House of Commons photo

Track John

Your Say

Elsewhere

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word is farmers.

Conservative MP for Foothills (Alberta)

Won his last election, in 2025, with 76% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Ethics February 1st, 2016

Mr. Speaker, they may have paid back the one, but did they pay back the other two? The Liberals did not just hold one campaign event; they held at least three.

On August 27, the Prime Minister held an event with the International Union of Operating Engineers in Oakville. On October 8, he held an event with the Carpenters' District Council in Vaughan.

In return for bringing forward a bill that would cut accountability and transparency in unions, could the jobs minister just say that this is repayment for these illegal campaign contributions?

Ethics February 1st, 2016

Mr. Speaker, it was immediately addressed because they got caught.

The government House leader said last week, when these illegal donations from big unions first came to light, that the Liberals followed the letter of the law. That is simply not the case.

We have a document from the union itself that states the Prime Minister's own campaign team asked specifically for union members to be props in this Liberal campaign event.

Could the jobs minister finally admit that her bill to gut transparency and accountability in a union bill is simply repayment for these illegal campaign contributions?

Business of Supply January 28th, 2016

Madam Speaker, I certainly did not say that our Conservative government was a failure when it came to the natural resource sector. If anything, we were a success story. We built four pipelines during our 10 years in government—four not zero. Yesterday the Liberal government pretty much stood up to the resource sector and said that it would be building zero pipelines during its term.

Business of Supply January 28th, 2016

Madam Speaker, the misnomer about the energy east project is that it is all about Alberta and Quebec. The fact is that this is a project that will impact Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic provinces. This is a project that will bring $55 billion over its 20-year lifespan to the Canadian economy.

This is not just about big business, but will impact rural communities across the western, eastern, and Atlantic Canadian provinces. This is going to mean jobs in small towns. This is going to mean jobs in construction, hotels, and restaurants. The ripple effect of these kinds of projects impact almost every Canadian in these provinces.

Ethics January 28th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, what is very clear is why the Liberals' priority is to reward union leadership. Just today, we found out that the unions illegally donated to the Liberals' campaign. It is no wonder that the Liberals want to hide this information from Canadians by repealing legislation that imposes transparency and accountability on union members.

Why do Liberals have so much time to defend union leadership but no time to come up with a plan to get Canadians, to get Albertans, back to work?

Ethics January 28th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the minister is confused about where her priorities should be. Why? It has come to light today that the Liberals received illegal union donations during the election.

This morning, the minister was repaying her union friends. She announced the Liberals have made it their priority to remove accountability and transparency from government.

The Liberal government had no intention to keep its commitment for accountability and transparency. Why is it important to reward union leaders rather than to come up with a plan to get Canadians back to work?

Business of Supply January 28th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, nowhere in my speech did I say that we were going to bypass consultation or the regulatory regime. I said that we had one of the best regulatory regimes in the entire world. In fact, we are ranked in the top 10 oil-producing countries, according to the World Energy Council and the recent report from the Canadian Association for Petroleum Producers. Nowhere in my speech did I say we wanted the government to bypass these regimes.

The Conservatives are saying that there is a system in place. Why would the government add additional regulatory regimes that are already done by the provinces, including Alberta, world-renowned regulatory regimes? That is what we are saying. We should stick with the system that is already there, and stand up and show some support for this industry.

Business of Supply January 28th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Regina—Qu'Appelle for sharing his time with me.

I have to say, it was a long day yesterday as I watched the announcement from the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Natural Resources. I was eager to see some glimmer of hope that the Liberal government now understood the significance of the energy industry to Canada's economy and the crisis that is going on in our energy industry right now, especially in Alberta. I must admit, when they announced the first of their five principles, I was somewhat optimistic. The first principle was that the projects now in the queue would not have to go back to square one. I thought this was a good start. Obviously, my optimism did not last very long. In fact, with each additional layer of bureaucracy, delay tactics, and vague guidelines, I came to realize, as many people in the oil sector did as well, that the announcement meant that we would likely never get another pipeline built in Canada.

I would like to take a moment today to explain to Canadians exactly what happened in that announcement yesterday. The Liberal government has told Canadian investors, in fact all Canadians, that it would rather support foreign oil producers over Canadian businesses and Alberta employers. It believes the environmental record of Nigeria, Russia, and Saudi Arabia is a better option than Canada's world renown regulatory regime. It would rather listen to vocal foreign-funded lobby groups than Canadian innovators and economists. It would rather support economies in Venezuela, Iran, and Sudan over Canadian jobs and Canadian families.

Completing these crucial pieces of infrastructure would transport Canadian oil, extracted under world-class Canadian standards. It would create Canadian jobs, establish a secure source of market for a Canadian product, and raise revenue to fund Canadian social programs and Canadian infrastructure projects. Instead, the option the Liberal government has selected is supporting having eastern Canada import 630,000 barrels of foreign oil a day from places like Nigeria, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia. These are places that are not exactly world renown for their environmental stewardship or human rights records. This, in essence, is exactly what happened yesterday.

This is not rhetoric. This is what I am hearing from Albertans every single day, not just from people in the energy industry but people across the province. These are Albertans who today feel abandoned by the Liberal government.

This decision is absolutely devastating to the Canadian economy and we will feel it especially deeply in my riding of Foothills, where everyone directly or indirectly relies on a strong energy sector for their livelihood. Whether they are in the energy industry, or Clean Harbors in High River, or a Canadian oil sands construction company in Okotoks, or they own a hotel in Claresholm, are a welder in Pincher Creek, or they own a shop in the Crowsnest Pass, this news, this lack of leadership and a framework, is going to be absolutely devastating to southern Alberta.

