Jim Carr

Mr. Speaker, how disappointing.

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear with Canadians. We will build this pipeline. We know that the environment and the economy go hand in hand, and that is the approach we are taking. Funding should never go to pay for work that seeks to remove Canadians' hard-fought-for rights. Voicing opposition over an energy project and putting kids to work distributing graphic flyers of aborted fetuses, as the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform did, are not the same thing. This is about protecting Canadians' rights, such as women's rights, something that our government will do regardless of what the opposition says.

Mr. Speaker, may I begin to speak as a Manitoban and as a prairie hockey dad? On behalf of my family and all Manitobans, I offer our sincere condolences to the people of Humboldt and of Saskatchewan. This is a tragedy that we all feel personally in our families and in our communities.The Prime Minister was very clear yesterday on the government's position of ensuring that the pipeline be built. He offered ways in which the government intends to act. He has instructed the Minister of Finance to engage in financial discussions with Kinder Morgan. He is discussing with his government legislative ways to reassert federal jurisdiction.This pipeline will be built.

Madam Speaker, every once in a while, the member rises in her place and wants to decide herself what the government should do about a project that is currently in front of the regulator. The National Energy Board will look at evidence and I am sure would be very pleased to consider what the hon. member has to say, but for the government to respond to that question and kill a project that has not yet been considered would be irresponsible.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did lay out a plan. It is too bad that the Leader of the Opposition did not hang around long enough to hear it before he took to the airwaves, before the Premier of Alberta spoke and before the Prime Minister of Canada spoke. He did not have to hear the Prime Minister's plan. Somehow he intuited what it might be.It might have been more respectful for the Leader of the Opposition to do a little listening before he did a little talking.

Mr. Speaker, the member perhaps may want to reflect on what he just said about distinguished Canadians, including grand chiefs, both in Saskatchewan and in British Columbia, that he is accusing of being corporate hacks.That is not the kind of respectful discourse that will create some credibility for the regulator trying to do a good job for Canadians. These are very unfortunate accusations.

Mr. Speaker, there will be hope when Canadians are faced with a regulatory regime that has their confidence, and that will only be done if we meaningfully consult with indigenous communities, with industry, with environmental groups, and across regions of the country. With good process and good regulatory controls, we have a much better chance of being where all members of the House want to be: moving our resources to tidewater sustainably.

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.

Mr. Speaker, this government has gone out of its way to approve three pipelines. Those are decisions that will put energy workers in Alberta and Saskatchewan to work. What this government could accomplish in one year, that government could not accomplish in 10 years. That is what we have been doing, because we care about putting energy workers to work.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the premier of Saskatchewan has actually quoted the Prime Minister on this matter. We understand that to develop our resources responsibly—

Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying how much of a privilege it is for me to represent the people of Winnipeg South Centre. It is always very hurtful to review the consequence of job losses in any sector. The natural resource sector in Canada accounts for 20% of the gross national product of the country. We in the government know that we have to grow the economy sustainably while protecting the environment. That is what we intend to do. Our hearts go out to those who are suffering because of economic dislocation. It is our commitment--

Mr. Speaker, it is very disappointing that the Leader of the Opposition will not denounce these statements and not show that the leader of his entire caucus understands how inappropriate those comments were and ask the member to apologize to all members of the House and all Canadians, today.

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to remind members opposite of what the Premier of Saskatchewan had to say yesterday about the plan we announced to support canola producers. He said, “the federal government has shown that they do support western Canadian agriculture” and he said, “we are going to support the federal government in these decisions from this day on, as we have always indicated we will.”The Canola Association supports us. The premier of Saskatchewan supports us. Growers support us. The industry supports us. It is only those Conservatives who do not support us.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear to us on this side of the House that our international obligations will be taken seriously, as will our commitment to move our natural resources to market sustainably.We have installed a new process to make that happen that has confidence in Canadians to make up their own minds, because the process will ask them their views. We will take seriously indigenous leaders because we have a constitutional and a moral obligation to consult with them meaningfully. Unfortunately, that has not been done in the House in a very long time.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, it is the responsibility of those who created the problem in the first place to clean it up. If the premier of Alberta or the premier of Saskatchewan believe it is a top priority for infrastructure investments in their province, then I am sure the government would be interested in considering their request.

