Oil Sand: The Last Six Months
Of Federal Activity

About

This Report

This is a computer-generated report that shows all of the federal activity with respect to the keyword "Oil Sand" over the last six months. This is a demonstration of the power of our government relations automation software.

Hansard

House: 62 Speeches
Senate: 12 Speeches

House Senate

Bills

Active: 0

Regulations

Filed: 0
Proposed: 0

The House

Mr. Pierre-Luc Dusseault (Sherbrooke, NDP)

June 14th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...utraged by the government's decision to invest $4.5 billion of our money in a pipeline transporting oil sands to British Columbia, in spite of obvious opposition in several regions of British Columbia...”

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...Does my hon. colleague believe we can expand production of greenhouse-emitting facilities like more oil sands production, new pipelines, and new oil wells, and still meet the Paris target?”

Ms. Linda Duncan

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...in cleaner technologies. However, it is divesting. Major corporations that formally invested in the oil sands are shifting to renewables, shifting to investing in other jurisdictions, because the fede...”

Hon. Amarjeet Sohi

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...ns being taken by the Alberta NDP on climate change. It has put a cap on overall emissions from the oil sands. It is phasing out coal. It has put a very effective price on pollution. I hope the federa...”

Mr. Alistair MacGregor (Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, NDP)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...is odd for a pipeline that is projected to add at least 13 to 15 megatonnes per year from increased oil sands production. If we look at the downstream emissions from the pipeline, if we were to expand it, it would be an estimated 71.1 megatonnes per year.

If we look at where we are trying to get in terms of keeping global temperatures stable, we can do some analytical modelling on how much carbon dioxide we can emit into the atmosphere to meet that and give every country in the world a carbon budget.

In a day and age when it is widely acknowledged that climate change is real and is happening and that we are the source of it, expanding a pipeline and expanding oil sands production flies in the face of our commitments. We cannot, in this case, walk and chew gum at the same time. It does not work. However, I acknowledge that we are going to continue using oil today, tomorrow, and for the foreseeable future, but what I would like to see is a transition plan so we can try to plateau and start minimizing our use.

The oil sands workers of Alberta have made a very valuable contribution to the Canadian economy, and the...”

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...m of great economic dependency of our country on oil and gas. Did he know that at the height of the oil sands production, it represented 2% of GDP, therefore, 2% of our schools, hospitals, and social ...”

Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, NDP)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...h without collective action.

Second, I have never suggested than an immediate shutdown of the oil sands is the solution, but I have called for a moratorium on the expansion of the oil sands, because we have to stop rushing headlong in the wrong direction. (1340)

Third, th...”

Mrs. Deborah Schulte (King—Vaughan, Lib.)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“... coal. This included the phase-out of the accelerated capital cost allowance for tangible assets in oil sands projects. That was in budget 2007, and its implementation was completed in 2015.

It included lowering the deduction rates for intangible capital expenses in oil sands projects to align with the rates for conventional oil and gas. That was in budget 2011, an...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...crats supported Rachel Notley's environmental plan but forgot what was in the plan itself: a cap on oil sands emissions, a price on pollution, and a pipeline to transport resources to markets other th...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...er the case and progressive leaders like Rachel Notley understand that. Thus, in addition to capped oil sands emissions and a price on pollution, her plan includes a pipeline to markets other than the...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

June 12th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ected, but it seems they forgot what that plan contained. Let me remind them. It contained a cap on oil sands emissions. It contained a price on pollution. It also contained a pipeline to get resource...”

Mr. Randy Hoback

June 11th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...r. We needed Kinder Morgan to deliver the oil we were developing and for which we had a market. The oil sands and other oil fields needed that pipeline to get the oil to market. If we cannot get it to...”

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, QD)

June 8th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“... Paris at COP21, the government is now making radical moves to extract even more dirty oil from the oil sands, which in no way helps address environmental issues.

Is that what we are seeing with...”

Ms. Kim Rudd (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)

June 8th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ct the environment, but it seems they forgot what that plan contained. Let me remind them: a cap on oil sands emissions, a price on pollution, a pipeline to get resources to markets other than the Uni...”

Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)

June 7th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...y $30 billion. Now Kinder Morgan is fleeing Canada in the face of the Liberal plan to phase out our oil sands.

Canadian energy investors are now creating a record number of new jobs outside of C...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

June 6th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...e playing politics with this issue. I can tell them that I was just in Alberta yesterday talking to oil sands workers, talking to pipeline workers, who are deeply grateful that we are able to move for...”

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

June 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...he value chain, in upstream exploration and production, and in service supply and technology in the oil sands, heavy oil, natural gas, and on pipelines. In Lakeland, a Cree community of about 1,200 people, the Frog Lake First Nation, wanted to reduce poverty in its community. It started its own oil and gas exploration company. Today, Frog Lake Energy Resources Corp. extracts over 3,000 barrels of oil per day, which has brought millions of dollars into its community. It has over $30 million in cash flow. The chairman of its board, Joe Dion said:

Together, we have to make reconciliation a priority, given the economic risks and gridlock that continues to impede the resource sector nationally, and Alberta's energy sector in particular. I believe that reconciliation can be realized right here in Alberta's energy sector. It is time for bold action. Alberta is not at the cross-roads, it’s in the ditch.

