Indigenous Affairs  Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that these projects are, by their very nature, divisive. They are even divisive within political parties. Are you sowing dissent between the premiers of Alberta and British Columbia?

Indigenous Affairs  Mr. Speaker, I was not intending to do that. However, the hon. member knows that there will be different views within communities. May I ask the hon. member if he has consulted with the 43 communities up and down the line, including 33 communities in British Columbia who stand to benefit from this project?

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, there was unprecedented consultation with indigenous communities, layered on month after month, because of the failure of the Harper government to consult indigenous communities in the northern gateway case. Not only was there consultation, there was real accommodation.

The Environment  Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is asking the government to speculate hypothetically on what a court may or may not say. We could look retrospectively at what courts have said. Even very recently the Supreme Court has spoken about consultation and actually has sided with the proponent.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member wants to talk about a disaster, it was the Harper Conservative disaster. Not one kilometre of pipe built to new markets, an inability to consult with indigenous peoples that led to failure in one court case after another, and the worst economic performance since the Great Depression, that is a disaster.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, we have said for a number of months now that there are legislative options that the government will consider. The government has also said that courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada, have already said in no uncertain terms that when we move resources in this country from one province to the other, it is squarely within federal jurisdiction.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, we understand that there has been quite a bit of uncertainty associated with the project, and that uncertainty comes from direct and indirect threats by the Government of British Columbia, which would use every tool in its toolbox to stop the project. Understandably, that means that those who are investing hundreds of millions of dollars and more in the project want more certainty than there was.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, these major energy projects are controversial. They are controversial among provinces. They are even controversial within political parties. There might even be members within the New Democratic Party, maybe even from Alberta, who think it is good for Canada.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, we have been saying in this House now for many months that the pipeline is good for the country, not only for the many thousands of jobs that it will create but for getting a better price for our crude internationally and expanding our exports. We have, with $1.5 billion, established a world-class oceans protection plan and we understand that many Canadians, and more Canadians all the time, realize that the Trans Mountain expansion is good for—

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, the hon. member can tell them that the $1.5 billion investment through the oceans protection plan will yield a world-class response. We think Canadians from coast to coast to coast deeply care about their coastline and the integrity of them. They also understand that the responsible development of our natural resources will mean thousands of jobs for Canadians.

Indigenous Affairs  Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows there was unprecedented consultation that led up to the decision to approve the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline. As the member also knows, 43 indigenous communities, 33 of them in British Columbia, signed agreements with Trans Mountain expansion, because they understand the prosperity of the oil and gas sector must be shared with indigenous people.

Indigenous Affairs  Mr. Speaker, has the hon. member consulted with those 43 indigenous communities? Does she understand the prosperity that will come from major energy projects? Has she consulted with the chiefs, who have publicly said for all Canadians to hear that they have been very much a part of this process, very much a part of this decision, and very much a part of shared prosperity that is in the interest of all Canadians, including indigenous communities in Alberta, British Columbia, and all across the country?

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the contracts have already been awarded. This is very important for Canadian industry, but it is particularly important, I might say, for his home province of Saskatchewan and the city of Regina. We are very pleased that the economic development benefits for this project will extend right across the country, and notably in Regina and in Saskatchewan.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, we say, as often as the hon. member rises in this House, that this Trans Mountain expansion project is going to create thousands of jobs. It is going to open up our resources to export markets. No one feels comfortable that 99% of our exports of oil and gas go to one country, the United States, nor do they feel comfortable that we are losing about $15 billion a year in revenue.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, the gong show is that the member stands up and after 10 years of failure, there is not one kilometre of pipe to tidewater, to export markets, while the environmental record is poor and the economic record is the worst for Canada since the Great Depression. That is some gong show.