Mr. Speaker, it is too bad that the Leader of the Opposition showed no patience last Sunday. He decided that he was going to speak to Canadians before the Premier of Alberta and before the Prime Minister of Canada, because he has extraordinary powers beyond the rest of us. He knew exactly what the Prime Minister was going to say, because he had already written his message before the Prime Minister spoke.What did the Prime Minister say? That this government supports the Trans Mountain expansion while it invests historic amounts of money on the west coast that all Canadians find so—

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.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said many times that one of the major responsibilities of the Government of Canada is to get our natural resources to market sustainably.If we want to access these foreign markets, if we want to create more jobs in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador, the only way that will be done is if the Canadian people see that the process that takes us to a decision is a credible one, not like the failed process of the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, every member of the House knows that there are Canadians who are suffering from job losses because of low commodity prices. They are suffering in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, and New Brunswick. We need to establish a credible process that will have the confidence of Canadians.The previous government, from 2011, built no pipelines because the process was not credible. We are in a better position today than we were a week ago.

Mr. Speaker, they are bashing in an open door. They cannot take yes for an answer. I guess we can say it one more time. We want the pipeline to proceed. We have approved it. We have approved it with conditions. We are investing a billion and a half dollars in the oceans protection plan. We are working with indigenous communities up and down the line. What is the opposition doing? The opposition is chilling investor confidence with a record that opposition members should be ashamed of.

Mr. Speaker, the message we received from indigenous leaders from virtually every region of the country is that they want to be involved in responsible and meaningful ways as we develop the natural resource sector in Canada. That has not happened and these projects will not be built unless it does. That is why a leading principle in the new way of doing things is to have conversations in a meaningful way with indigenous communities from coast to coast, something the previous government failed to do.

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?

Mr. Speaker, we understand that 20% of the gross domestic product of Canada is in the natural resources sector. We understand that prosperity for western Canadians and, indeed, right across the country depends on responsible and sustainable natural resource development.The government understands that we have to protect the environment and create jobs for a prosperous future for Canada. That is what we intend to do.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member opposite agrees with us that having 99% of our export of oil and gas go to one country, the United States, is not a very good idea, which is why we want to expand our export markets. It is too bad that, in 10 years of government, the Conservatives did not do that. They did not build one kilometre of pipeline to access export markets. In a way, the hon. member is helping us make the argument that we need to do exactly that to get a better price for our oil and to create good jobs for Canadians, and that is what we intend to do.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of British Columbia understands about carbon pricing. The Conservative Government of Alberta understands about carbon pricing. The newly elected Progressive Conservative Government of Manitoba understands about carbon pricing, and across the other way, this government understands about carbon pricing and taxing pollution. We know that the NDP understands the importance of carbon pricing. The Green Party understands the importance. The Bloc understands the importance. Who does that leave?

Mr. Speaker, all week the Conservatives pretended to stand up for business women. Members on this side were deeply disappointed by comments made by the Conservative member for Battlefords—Lloydminster about the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.We can all agree that sexist comments should not be part of the public debate or part of any conversation anywhere, period.Will the Leader of the Opposition stand here today, do the right thing, denounce his member's comments, and ask him to issue a full apology to the House?

Mr. Speaker, in this federation, when an industry, a sector or a region is suffering pain, the country reacts, as the country reacted this week. It was also the best of Canadian federalism, because not only was it the Government of Canada, it was the Premier of Saskatchewan, it was ministers of trade across the west, it was the Canola Council itself and it was producers working as one. The only ones who are offside are the Conservatives in the House.

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the member, who is from Alberta, has so little confidence in the entrepreneurship of Albertans and the capacity of Albertans to innovate. It was their innovation that gave us the opportunity to develop this resource in the first place. Does the member find that all this talk about doom and gloom gives inspiration to foreign investors to invest in Canada? Perhaps she is part of the problem.

Mr. Speaker, we do not have any difficulty repeating the government's position, and I do not know why members opposite cannot take yes for an answer. Yes, we think the pipeline is a good idea. Yes, we approved the pipeline. Yes, we intervened at the National Energy Board when it wanted to delay the pipeline. We want the pipeline built. How about members of the opposition? What chill are they putting on investment by their incessant questions?

Mr. Speaker, the failure was the inability of the Harper government to build one kilometre of pipe to new markets. That is the failure. The Conservatives had 10 years to do it and they could not. The reason they could not was because they refused to understand that investments in the environment enable us to build infrastructure. We on this side of the House are very proud of our ability to create jobs and protect the environment at the same time.