The story of Frog Lake is the story of Albertans and people across Canada. It is about aspirations, ambition, entrepreneurialism, and taking ownership of opportunities.

Sometimes I think my colleagues in the NDP would have us believe that communities like Frog Lake do not exist, that all indigenous peoples in communities are opposed to oil and gas. That is just not the reality. The Fort McKay and Mikisew Cree bands have invested $545 million to buy nearly half the shares in one of Suncor's storage facilities. There are 35 first nations working together, right now and for the past five years, to build an indigenous-owned pipeline from Alberta to northern British Columbia, an initiative that would have the support of every single indigenous community and two provinces along the road if it can go ahead.

The Fort McKay band, near the Athabaska oil sands, has an unemployment rate of 0%, and financial holdings in excess of $2 billion. Its band members have an average annual income of $120,000. (1300)

Goodfish Lake Business Corporation in Lakeland employs 150 Albertans through three dry cleaning and laundry services, which contract with oil and gas, one of which is located in White Fish first nation. A sewing and garment company in Fort McMurray, called Protective Clothing Supplies Ltd., produces petrochemical workwear for businesses in the oil sands.

All of these communities provide jobs for their members and employ people outside o...”

Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)

June 1st
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“... pollution, and it is phasing out coal. It has also put the first-ever hard cap on emissions in the oil sands. That is how this fits in our climate plan. Of course, we are doing more. We are making in...”

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie (Joliette, GPQ)

June 1st
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...aid that to help the environment, the Liberals plan to build more pipelines and further develop the oil sands, generating revenue that they will use to set environmental standards and fight climate ch...”

Mrs. Rosemarie Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC)

May 31st
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...tainly are not comforted by the Prime Minister's repeated confession that he wants to phase out the oil sands.

The loss of business investment in Canada is a troubling trend, and the Liberals ha...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

May 30th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...mate change was a three-pronged approach, which included limiting greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands, putting a price on carbon in Alberta, and building a pipeline to get Alberta's resources ...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

May 30th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“... years ago, yet they forgot that part of that plan involved three elements: one, an absolute cap on oil sands emissions; two, a price on carbon that would apply to the Alberta economy; and three, gett...”

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Prime Minister, Lib.)

May 30th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ng investments in Alberta and good jobs for Albertans, and indeed all the Canadians who work in the oil sands industry, for years to come. It is no wonder the Conservatives are flailing about.

W...”

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

May 30th
Hansard Link

Routine Proceedings

“...er the Liberals.

Last year, the Prime Minister told the world that he wanted to phase out the oil sands. In case Canadians thought that this was a slip of the tongue, unfortunately he reinforced it again just a couple of weeks ago in Paris, when he said he regretted that Canada cannot get off oil tomorrow. Therefore, at the outset, is it any wonder that oil and gas proponents and investors around the world might be wondering whether or not the Prime Minister and the Liberals actually welcome oil and gas development in Canada? The Liberals campaigned in co-operation with anti-energy activists, denigrating Canada's world-leading track record as the most responsible oil producer in the world, and denigrating our track record for the highest standards, second to none, for science-, evidence-, and expert-based decision-making, and for consultation with impacted communities and first nations, including the incorporation of traditional knowledge.

The Liberals froze the regulatory system in February 2016, causing massive uncertainty for energy development in Canada. They announced interim measures, most of which had been hallmarks of the Canadian regulatory system for decades. However, one was not, and that was the consideration of upstream emissions for pipeline approvals. Not only was that an overreach into provincial jurisdiction, because that is where upstream emissions are regulated, but it was later magnified by the Liberals instructing that downstream emissions coming from tailpipes should also be attached to a pipeline for consideration of its approval. Ultimately, that is what caused the abandonment of the potential nation-building opportunity in energy east. However, before that, the Liberals had vetoed the northern gateway pipeline, previously approved by the Conservatives, which was the only new stand-alone opportunity to reach tidewater to get Canada's energy into the Asia-Pacific, which will continue to demand oil and gas for years to come. Then, the regulatory delays caused the abandonment of two LNG projects, holding Canada back by missing Asian contracts.

On top of all that, the Liberals decided, at the very worst time for energy workers, to remove the tax credit for new oil and gas drilling and exploration wells, and then imposed a carbon tax on all provinces, increasing costs right across the board. They imposed an offshore drilling ban, which the Premier of the Northwest Territories said destroyed hope for the future of people in his communities. The ban was imposed without adequate consultation, and it does not apply to any other Canadian coast. It stops exports, and it clearly targets the oil sands and the pipelines, because it does not address foreign tankers or American tankers in the ...”

Mr. Robert Sopuck (Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, CPC)

May 29th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...rom day one. I saw it in person on the ground when I was doing environmental monitoring work in the oil sands. The care taken by energy companies and contractors with environmental protection was some...”

Mr. Alupa Clarke (Beauport—Limoilou, CPC)

May 22nd
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...ternational environmental groups, who like to see the Prime Minister contemplating the death of the oil sands, will spend millions of dollars to promote the end of natural and energy resources in Cana...”

Hon. Erin O'Toole (Durham, CPC)

May 8th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“... cost allowance acceleration for any investment that goes to a resource company or a company in the oil sands, one of our largest single contributors to the gross domestic product of Canada. Let us in...”

Mr. Nick Whalen (St. John's East, Lib.)