After the announcement of the delay of energy east and the Trans Mountain pipeline extension yesterday, I spent last night speaking to many stakeholders across Alberta. The feedback was unanimous. The message the announcement sent to Canada's resource sector is that we are closed for business. Instead, the government wants to add bureaucracy, red tape, and political influence to try to reach consensus. Adding more layers of regulations, infringing on provincial jurisdictions, and delaying decisions will not reach consensus. What we need from the Liberal government is leadership to do what is right for Canada and to stand up for our strong record as a resource-rich country.

Provinces such as Alberta, through the Alberta Energy Regulator and Alberta Environment, already have strong regulatory regimes to measure GHG emissions upstream. In fact, Alberta announced an even more stringent climate change framework in November. Now the Liberal government wants to add additional bureaucracy and red tape to that already difficult system.

It was under the Conservative government's leadership that we passed the Pipeline Safety Act, which ensured a world-class pipeline safety regime. We also strengthened the National Energy Board funding to increase annual inspections of oil and gas pipelines by 50% and double the number of comprehensive audits to improve pipeline safety across Canada, which is now among the best in the world, with a 99.99% safety record. That is something the rest of the world will envy.

Canada's environmental regulatory regime is among the best in the world; especially, when we compare it with some of the countries that are going to be exporting their oil into eastern Canada. For example, in 2013, the World Energy Council acknowledged Canada's higher pace of environmental improvement and ranked it higher as a builder of sustainable energy systems compared with other fossil fuel countries, including Norway, Australia, and the United States. Based upon energy security, energy equity, and environmental sustainability, the World Energy Council ranked Canada number nine in the entire world.

The low-carbon fuel standard stated there are 13 oil fields in California alone, as well as crude oil blends in six other countries, that generate higher upstream green gas emissions than the Canadian bitumen production.

Where is the dirtiest oil in North America? It certainly is not in Canada. In fact, it is just outside Los Angeles, where the oil field generates twice the level of upstream GHGs as the Canadian oil sands. The title of “world's dirtiest oil” goes to the Brass crude from Nigeria, where the upstream GHG emissions are more than four times higher than the Canadian oil sands. Yet, we do not seem to have a problem with importing that into eastern Canada.

A 2014 study by WorleyParsons compared Alberta's environmental standards with nine other comparable jurisdictions around the world. Canada ranked atop all 10 when it came to transparency, compliance, and stringency of our environmental record.

The Liberal government is further putting Canada at a competitive disadvantage compared with other oil-producing countries, including the United States, which is not talking about a federal carbon tax, is not stopping building pipelines, and in fact has doubled its production to nine million barrels a day over the last five years.

Canadians understand energy is a critical part of our economy. It provides jobs and opportunities from coast to coast to coast. It is unfortunate to see this Liberal government trivializing the importance of our natural resource sector, even though it makes up 20% of our nominal GDP, at $160 billion a year.

The proposed energy east pipeline has two distinct elements: the conversion of 3,000 kilometres of existing natural gas pipeline that will be converted to transport oil; and additional construction of 1,500 kilometres of new pipeline in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick. This 4,600-kilometre pipeline would carry approximately 1.1 million barrels per day of crude oil from Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries in Quebec and New Brunswick.

Energy east would basically generate thousands of jobs across the country and address what I hear on a regular basis: the want and the need in Canada for value-added refined bitumen right here at home. This is a huge win-win for Canada.

In fact, energy east would develop more than 14,000 jobs annually during the nine-year construction stage, and 1,300 of those full-time jobs would be in Alberta.

Unfortunately, the Liberal government is now causing further uncertainty in an industry already hit hard by low oil prices, as well as an Albertan carbon tax and a new royalty regime which may be announced tomorrow.

The downturn in the energy sector impacts all Canadians, but is hitting Albertans hardest of all, and it is only getting worse. While the Liberal government feels its lack of leadership in the resource sector is refreshing, Alberta's oil and gas sector is hurting. More than $50 billion in investment has already left Alberta and the wealth transfer from Canada to the United States is about $30 billion a year.

Now, this week, Statistics Canada has announced the initial job losses report for Alberta was incorrect. Instead of 14,000 job losses, it is now saying 19,000 Albertans have lost their jobs last year, the worst since the Liberals introduced the national energy program in the 1980s. Alberta's unemployment rate, once the envy of Canada, is expected to exceed 8% by the end of 2016.

One thing really caught my attention in the announcement yesterday. They made this announcement for the future of our children.

I remember growing up in Saskatchewan under an NDP government, and my dad saying, “Go to Alberta, take advantage of the Alberta advantage, and don't come back. There's nothing for you here.”

I am very fearful that under this Liberal government's policy, I am going to have to tell the same thing to my kids, “You're going to have to leave Alberta because there are not jobs here for you.”

The Economy January 27th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the Liberals may believe, Alberta is facing an economic crisis. It is losing jobs at a rate we have not seen before or since, ironically, the Liberals introduced the national energy program in the 1980s.

When asked about these job losses, the member for Calgary Centre sounded like a Liberal from the 1980s. He said that the people he had spoken with felt “refreshed” with the Prime Minister's failed approach. Refreshed is certainly not the feedback I am hearing from Albertans. They are not refreshed to be losing their jobs. They are not refreshed to be losing their homes.

Why is the only job that the minister seems to care about is his own?

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply January 25th, 2016

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member asked that question. I had the opportunity to meet with several business leaders from the oil and gas sector last week in Calgary. It was interesting. We talked about the Prime Minister's pledge to give $1 billion to Alberta to help in this time of need, which is really just a drop in the bucket.

They met with the finance minister as well, and their response to the finance minister was that they do not need that $1 billion. They said to get them energy east and get behind them and support them, and they will raise those dollars on their own. They said they do not need a government handout; they just need its support. That was a very clear message, and it is something we should get behind.