Mr. Speaker, members of the government have said in Vancouver; Calgary; Edmonton; Regina; St. John's, Newfoundland; Montreal; Toronto; and Mississauga that we believe that this pipeline is good for Canada. It is not only a good project for Alberta and British Columbia. It is good for all of Canada. It is good for the energy sector. It is good to expand our export markets. It is good for reconciliation with indigenous people. It is a good project and I am glad the member agrees.

Mr. Speaker, we care about job creation across the country, and we especially care about creating jobs in the energy industry, which is hurting because of low commodity prices, so it was astonishing for us to read that the member from Calgary was actually accusing the job creators of predatory practices in a tweet she sent out for all Canadians and all people around the world to read. We now know who really cares about creating jobs in Alberta.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite forgot to mention the $1.5 billion ocean protection plan. He did not mention it because, for whatever reason, he is not prepared to admit that this government has established and will establish a world-class system to protect our coasts. Why is that not part of the conversation? This is a coast that the member and his riding know all too well is essential not only to British Columbiana but to all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member said a sevenfold increase in tanker traffic. Actually, it is one more tanker a day—one—which will be surrounded by world-class spill response at a time when indigenous people, for the first time, have been involved from day one in becoming a part of the monitoring of the safety of the line, and we believe that we are going to leave the backyard of indigenous people better than we had found it.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that the provinces will determine their own system, one of the features of Canadian federalism that makes us so special. We can respect that the province of British Columbia will have a different system than Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec, but all told, it is a national strategy to do what Canadians want us to do, which is to put a price on carbon pollution and leave this planet a better place for our children and our grandchildren.

How about pretty well every day, Mr. Speaker.It is remarkable what the members opposite do not want to hear. They do not want to listen to what we say when we talk about the oceans protection plan. They do not want to listen to us when we talk about working with indigenous communities. They do not want to listen to us when we talk about the pipelines we have approved, so it is very selective hearing and revisionist history.

Mr. Speaker, indigenous communities have not been meaningfully consulted about major energy projects. Because the former government did not do a very good job, we have decided to do a better one. We announced a set of principles on January 27, the centre point of which was that kind of meaningful consultation. We have asked a ministerial panel of three individuals to go up and down the line for that kind of consultation. Two out of those three representatives are aboriginal women.

Mr. Speaker, the member is right. Canadians want an environmental assessment process that they trust. That is why the government has established a country-wide survey of Canadians on the Environmental Assessment Act, on the Fisheries Act, on the Navigable Waters Act, and on the National Energy Board. All of those results will come back to the government in late March and we will have a long-range plan of environmental assessment. I hope the member is not suggesting the government should tell the National Energy Board chair who should sit on what panels.

Mr. Speaker, we are aware of how important the natural resource sector is in Canada to creating jobs. We also know that at the moment there are particular regions in the country that are hurting because of job losses because of commodity prices, particularly in Alberta and Saskatchewan, and as my colleague has just said, also in New Brunswick. We are also aware that major projects are good for the country, but they must carry the confidence of Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, we are signing trade agreements, which means 1.5 billion customers in Canada's free trade zone. Canada is the only G7 nation to have a free trade agreement with the other six. That sounds like a strong trade policy to me. How about an increase of 17% in Canadian exports to Japan after ratification of the CPTPP? I would call that a strong trade policy.What is weak is the Conservative opposition's understanding of what strength means in trade policy.

Mr. Speaker, this government does not speak on behalf of first nations. Why does the hon. member think he can? The billion dollars is not government money. It is the polluter pays principle in the Pipeline Safety Act.The hon. member knows that there are communities that have different points of view on pipelines, including governments that all wear the New Democratic stripe. This is the time to bind people together, not divide them.

Mr. Speaker, we continue to engage with China at the scientific level. We announced last week a generous support package for producers, which by the way, has the support of the Premier of Saskatchewan, of the Canola Council of Canada, of producers and of trade ministers across the west. We continue to look for other markets for canola. We have taken no possibility and no other action off the table.

Mr. Speaker, during the 10 years of the Harper Conservatives' administration there was not one kilometre of pipe built to open up export markets. At the same time, they systematically ignored their constitutional responsibilities to consult with indigenous communities, and paid no attention to environmental stewardship. That is one strike, two strikes, three strikes.

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. That is precisely what the Prime Minister has asked the Minister of Finance to do. We are in the process of doing that right now.

Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure of visiting Fort McMurray with the Prime Minister when we talked to energy workers. We talked about how much progress was being made.It would be good for members of the opposition to every once in a while talk about the progress that is being made in Alberta on sustainably developing our resource on GHG emission and reductions as a result of the innovation and entrepreneurship. We on this side of the House place an awful lot of stock in the innovation and entrepreneurship of business leadership in Alberta. We wish members opposite shared our optimism.

Madam Speaker, the government was very pleased, in the budget of 2016, to announce a program of establishing electric vehicle charging stations, $62.5 million over two years. We are also very pleased that it was the Province of Quebec that was the most enthusiastic of all the provinces.I know it is absolutely consistent with the government's commitment to move to a lower carbon economy while creating good, clean jobs for Canadians, and I am glad the member is on side.

Mr. Speaker, when the Harper Conservatives chose to bail out Chrysler in 2009, they had no intention of ever recovering the loan. The deal the Conservatives made actually approved 100% of the loss at the exact time that they handed out the bail-out money. Our government exhausted all possibilities for recovery from the old Chrysler.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will be pleased to know that corporate social responsibility is a very important matter for this government and for all members of the House. They know that the practices of Canadian corporations overseas are the subject of interest to this government and certainly to other members opposite, including the one who just asked the question.Very soon we will have the pleasure of announcing the successful candidate in a competition that has shown there is great interest from coast to coast to coast in this very important job.

Mr. Speaker, the member is not paying attention to what the Premier of Saskatchewan has said, nor is he paying attention to the expansion of export markets, nor is he paying attention to the very interesting meeting that the Minister of Agriculture had in Japan with her counterpart. We will know more about that in a matter of days.

Mr. Speaker, over the last number of weeks, I have had the pleasure of having meaningful conversations with indigenous leaders, in Halifax, in Winnipeg, and only last week in Vancouver, in meetings with leaders from the north coast, the Okanagan, and the Vancouver area itself. What they have been telling me time and time again is how refreshing it is for them to actually have a conversation with the Government of Canada, which they have not had in 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, how disappointing.

Mr. Speaker, we expanded export capacity for the Alberta Clipper project, the Nova Gas pipeline, the Line 3 replacement project, and the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline. We support the Keystone XL pipeline. Their record in 10 years in office was not one kilometre of pipe built to expand our export markets, failed attempts to consult with indigenous people, and no attention paid to environmental stewardship. Why would we follow that failed record?

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada disagrees with the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose unfair and punitive tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber.Earlier this year, I created a federal-provincial working group to support the forestry industry in this difficult period. We will continue to work with producers, workers, their families, and the provinces. Canadian workers can count on us.

Mr. Speaker, it is very disappointing that the Leader of the Opposition will not denounce these statements and not show that the leader of his entire caucus understands how inappropriate those comments were and ask the member to apologize to all members of the House and all Canadians, today.

Mr. Speaker, if the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador wishes to discuss the possibility of an extension of loan guarantees, the Government of Canada will consider it seriously.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the way in which the previous government went about the business of having these pipelines approved and built did not work. They did not work because the Federal Court of Appeal quashed a project because of insufficient consultation with indigenous communities. The record will show that during the course of the tenure of the Harper government there was not one kilometre of pipeline built to the oceans. We had a choice. The choice was to follow a path that did not work or to try another one. We chose to—

Mr. Speaker, expanded export capacity for the Alberta Clipper project, the Nova Gas pipeline, the Line 3 replacement project, the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline, support for the Keystone XL pipeline, the Arnaud apatite mine, Woodfibre LNG, the Ridley Island propane terminal: these mean tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of investment in the Canadian economy.

Mr. Speaker, as we know, the previous government offered a loan guarantee to the Muskrat Falls project in 2013. If the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador seeks to have that loan guarantee extended, the Government of Canada will look at it very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is breaking news to all of us today. Northern pipeline actually got built to foreign markets. Northern gateway did not get built, because the Federal Court of Appeal said that his government had not consulted properly with Canadians.The member also knows that any discussion about investment in the energy sector has an awful lot to do with environmental protection: a $1.5 billion investment in the oceans protection plan. I am hopeful that I will have a chance to detail that plan—

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend's question gives me another opportunity to say that this government believes that pipeline should be built and it should be built because we want to take the crude from Alberta and move it to an export market. We want to create the 15,000 jobs for Albertans and British Columbians, just as we have created jobs in the approval of other pipelines, just as we continue to have confidence in the innovation and the entrepreneurship of Albertans.We on this side of the House have confidence in Alberta.