May 8th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...ing things like a greening government solution and efforts to reduce methane gas emissions from the oil sands. We are working with the provinces to improve infrastructure that will drive the green eco...”

Mr. Blaine Calkins (Red Deer—Lacombe, CPC)

May 8th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...of either Montreal or Halifax. When I would get on that airplane in Ottawa, it would be filled with oil sands workers coming from either Atlantic Canada, the Maritimes, or Quebec. These folks were all wearing their Firebag and Kearl project jackets, they had their workboots on, and they were ready to go all the way to Alberta. These jobs were so well-paying it was cost-effective enough for them to book a flight, go work in the oil sands for several weeks at a time, and then go back to their families. That paycheque would improve the quality of life of these Canadians. People from all over the world would come to Alberta.

Over 4,000 businesses in Canada alone have a direct line to the oil sands because they provide goods, services, or products to the oil sands development. These are millions and millions of dollars of revenue. (1355)

The cos...”

Mr. Kevin Waugh

May 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...0 million a day, and 110,000 jobs have been eliminated in my province and in Alberta because of the oil sands. It is because of the Liberals' attack on oil in Saskatchewan and Alberta. This is just an...”

Mrs. Rosemarie Falk (Battlefords—Lloydminster, CPC)

May 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“... have before us. What we have is another step forward in the Prime Minister's plan to phase out the oil sands. The United States is Canada's largest energy trading partner, which is an important relat...”

Mr. Pierre Nantel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, NDP)

May 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...pinion, what kind of debate could we have in order to obtain information on oil production from the oil sands side?”

Mr. Alupa Clarke (Beauport—Limoilou, CPC)

May 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...regardless.

The Prime Minister and member for Papineau has said Canada needs to phase out the oil sands. Not only did he say that during the campaign, but he said it again in Paris, before the F...”

Mr. Pierre Nantel (Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, NDP)

May 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...e as the cleanest in the world. Honestly, can we talk about the serious problem with developing the oil sands or the tar sands? Let us call them oil sands for some positivity.

What do you think of the new technologies that could make this ...”

Mr. Alupa Clarke

May 4th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...g us that we have the third largest oil reserve in the world? The carbon capture technology for the oil sands is getting better by the day.

We need to improve our environmental practices, I thin...”

Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)

May 1st
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...hydro bills, they earn revenue from selling electricity.

Alberta is also home to the Canada's Oil Sands Innovation Alliance, which, through collaboration and the sharing of technologies among co...”

Hon. Catherine McKenna

May 1st
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...e that imposed a carbon tax and is eliminating carbon in that province. He also raised the price on oil sands emissions. These people are working very hard.

We must ensure that we are working fo...”

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

April 30th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...tlines or marine ecology. It is actually only a ban on Canadian oil development and exports, on the oil sands, and on pipelines. It is an attack on the hundreds of thousands of energy workers across t...”

Hon. Jim Carr (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)

April 30th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...rkers at Fort McMurray. They actually came from every nook and cranny of the country working in the oil sands. They understand better than everybody else how important the energy sector is for familie...”

Mr. Ron Liepert (Calgary Signal Hill, CPC)

April 30th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...k about what we are listening to, we are listening to the Prime Minister talk about phasing out the oil sands, and we are watching as the Liberals are funding summer student jobs to protest against pi...”

Mr. Ron Liepert (Calgary Signal Hill, CPC)

April 27th
Hansard Link

Statements by Members

“...t week, they saw reports of the Prime Minister speaking in Paris and talking about phasing out the oil sands. That does not give them much hope. Of course that was not the first time he said that.

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

April 19th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...es are concerned that the energy sector is at risk.

The Prime Minister wants to phase out the oil sands. He killed energy east, northern gateway, and the Pacific NorthWest LNG pipeline. When is ...”

Mr. Colin Carrie (Oshawa, CPC)

April 19th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...p>Mr. Speaker, in Ontario, over 1,100 companies and 42,000 jobs depend on the $4.6 billion spent by oil sand producers. Liberal policies have failed energy east, failed northern gateway, and are poise...”

Mr. Colin Carrie (Oshawa, CPC)

April 19th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...is good for Canada, but the question is when is the Prime Minister going to realize that.

The oil sands benefit not only Alberta but all provinces. My province of Ontario receives approximately ...”

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

April 18th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ker, things are actually only going to get worse. The Prime Minister said Canada must phase out the oil sands. He killed northern gateway, energy east, and the Pacific NorthWest LNG project, and he im...”

Hon. Lisa Raitt (Milton, CPC)

April 17th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ct in serious danger. Was the Prime Minister really serious when he said he wanted to phase out the oil sands from the Canadian economy?”

Mr. Matt Jeneroux (Edmonton Riverbend, CPC)

April 17th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said he wants to phase out the oil sands. Well, he is doing it.

By introducing Bill C-69 and the carbon tax, the Prime Minist...”

Mr. Michael Cooper (St. Albert—Edmonton, CPC)

March 2nd
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...ation to Gerald Butts' friends and the Minister of Environment 's friends, and for the radical anti-oil sands movement to take over the process, to control the process with their ideological and political agenda to shut down Alberta's oil sands, a movement that is funded by U.S. money, filled with activists who are in many cases noth...”

Mr. Joël Godin (Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, CPC)

March 2nd
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...l likely surprise the members opposite is that we even abolished, yes abolished, tax breaks for the oil sands, so the Liberals really need to stop talking about Alberta's dirty oil.

