium term, our pipeline capacity is becoming insufficient, which risks wasting our resources.
In the long term, the United States will develop its own vast shale gas and oil reserves. That is why Canada must strategically diversify its markets, which means building the infrastructure we need to transport our resources to the ocean so they can be shipped out.
To meet this challenge, our government is seeking new markets and, in principle, is supporting the construction of pipelines to the southwest and east. We have also modernized our regulatory approval process, strengthened our environmental reviews and increased consultations with aboriginal groups.
In contrast, we have from the NDP incoherence and contradiction and support for foreign commentators who claim our resources are a curse and that it would be game over for the climate if we developed our oil sands which represent one one-thousand of global emissions. From the Liberal leader, these attacks on Canada are greeted by deafening silence.
The plan of the New Democrats is as clear as mud. While they claim they support the development of the oil sands, all indications are to the contrary. They oppose Northern gateway before a review is complete. The NDP leader is also opposed to Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline, saying that they cannot say “yes” to a project by Kinder Morgan. They opposed Keystone XL and flew to Washington to lobby against the approval of a project that would create hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs.
The NDP claims to be in favour of a west-to-east pipeline, but now it is opposing the reversal of line 9B. The NDP said that we cannot reverse the flow of Enbridge's pipeline 9.
When he was speaking in English, the leader of the NDP said a west to east pipeline was:
—the type of pro-business common sense solution that not only creates jobs—it strengthens Canada’s energy security and will leave more to future generations than just debt.
This blatant contradiction, policy incoherence and opposing messages in different regions of the country undermines the vestiges of his credibility, while it does nothing to help our government sell its message to foreign countries. Similarly, it would be helpful for the Liberal Party to show some courage and start to support policies that advance the national interests.
Our government is taking action on climate change, while promoting Canada abroad and creating jobs and economic growth at home.
BUSINESS OF SUPPLY May 21st, 2013
Mr. Chair, we have consultations with a broad range of Canadians, industry and environmental groups and we discuss the critical issues regarding responsible resource development in our country. That is the way this minister and this ministry inform themselves about the issues that are of concern to the Canadian public. There is an enormous opportunity to develop our resources and we will do so responsibly.