Mr. Speaker, approved pipelines, job creation for the people of Alberta, for the people of western Canada, compared to the 10-year record of the Harper Conservative government of not one kilometre of pipeline built to tidewater, no consultation with indigenous people, court cases that said the Harper government had failed in its constitutional responsibilities, no conversation with the importance of energy and the environment being part of the conversation, why would we want to mimic that record of failure?

Mr. Speaker, the member knows that we have three pillars of strategy. One is to engage the Chinese at the scientific level. The other is to provide a support program for producers, and there is alignment across the country, including provincial governments, the industry and the canola association itself, and another is to expand our export markets. We intend to do that through trade missions to Japan, to Korea, to Europe and to South America. We understand that this is a very difficult moment for our producers. We stand with them.

Mr. Speaker, we approved the TMX. We approved Enbridge Line 3. The previous Conservative government ruined the chances of northern gateway by insufficiently consulting with indigenous peoples. Jobs were lost in the energy sector during its 10 failed years in government.We actually have to thank the Conservatives, because we are learning from their mistakes.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that this government understands the importance of opening up export markets for Canadian crude. He knows, at the same time, that we announced an investment of $1.5 billion in the ocean protection plan. He probably knows that we are in constant conversation with indigenous communities up and down the line to ensure safety. What he may not know is that the Prime Minister of Canada, in Edmonton this morning, said—

Mr. Speaker, the government has no interest in inflaming emotions between regions of our countries, between sectors, or from one province to another. The job of the Government of Canada is to speak on behalf of all Canadians. If the member opposite and members of the Conservative Party expect that we are going to play a game of trying to enrage and inflame regional tensions, we will not do it.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister makes the same speech in Nanaimo, in Vancouver, in Fort McMurray, in Calgary, in Edmonton, in Winnipeg, and St. John's, Newfoundland, because he is delivering a message to all Canadians, and that message is that in 2018, environmental stewardship and the economy is one conversation. I am very anxious to hear members of the Conservative Party talk about the importance of the $1.5-billion investment in the oceans protection plan.

Mr. Speaker, we know the people of Alberta have suffered as a result of the low commodity prices. We know some 120,000 were jobs lost, but thankfully at least half of them have returned. We know we have approved the Enbridge Line 3 replacement. We have approved the Trans Mountain expansion. We are in favour of the KXL pipeline. We have met with energy workers. We have met with CEOs of the energy industry. They realize this government stands with energy workers.

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the hon. member has not been paying closer attention to the file. If he had been paying closer attention to the file, he would know that there has been continuous engagement and that we seek to be invited to China to talk to the scientists about the accusation that there is impurity in our canola.Second, had he been paying attention to the generous support for producers, which has been called a very important—

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.

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives had 10 years to build a pipeline to ship Canada's resources to new global markets. They built zero. The Conservatives had 10 years to consult indigenous and local communities. They ignored them. The Conservatives had 10 years to end the discount on Canadian crude. They did not.

Mr. Speaker, the government approved the pipeline because it determined that moving crude from Alberta to British Columbia and then to export markets was in the national interest. As members know, 99% of the export of Canadian oil and gas goes to the United States.Therefore, we concluded that it was in the interests of Alberta, British Columbia, and all of Canada to approve this pipeline. It employs thousands of people not only in British Columbia and Alberta but all across the country. We stand by that approval.

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the member, who is from Alberta, has so little confidence in the entrepreneurship of Albertans and the capacity of Albertans to innovate. It was their innovation that gave us the opportunity to develop this resource in the first place. Does the member find that all this talk about doom and gloom gives inspiration to foreign investors to invest in Canada? Perhaps she is part of the problem.

Mr. Speaker, the government has a priority. It wants to move our natural resources to market. The previous government was unable to move natural resources to tidewater, because it continued to follow a process that failed and that did not have the confidence of the Canadian people. Why would we want to repeat those mistakes?Rather, we are embracing a process that reaches out to Canadians, that reaches out to indigenous communities to build confidence in the regulatory process, to meet our combined objective—

Mr. Speaker, was the town hall in Edmonton in the dark? I think there were cameras there. There were microphones there. People were taking pictures of it. They were recording what the Prime Minister said, which was that this pipeline will be built. This has been unequivocal. We have intervened at the National Energy Board when there have been attempts made to slow the process down. We understand that this is a project that is going to create jobs, expand export markets, and invest heavily in ocean protection with the partnership of indigenous people. This is responsible national policy.