All of these measures resulted in a good environment report card for Canada and confirmed the reduction in greenhouse gases under the previous government. Do members know that, in 2014, the last full year our government was in power, we reduced greenhouse gas emissions? Canada's share of global emissions decreased by more than 15%.

We were unable to do more after 2014 because we were no longer in office. The Liberals took power. What did they do? Under the Conservatives, our share of global emissions fell from 1.9% to 1.6%. Those results were not obtained under the Liberals. We, the Conservatives, reduced greenhouse gas emissions. (1050)

We must have done something right because the Liberal government adopted our greenhouse gas emissions targets. They say that we do not consult scientists, but they probably consulted the same scientists that we did. They took the findings of our scientists and the findings of theirs to come up with the same target. As a Conservative MP, I established a circular economy committee in my riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier. Yes, we Conservatives are working to protect our planet in various ways in our own ridings.

When the Liberal government talks about western Canada's dirty oil, I would like to remind the group of members opposite that it was prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau who created the oil sands. Yes, members heard me right. It was Pierre Elliott Trudeau. It was probably to pay for Ca...”

Mrs. Shannon Stubbs (Lakeland, CPC)

February 27th
Hansard Link

Point of Order

“...ment.

The Liberals have imposed new hurdles, delays, rule changes, called for phasing out the oil sands, added costs and roadblocks to the oil and gas sector, which is already the most heavily-r...”

Hon. Jim Carr (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)

February 27th
Hansard Link

Point of Order

“...hile putting a hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions, including Alberta's 100-megatonne limit on the oil sands. We do it by putting a price on carbon, implementing a $1.5 billion oceans protection plan...”

Ms. Linda Duncan (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

February 27th
Hansard Link

Points of Order

“...here is no guarantee of protection for indigenous peoples in the bill. I need only give the case of oil sands activities in the north and dam approvals. There is absolutely no consideration in the bil...”

Ms. Linda Duncan (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

February 27th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...er the past two years? Will it include projects excluded by the Conservatives, for example, in situ oil sands operations? Will it include dangerous rail traffic as proposed under my bill, Bill C-304?

While the bill does list some laws that may trigger effects under federal jurisdiction, the responsible ministers still get to decide if an approval or review is even needed. The minister is required only to consider if a project may impact federal lands, have transboundary or transborder impacts, or impact indigenous peoples, health, social or economic matters, not yet established by cabinet.

It should be noted that the minister can allow for the substitution of a provincial assessment regardless if federal powers or duties may be triggered. The majority of the bill extends broad and extensive discretionary powers to the minister of the environment, the new agency, and the cabinet to call for an assessment or not. The minister is not required to call an assessment, even if in her opinion the proposed activity warrants designation due to its adverse effects or due to public concerns. The power currently in place has rarely ever been utilized. It should be mandatory.

My bill, Bill C-304, to the contrary, imposes a mandatory duty on the minister to call for an assessment where, in her opinion, a project may pose significant risks to environment or health or there are public concerns.

There are many discretionary powers to list, but they include the following examples: discretion to decide if an impact assessment is not required even for a designated project; the discretion to decide the scope of factors to be considered; an agency discretion to delegate any part of the impact assessment to other jurisdictions; ministerial discretion to substitute equivalent provincial processes; ministerial discretion to terminate a review panel or remove conditions in an environmental impact assessment decision to revoke or amend the impact decision statement. The minister can even delegate his or her powers, duties, and functions to the agency.

The power to assess regional impacts and strategic assessments also requires greater clarity. The bill provides absolutely no clear triggers for either of those to occur, or any right to trigger them.

The much-touted planning stage sounds remarkably similar to the initial assessment process. There is concern that the new approach is solely reliant on information provided by a project proponent.

Broad concerns have been voiced that the power to approve or reject a project remains vested in the minister or the cabinet, and that while panels can identify adverse effects, they cannot reference any degree of significance. The potential remains for interjection of political considerations to override any of the determination in the review, including sound science. The minister need only determine that the effects are in the public interest.

With regard to public participation, while the government claims that the bill provides strengthened rights to participate, it is remarkably silent in extending any specific rights, including to present evidence or to cross-examine. The agency must merely “provide an opportunity to the public to participate” in the planning stage and assessment of a project in any regional or strategic assessments. The agency is empowered to decide on participant funding, but there is no similar duty to enable funding for strategic reviews.

Regarding indigenous rights, the bill does require the addition of some indigenous participation in panels and advice. Any assessment must consider impacts on indigenous groups or adverse impacts to indigenous rights. The minister, in making a determination on public interest, must also consider adverse impacts of a project on the rights of indigenous peoples, although they are not stated to serve as a bar to approval. (1535)

The minister alleges that the bill provides indigenous peoples with “Early and inclusive opportunities for engagement and participation at every stage, in accordance with a co-developed engagement plan, with the aim of securing free, prior and informed consent..”. However, while the justice minister committed last December to ensuring that all federal laws will be made consistent with the UNDRIP, no such specific reference is found in this bill.

