Kim Rudd

[Employment, March 11th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, as we have said many times in this House, we feel for the families and the communities in our energy-producing provinces who are going through this downturn in commodity prices. We are working to grow the economy.

The National Energy Board, with its five new principles, is reviewing major projects. As we modernize the NEB, we will have an opportunity to see projects go through a robust process that Canadians can have confidence in.

[The Environment, March 10th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that science will be considered, and I can also assure the member that the five principles will be applied to any project in process.

Our government understands the importance of sustainably developing Canada's natural resources and moving them safely to market, but we also understand that it cannot happen without Canadians having confidence in the way projects are reviewed.

The best way to rebuild that confidence is by meaningfully consulting with indigenous communities, restoring the importance of science, respecting indigenous traditional knowledge, listening to Canadians, and assessing direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions linked to the project under review, all things that our government is doing.

Canadians want us to work together—as governments, as communities, as individuals—because that is how Canadians have always worked best.

[The Environment, March 10th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to doing things differently, to recognizing both the importance of economic growth and the imperative of environmental responsibility.

Canadians understand the importance of natural resources to our economy. They know that this industry creates jobs and spurs investment, but they lack faith in the way we assess those projects. They have come to believe that the scales have been tipped too far in one direction.

Our government shared those concerns. That is why we committed to modernizing the National Energy Board to ensure that its composition reflects regional views and has sufficient expertise in fields such as environmental science, community development, and indigenous traditional knowledge. We are in the process of determining how these changes can best be made.

To further restore the confidence of Canadians, we have introduced an interim process for reviewing major resource projects. That approach is based on five clear principles. First, no project proponent will have to return to the starting line. Second, decisions will be based on science and evidence, including traditional indigenous knowledge. Third, the views of the public and affected communities will be sought and considered. Fourth, indigenous peoples will be consulted and, where appropriate, their rights and interests accommodated. Fifth, direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions will be assessed.

To achieve all of this, our government intends to seek an additional four months to render a final decision on the proposed Trans Mountain expansion project, and with respect to the energy east project, we intend to seek six more months to allow the NEB to complete its work and three more months for our government to make its final decision.

We believe these are reasonable timelines and consistent with the prudent approach we have promised Canadians. With all of these efforts, our goal is straightforward: restoring public confidence in how major energy projects are reviewed.

That confidence is critical, because little can be achieved without it. As the Prime Minister has said, governments grant permits, but only communities can grant permission. If we are going to build the infrastructure to move our resources to market, Canadians need to have confidence in the environmental review process and know that it is fair and open and guided by science.

The process we have set out will take us down a different path—the right path, the path of properly weighing environmental concerns, meaningfully engaging indigenous communities, and listening to the input of Canadians. Our government will engage Canadians in a process whereby trust is rebuilt and certainty is restored and progress is made.

[Citizenship Act, March 10th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, could the member opposite expand on why he believes it is so important for us as Canadians to say to the world that citizenship is important to us, that we respect the rights that go with that citizenship, and how much it means to those people we invite into our country to become Canadian citizens? Immigrants enhance our country. They have the capability to work and create opportunities in our country.

[Natural Resources, March 7th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the previous government we believe in meeting with all voices around the energy sector.

In 2012, the previous government stated that environmental groups threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda. That is not exactly helpful language to build bridges and find common ground.

[Natural Resources, February 26th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

We have said many times in this House that we feel for the families of the resource-producing provinces in this country, with the hardships they are going through. There are things we do not control, on which other countries make decisions, and the global commodity prices are affecting all of us.

We will continue, as we have said, to allow the National Energy Board to complete its very robust process. As that process continues, we will be happy to inform my colleague as it progresses.

[The Economy, February 24th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, we know the global decline in oil prices is producing hardship for Alberta and other energy producing provinces.

The global downturn in commodity prices has affected many sectors in the Canadian economy and we are closely monitoring the situation. However, with our large and diverse natural resource endowment, Canada remains favourably positioned to respond to the projected long-term growth in global demand for natural resources.

[The Economy, February 23rd, 2016]

Madam Speaker, the livelihoods of thousands of families are dependent on the energy sector. I know every member of the House wants an end to the suffering in communities across the country that have been hit hard by low oil prices.

With the measures our government has announced, I am optimistic that we can rebuild the energy sector on a more sustainable footing, that we can restore the public confidence in the environmental reviews, while providing greater certainty for industry, and that together we can emerge from these challenging times to a future that is better and brighter than we could imagine.

I will disagree with my hon. colleague. Some oil producers and shippers have come to my office to talk me. They are optimistic and they are some of the best innovators in our country.

[The Economy, February 23rd, 2016]

Madam Speaker, our government understands that these are difficult days for the people of Alberta. For thousands of our fellow citizens, the precipitous drop in the price of oil has made these very trying times. Businesses are struggling, jobs are lost, and families are hurting. We have seen this boom and bust cycle before, but it does not make it any easier for those who are struggling. While there is no magic wand, there are things we can do both now and in the long term to weather this storm.

In terms of short-term actions, we are working with the province of Alberta. A few weeks ago, the Prime Minister moved quickly to fast-track infrastructure funding of $700 million. This will ease the immediate hardships and job losses in the energy sector.

In addition, when a region's unemployment rate rises, the entrance requirement for employment insurance is reduced and the duration of benefits increases. In fact, the duration of these benefits has increased in all four economic regions in Alberta.

The number of weeks available in hard-hit regions in Alberta has increased by 5 to the maximum entitlement nationally of 45 weeks. We have also put in place an interim approach for major resource projects already under regulatory review. We have committed to modernizing the National Energy Board.

We know that the sooner we restore public confidence in the regulatory process, the sooner we will see broad-based support for large-scale, sustainable energy products that will get our resources to market. Indeed, our government believes there is every reason for Canadians to be optimistic about the long-term future of our energy sector.

Also, there is every reason to believe we can achieve a brighter future based on a clean environment and a strong economy going hand in hand: a future built on innovation and adapting to changing times; a future utilizing greener ways to extract and develop our fossil fuels; a future with more sustainable ways to get our energy to markets at home and abroad; a future that makes greater use of renewable sources of energy; a future where energy efficiency plays a more prominent role; a future where we invest in clean technologies and green infrastructure; and, in short, a future where we engage Canadians on how to generate the energy we need while preserving the planet we cherish.

Our government is committed to doing both. Through the federation, we can engage in nation building by creating a visionary energy strategy that enables Canada to lead in the fight against climate change and truly position us as a global leader in a low-carbon economy.

[Natural Resources, February 22nd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend has expressed her opposition to our government's plan. However, what she has not explained is which elements of the plan she disagrees with. Is she saying that projects currently in process should start over again under new rules? Is she suggesting that decisions about pipeline projects should not be based on science, or that we should ignore indigenous knowledge? Does she believe that the views of the public and affected communities should not be sought and considered? Is my colleague across the aisle arguing that the rights of indigenous peoples should not be accommodated? Is she seriously suggesting that upstream greenhouse gas emissions should not be assessed when evaluating a pipeline project?

Perhaps the hon. member will want to reconsider her position and support the plan this government has proposed. I would very much welcome her support.