Mr. Speaker, we have shown certainty where before there was only uncertainty. We have a very specific set of timelines that are predictable. They are predictable to proponents. They are predictable for those who want to offer their opinion on all of these projects.The member has mentioned four or five projects. What they share is that there is predictability, there is a timeline, and there is a process, none of which was the case when we took power.

Mr. Speaker, our government understands the important contribution of the oil and gas sector to Canada's economy, workers, and local communities. We will continue to provide support to the sector and the region to support the recovery from this tragic event.

Mr. Speaker, we understand the critical importance of forestry to the economies of eastern and western Canada as a source of jobs, prosperity, and opportunity. We are acutely aware of the threat that forest pests like the mountain pine beetle, emerald ash borer, and spruce budworm pose to Canada's forests. In budget 2016, we invested $87 million to support scientific research and infrastructure, including funding to combat destructive forest pests such as the spruce budworm and the mountain pine beetle. We are working closely with provinces, universities, and industry, all with the common goal of finding a way to keep these pest populations low—

Mr. Speaker, forestry jobs are vital to communities and Canadian workers across the country. We are taking immediate action to help companies, workers, and local communities affected by these unfair and punitive duties.We will vigorously defend our industry and our workers from the impacts of this decision by the U.S. commerce department.

Mr. Speaker, we understood very well that the failed process of the Harper government meant that the Federal Court of Appeal said no to the northern gateway pipeline project. It was because there was insufficient consultation.We were faced with a decision: Do we use the failed process or do we have a much deeper consultation? That is what we did. We consulted with 118 indigenous communities. We talked to thousands of people. We believe that the process was the one that was mandated by the Court of Appeal, consistent with our section 35 rights.

Mr. Speaker, the expert panel of five individuals, including one from Alberta, have spent months consulting Canadians on what a world-class regulator would look like. There are 26 recommendations. The Government of Canada will now carefully assess these recommendations. As I said a moment ago, Alberta has been a leader in the energy sector for Canada for decades, and I see that it will not only maintain the status quo but it will grow.We have confidence in the energy environment in Alberta.

Mr. Speaker, the only people who have no confidence in the Alberta economy are the Conservatives. It is a little strange, because the facts make the point. There are 50,000 new jobs. Alberta is set to lead Canada in growth in 2018. We could talk about the growth of the Canadian economy, too. We could talk about 600,000 new jobs that Canadians have created since 2015. We could talk about leading the industrialized world in economic growth. It is just too bad that this pride and optimism—

Mr. Speaker, they are bashing in an open door. They cannot take yes for an answer. I guess we can say it one more time. We want the pipeline to proceed. We have approved it. We have approved it with conditions. We are investing a billion and a half dollars in the oceans protection plan. We are working with indigenous communities up and down the line. What is the opposition doing? The opposition is chilling investor confidence with a record that opposition members should be ashamed of.

Mr. Speaker, the member asks this question from time to time in the House, asking the government to make a decision on a project that is currently before a regulator. For the government to make a decision before it has gone through due process would be irresponsible, and we will not do it.

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?

No, Mr. Speaker, but I need more.Had the previous government not spent so much time prejudging the National Energy Board, muzzling climate scientists, ignoring traditional knowledge, and finding ways to short-circuit the process, perhaps major resource projects would carry the confidence of Canadians.Our government will not follow the lead of the previous administration on its path of failure.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of British Columbia understands about carbon pricing. The Conservative Government of Alberta understands about carbon pricing. The newly elected Progressive Conservative Government of Manitoba understands about carbon pricing, and across the other way, this government understands about carbon pricing and taxing pollution. We know that the NDP understands the importance of carbon pricing. The Green Party understands the importance. The Bloc understands the importance. Who does that leave?

Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure on January 27, with the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, to announce a new set of rules in order to re-establish some kind of Canadian confidence in the regulatory system that, unfortunately, was broken after the last 10 years.We have added time for a panel of three distinguished western Canadians to hear the concerns of the mayor of Vancouver, the mayor of Calgary, and indigenous communities up and down the line, so at the end people will say, “We have confidence in the regulatory process.”