The second part of the bill is with respect to the Canadian energy regulator act. An expert panel was also struck to modernize the National Energy Board, whose recommendations included, among them, a new independent Canadian energy information agency, which does not exist in the bill. There was significant public concern with the decision by the Harper government to shift the decision-making power from the NEB to the cabinet, and from the CEAA to the NEB and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

How well does the proposed new regime deliver on these calls for reform? The answer is perhaps best expressed in the analysis by Calgary energy law expert Professor Nigel Bankes, entitled “Some Things Have Changed but Much Remains the Same”, adding that the tabling of a completely new Canadian energy regulation act rather than mere amendments to the NEB Act “no doubt creates the impression that the new Bill represents a wholesale replacement of the NEB rather than mere tinkering.” His analysis suggests that much of the current regime remains unchanged.

The name of the agency is changed, there are several additional requirements for indigenous appointments, and there is the addition of prescribed factors for the Canadian energy regulator to consider. However, what is noteworthy is that unlike the impact assessment panel members, the Canadian energy regulator is not required to consider climate commitments or cumulative impacts. In fact, there is zero mention of climate in the entire Canadian energy regulatory act. This is doubly concerning, as Bill C-69 allows for unlimited CER appointees to each panel. As with the Harper law, the energy regulator may only recommend.

The CER is empowered to review offshore renewable and power line projects. Concerns have been expressed with a potential conflict of interest, as the Nova Scotia and Newfoundland offshore oil boards will participate in assessments of offshore projects. Interestingly, the power to issue export and import oil and gas licences is shifted from the cabinet to the Minister of Environment. The CER may review designated interprovincial power lines, but no such project has to date ever been designated. Legal experts have raised concerns with the lack of legal certainty if the CER is authorized to deliver on the crown's aboriginal consultation duties.

Finally, on the Navigation Protection Act, while the new law counters views once expressed by the Liberals while in opposition, they do mirror recommendations of the Liberal's majority standing committee on transport to maintain much of the downgrades to the law instituted by the Harper government. Erased are the words “navigable waters protection” from the law.

In many instances, the legal protection of our lakes and rivers is even further weakened or left to be determined by yet to be promulgated regulations. The schedule of lakes and rivers is blank, shifting the onus to Canadians to even seek the meagre protections offered under the bill. Public notice and right to participate are very limited.

Gone is the once important trigger for a federal assessment where navigable waters may be impacted. I think immediately of the loss of navigation access by indigenous peoples, who practice their traditional harvests in the many lakes, rivers and marshes in northern Alberta, because the approval of dams and oil sands projects are absent consideration and respect for their treaty and aboriginal rights. The ...”

Ms. Linda Duncan

February 27th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...elines, a review of major dams, a review of LNG projects, a review of the cumulative impact of many oil sands projects on first nations to access marshes and the loss of their traditional hunting righ...”

Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, CPC)

February 27th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...natural resource sector has brought tremendous wealth to my riding, all of Alberta, and Canada. The oil sands alone have brought $7.4 billion to the Canadian economy outside of Alberta: $3.9 billion t...”

Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, NDP)

February 14th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...is one detail we want to emphasize on today. According to our interpretation it would seem that the oil sands development sites that use in situ technology would not be covered under the agency's mand...”

Mr. Robert Sopuck (Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, CPC)

February 13th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...rojects amid Canada's 'difficult' regulatory environment”.

I had the honour of working in the oil sands in 2009-10. I lived in a camp for an oil sands project. There were people from all walks of life. People talk about the industry as if it...”

Hon. Jim Carr (Minister of Natural Resources, Lib.)

February 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change, which included Alberta's hard cap on oil sands emissions. This was the first climate change plan in the history of the country that was d...”

Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)

February 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...ountain project. They also undertook an analysis of its impact on greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands. Many see these projects as an opportunity for job creation and are interested in the socioeconomic benefits generated by sustainable resource development.

Stephen Buffalo, president and CEO of the Indian Resource Council, said at an energy conference last year, “We are depending on these pipelines for the success of the Canadian economy.”

That view was echoed in a recent interview by Calvin Helin, an executive with Eagle Spirit Energy, a company that hopes to build an indigenous-owned pipeline from the Alberta oil sands to the B.C. coast. He stated, “The reality is it is the only way forward. There's nothing ...”

Mrs. Cathy McLeod (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, CPC)

February 12th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...loves that sells work gloves especially built to withstand the rigorous operating conditions in the oil sands. This is but one example of a Canadian company that benefits from the industry.

In Ontario, it is $3.9 billion. Berg Chilling Systems is an equipment manufacturer that develops custom engineered chilling, pumping, and heat recovery equipment for use in natural gas production facilities. In Quebec, it is $1.2 billion in total. GHGSat is an innovative aerospace company working with oil sands producers to develop new satellite-based GHG emission acknowledging technologies.

These are just three examples of many companies across this country that are benefiting from the oil sands.

It is important to point out that these companies are all about technology. People have looked at natural resource companies and said they are just taking their supplies and sending them to market. However, for things like GHG emission monitoring with satellites, that is being done by innovative companies with technology that is supporting the oil sands.

The world needs more of Canada, not less. Canada is probably one of the most environmentally sound extractors of oil in the world. In my view, I would send our product to China, as there are many other countries that might supply the product with less environmentally sound practices. Whether we like it or not, we are going to need oil in the immediate and probably mid-term future. Someday we will probably make some advances in technology where our need for oil will be somewhat reduced, but in the meantime, we would be absolutely foolish not to take advantage of the opportunities.

What is the situation? We have heard we have a landlocked resource. We are unable to get our product to markets and that is to the severe detriment of the Canadian economy in terms of tax revenue going to the federal government and in fact all levels of government.

A lot of work has been done. We tried very hard to find ways to get pipelines to tidewater. The northern gateway, for example, was one, but the Liberal government just slashed that idea. We can look at energy east, where the government made the conditions so onerous that the company walked away. To be honest, that is an incredible shame.

We are losing investment. The president of Suncor just the other day said it is getting too tough to do business in Canada. We know that money goes where it is wanted. We know that investment goes where it is wanted. We are creating an environment where it is difficult to get anything done in this country.

We do have a project here. We have a project that has been approved and a company that, to be quite frank, has been very patient for many years. It's the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain expansion.

The Kinder Morgan pipeline goes through the riding that I represent. Many hundreds of kilometres of pipeline goes through my riding. This pipeline was built before I was born. I moved to Kamloops in 1999 and we were probably not even aware that it existed. We knew there was a pipeline but no one paid any attention to it. People did not worry about it. They knew there were opportunities for local jobs. They knew that it was providing the gas stations with, ultimately, the product they needed to fill their vehicles. (1645)

I heard the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands talking earlier about rail versus pipelines. If oil is transported by rail, it is right along the salmon fish-bearing streams, and the chance of an incident with rail is much higher than the chance of an incident with pipelines.

The other thing no one talks about is that as rail transport of the product increases, the opportunity to move other supplies and goods is lost. We often have conversations with those in the wheat industry and many others who are having trouble moving their product to ports because of the capacity of our rail system. Therefore, not only is rail perhaps a little more concerning in terms of transfer but it also takes enormous capacity. I suggest that our rail system is pretty close to capacity. At least, where I wait at the tracks where the two lines meet, it certainly seems to be at capacity.

This pipeline has been in place for many years and people did not really pay much attention to it, so what has changed? All of a sudden, there seems to be a dedicated movement. There has been a lot of talk and research done, where foreign influences work with environmental groups to shut down our oil sands. I would ask everyone why they are working to shut down Canada's oil sands and not focused on other areas, such as perhaps ships coming in from Saudi Arabia or what is happening in the U.S. It seems there is a targeted, intense effort to shut down our oil sands and to stop any pipeline project. We clearly need to ask ourselves what is happening in Ca...”

Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Lib.)

February 6th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“... also need to do, which is making sure that we support indigenous community-based monitoring in the oil sands. We need to address species at risk, including the recovery of caribou. We need to support...”

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

February 5th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“... because the National Energy Board refused to hear the evidence of Unifor. The largest union in the oil sands, Unifor went before the NEB to point out that building Kinder Morgan will cost Canadian jo...”


The Senate

Hon. Rosa Galvez

June 13th
Hansard Link

Natural Resources Trans Mountain Pipeline

“...ject, could you please elaborate on the forecast that has been conducted to assess the value of the oil sands and its present and future impacts on the Canadian economy? Given that China, for example,...”

Hon. Rosa Galvez

April 24th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Project Bill Second Reading—Debate

“...occurring in Canadian and worldwide oil, gas and energy sectors. (1510) In 1971, there was a single oil sands operation at Fort McMurray which produced 30,000 barrels per day. Since the 1990s, only 40 per cent of oil sands are extracted by Canadian companies, with the remainder by American companies and more recently by foreign corporations. In 2014, oil sands production was 2.3 million barrels per day, representing close to 30 per cent of Alberta’s $300 billion GDP. According to Statistics Canada, 98.5 per cent of the crude oil from oil sands is exported to the U.S. With this reduced diversity and a single product buyer, the economy is subject to the high volatility of crude petroleum. The prices of crude oil decreased from US$140 per barrel in 2009 to US$30 a barrel in 2016. Last December, the Western Canadian Select prices dropped to a low of US$20 a barrel. Alberta’s old mono-economy struggled to thrive in a US$50 per barrel world. In 2016, more than 3 million barrels per day of Canadian crude were sold to the U.S. at bargain basement prices. Divestment from fossil fuel is another major concern for oil sand business. Norway’s trillion-dollar sovereign wealth fund will fully divest of fossil fuel holdings, which may impact Canadian oil and gas equity shares which are valued at US$2.86 billion. This move could impact 61 Canadian oil and gas equities including Suncor, TransCanada, Enbridge, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., Encana, Cenovus and Imperial Oil. The retreat comes at the same time as large scale sell-offs by international oil sands producers totalling $30 billion, including ConocoPhillips, Royal Dutch Shell, Statoil. And just yesterday, HSBC, the largest bank in Europe, announced that it will no longer finance oil sands projects. The International Energy Agency stated in its World Energy Outlook report that the U.S. could be a net exporter of oil within a decade and is set to become the world’s dominant oil and gas production leader for the following decades. The U.S. is moving from being our partner to being our greatest competitor. Can landlocked unconventional oil sands, which need special refining conditions, compete with lighter conventional crudes from the U.S. which are easier to refine? [Translation] Considering the history of the oil sands, it is rather troubling that fewer than five Canadian refineries can use the oil sands as raw material, while refineries in the Gulf and in the American Midwest have undergone modifications to be able to do so. The new mega-refineries currently being built in Asia and the Middle East have been specifically designed to export refined products. This gives them the flexibility needed to accept the heaviest forms of sulfur-containing crude oil. Given that older refineries are gradually shutting down, complex refineries account for the vast majority of the global refining capacity. The main reason behind the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project is to maximize prices by getting the oil sands to tidewater. However, this oil, which could be sold in Asia, commands a lower price than in the United States, considering the high transportation costs. Furthermore, the OECD recently revealed that growth in Asia has slowed and will remain stable. At the same time, renewable energy consumption in Asia has doubled in a little over two decades. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency, China is investing US$364 billion in renewable energy production. [English] Now, given that the petroleum companies themselves are divesting, that the U.S. will become a net exporter, that Canada does not have oil sands refining capacity, that potential buyers in Asia are moving to renewable energies, that refineries and pipeline companies are foreign owned, and Alberta economic diversification is on a good track, are new pipelines sound decisions or political decisions from an economical perspective? Maybe, but this has to be proven with transparency and due diligence. The proposed $6.8 billion Texas-based Kinder Morgan TMEP and tanker project would triple capacity to 890,000 barrels per day and would increase tanker traffic nearly 700 per cent in Vancouver’s harbour, passing by hundreds of kilometres of beaches, islands and coastal wilderness. Are the economic benefits of the TMEP sufficient to justify the increased risk of environmentally disastrous spills on the B.C. coastline and the additional contribution to climate change resulting from increased bitumen production? The Alberta government advertises that 37,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs will be created per year of operation, as well as 15,000 construction jobs and 1,300 marine sector jobs, while the Conference Board of Canada estimates the creation of 34,000 jobs annually for 20 years. These estimates differ largely from what Kinder Morgan mentions in its own Volume 5B of its NEB submission of 2,500 jobs per year for two years. One thing is certain: When compared with similar pipeline projects, most job creation occurs over the two- to three-year construction period and is around a few thousand. The 60-year-old existing Trans Mountain pipeline has already spilled around 5.5 million litres in 82 separate incidents. It needs replacing. Ships carrying fuel have recently spilled into B.C.’s coastal waters exposing a deficient marine spill response. A spill could put 98,000 coast-dependent jobs, salmon rivers, wildlife, tourism, and the health of coastal residents and ecosystems at great risk. The initial NEB review did not consider either the upstream or downstream greenhouse gas emissions of the project. GHG emissions from oil sands are between 8 and 37 per cent higher than conventional crude. The pipeline is projected to add 13 to 15 million tonnes per year from increased oil sands production. In 2016, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences conducted a thorough study on diluted bitumen spills from pipelines. The study examined physicochemical properties from dilbit, environmental toxicity and spill response planning. To paraphrase the report: dilbit is substantially different from other crude oils in its high density, viscosity and adhesion properties. These chemical and physical properties are relevant to environmental impacts and require modification to regulations for spill response plans and cleanup. Environment Canada jointly with Fisheries and Oceans and Natural Resources Canada have also noted the unique chemistry of oil sands, namely the presence of complex compounds such as n-alkanes, PAH/APAH and saturated biomar...”

Hon. Larry W. Smith (Leader of the Opposition)

April 18th
Hansard Link

Natural Resources Oil and Gas Industry

“... should come as no surprise. However, in January of last year, the Prime Minister said of Alberta’s oil sands: We need to phase them out. If the Prime Minister truly believes Trans Mountain is in the national interest and will be built, if he truly believes and wants Canadian and foreign investors to invest in our country, then why does he continue to speak of transitioning away from our oil sands?”

Hon. Richard Neufeld

April 17th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Project Bill Second Reading--Debate Continued

“...obs per year of operation. And let us never forget that people from across this country work in the oil sands, even if they reside in Vancouver or Burnaby. Some have argued that the number of construction jobs is only 20 per cent of that amount. That’s still 3,000 construction jobs. Regardless of the number, there is no doubt that the economic spinoffs of this major Canadian energy infrastructure project are massive, including billions in extra government revenues and thousands of good-paying, family-supporting jobs. But if Trans Mountain doesn’t move forward, these jobs are at risk, as is Canada’s reputation. This brings me to another issue I want to address: Canada’s shrinking competitiveness and our lack of appeal to foreign investors. In recent months, some multinationals have essentially said, “Thanks but no thanks” to Canada’s natural resources. Shell and Chevron have divested themselves of their Canadian oil sands portfolios. PETRONAS has cancelled a proposed $36 billion LNG facility on the West Coast. ...”

Hon. Jim Carr, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources

March 27th
Hansard Link

Ministry of Natural Resources Trans Mountain Pipeline

“...the abundance of resources that is our inheritance, with our proven capacity to be innovative — the oil sands themselves were opened up and developed by innovation — that we are well positioned to lea...”

Senator Eaton

February 7th
Hansard Link

Canada Elections Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“Senator Woo, from doing the inquiry on the oil sands six years ago when a lot of money was coming in to support environmental groups, washed th...”

Hon. Richard Neufeld

February 6th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Leave Granted to Consider Matter of Urgent Public Interest Pursuant to Rule 8

“...ycheque if in fact that goes ahead. Further, this is not exclusively a West Coast matter. While the oil sands are located in northern Alberta, Canadians from across the country benefit from this regional resource — all Canadians do. Thousands of Atlantic Canadians work in the oil sands. A recent report also shows that suppliers in Quebec alone were awarded contracts totalling $1.2 billion, and these expenditures have added $1.25 billion to Quebec’s GDP. The economic spinoffs of the oil sands are felt across the country. Some senators may argue that this request does not meet the criteria stated in rule 8-3(b) and that the Senate is unlikely to have an opportunity to debate this matter within a reasonable period of time. What is a reasonable period of time? For Kinder Morgan, each day is another day of wasted opportunity and wasted money. But most important for the thousands of Canadians who have jobs or who could have jobs thanks to the oil sands, this is an emergency for them and their families. The Senate should address this issue no...”

Hon. David Tkachuk

February 6th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Consideration of Matter of Urgent Public Interest Pursuant to Rule 8

“... be emboldened to move to effectively kill the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline and put the oil sands into jeopardy? Why is B.C. doing what they are doing? Because they can. And why is that? Because the federal government has been inconsistent in its environmental position and has sown confusion across the country. In confusion there is chaos. Let’s look at the record. The federal government caved in to the West Coast environmentalists by banning tanker traffic on the West Coast. No tankers. That means no pipeline there, either. Tankers could go south along the coast. That’s not a problem, even though that’s a largely populated area. The Northern Gateway was done. So where can the pipeline go? Through the heavily populated south, that’s where, providing fodder to the Greens in B.C., who have no interest in pipelines and want to kill the oil sands. Meanwhile, on the East Coast, which would be energy-starved without tankers, there’s no s...”

Hon. Richard Neufeld

February 6th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Consideration of Matter of Urgent Public Interest Pursuant to Rule 8

“...structure project, many of which have already been taking advantage of the business opportunity the oil sands have given them for decades. The economic impact of our natural resource development is un...”

Hon. Grant Mitchell

February 6th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Consideration of Matter of Urgent Public Interest Pursuant to Rule 8

“...t Albertans and others whose livelihoods are based upon the oil and gas industry, in particular the oil sands, to bear alone the price of solving this problem. That would be a massive economic and human problem, not just in Alberta but across this country. The people who are dependent on jobs and the spinoffs created by this industry have mortgages to pay, families to feed, children to educate and retirements to secure. Their reaction is deeply emotional and practical. So in my estimation we have no choice but to build the pipeline, but we also have no choice but to reconcile these two intensely conflicting sets of interest, and not with animosity and not with anger, but with a collaboration that we have seen so often in so many successful ways that has made this country the great, remarkable, wonderful place that it is. This is the kind of challenge that frequently faces sophisticated democratic political systems like ours, and here we are. First, we need to build this and other pipelines and other energy projects. This sustains our economy and people’s livelihoods. But while we do that, we need to continue to take steps to make our fossil fuel industry as efficient, low-emitting and safe as possible, and we need to, for many reasons, deal more broadly with greenhouse gas emissions and climate change policy. Getting our resources to market means doing it sustainably and responsibly, and I doubt there is anybody in this room who would disagree with that. I want to specify this. Albertans have already made great contributions and sacrifices in this regard, supported by their Alberta government now, by their previous Alberta governments and by the current Government of Canada. The initiatives, undertakings and sacrifices by Albertans that I’m going to list speak directly to the kinds of concerns that B.C. has raised. (2100) First of all, the former Progressive Conservative government of Alberta implemented, ahead of the curve, the first carbon tax in the country over a decade ago. The current Alberta government has implemented an aggressive Climate Leadership Plan, including a more ambitious carbon tax, phasing out of pollution from coal-generated electricity, tripling renewable energy by 2030 and capping oil sands emissions. There has been extensive environmental review of this project. As I mentioned, ...”

Hon. Nancy Greene Raine

February 6th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Consideration of Matter of Urgent Public Interest Pursuant to Rule 8

“... like to call it fake news. I know there are people who believe that petroleum products coming from oil sands are somehow evil, and they are the cause of global warming — or should I say climate change? Because it may turn out that the climate is not warming. We’ve been bombarded with messaging for years that man is causing climate change. The result is a debate that’s become polarized and certainly is no longer a credible example of a scientific debate. True scientific debate is used to get to solutions, not to insult and denigrate those on opposite sides of the debate. Colleagues, as you know, the climate has always changed in spite of the rhetoric that man is causing the change; the science is, by no means, finalized. The problem with fearmongering around climate change by those who reject the value of resource revenue coming from oil sands is that in demonizing dirty oil, we allow activists to say that pipelines and oil tankers ...”

Hon. Yuen Pau Woo

February 6th
Hansard Link

Trans Mountain Pipeline Consideration of Matter of Urgent Public Interest Pursuant to Rule 8

“...outside of North America, and in particular in the fast-growing regions of Asia, notably China. The oil sands, unfortunately, are unable to reach these fast-growing markets because they are stranded. ...”


Was This Useful? Try Our Real-Time Alerts Product: Free Trial

About FederalMonitor.ca

FederalMonitor is a government monitoring software company. Our real-time alert technology has been used in Ontario since 2011 and in Europe since 2014.

Our Office

19 Yorkville Ave, 3rd Floor
Toronto, Canada
M4W 1L1

Free Trial

The best way to evaluate FederalMonitor.ca is to try it out. There's no obligation to buy and no payment information required to get started.

Created by Addison Cameron-Huff, technology lawyer.