Mr. Speaker, actually, we have said repeatedly all week that we do support the Keystone XL pipeline.We also gave Canadians an opportunity to express themselves on the Trans Mountain expansion, and they expressed themselves in 35,000 opinions that were sent to a website. Those opinions came from Canadians from coast to coast who have a real interest in this national project.We, unlike governments that came before us, will take those opinions seriously.

Mr. Speaker, on January 27 the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and I announced a set of interim principles that would govern those projects that are currently under review. That will be followed by an entire modernization of the National Energy Board and other federal agencies, because those agencies under that government did not carry the confidence of Canadians. If we do not carry the confidence of Canadians, nothing will be built.

Mr. Speaker, the member talks about the same process that was used by the Harper government. As I said a moment ago, we changed the process. We added layers of consultation with indigenous peoples, because the Federal Court of Appeal said that the Harper government did not consult enough. We sent an expert panel that went up and down the line. There are now 44 indigenous communities that will benefit, 33 of them in British Columbia. We know that projects like this do not achieve consensus everywhere. We do know that this is in the national interest.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear to us on this side of the House that our international obligations will be taken seriously, as will our commitment to move our natural resources to market sustainably.We have installed a new process to make that happen that has confidence in Canadians to make up their own minds, because the process will ask them their views. We will take seriously indigenous leaders because we have a constitutional and a moral obligation to consult with them meaningfully. Unfortunately, that has not been done in the House in a very long time.

Mr. Speaker, all week the Conservatives pretended to stand up for business women. Members on this side were deeply disappointed by comments made by the Conservative member for Battlefords—Lloydminster about the Minister of Environment and Climate Change.We can all agree that sexist comments should not be part of the public debate or part of any conversation anywhere, period.Will the Leader of the Opposition stand here today, do the right thing, denounce his member's comments, and ask him to issue a full apology to the House?

Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure of visiting Fort McMurray with the Prime Minister when we talked to energy workers. We talked about how much progress was being made.It would be good for members of the opposition to every once in a while talk about the progress that is being made in Alberta on sustainably developing our resource on GHG emission and reductions as a result of the innovation and entrepreneurship. We on this side of the House place an awful lot of stock in the innovation and entrepreneurship of business leadership in Alberta. We wish members opposite shared our optimism.

Mr. Speaker, it is too bad that the Leader of the Opposition showed no patience last Sunday. He decided that he was going to speak to Canadians before the Premier of Alberta and before the Prime Minister of Canada, because he has extraordinary powers beyond the rest of us. He knew exactly what the Prime Minister was going to say, because he had already written his message before the Prime Minister spoke.What did the Prime Minister say? That this government supports the Trans Mountain expansion while it invests historic amounts of money on the west coast that all Canadians find so—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did lay out a plan. It is too bad that the Leader of the Opposition did not hang around long enough to hear it before he took to the airwaves, before the Premier of Alberta spoke and before the Prime Minister of Canada spoke. He did not have to hear the Prime Minister's plan. Somehow he intuited what it might be.It might have been more respectful for the Leader of the Opposition to do a little listening before he did a little talking.

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to having the pipeline built. We intervened in motions at the National Energy Board when there were attempts to unnecessarily delay the project, and we happened to be successful in that motion. We will be continually alert to attempts to delay because we know that delay adds to uncertainty and uncertainty adds to costs. What the Prime Minister said yesterday was that we would not tolerate unnecessary delays and that we would add certainty.

Mr. Speaker, when the Harper Conservatives chose to bail out Chrysler in 2009, they had no intention of ever recovering the loan. The deal the Conservatives made actually approved 100% of the loss at the exact time that they handed out the bail-out money. Our government exhausted all possibilities for recovery from the old Chrysler.

Mr. Speaker, we understand that the premiers of Alberta and British Columbia will have reasons to make statements about energy projects. There is only one government in Canada that has the responsibility of approving major infrastructure that goes across provincial lines, and that is the Government of Canada. The Government of Canada has approved the pipeline and we will ensure that the process is as expeditious as possible. I do not understand all the fuss on the other side. We want the pipeline to be built.

Mr. Speaker, there was a chief in northern Manitoba who told me that she had not had a single conversation with the previous Conservative government in 10 years.This government has undergone a serious set of meaningful consultations with indigenous communities from coast to coast to coast. Without that consultation, no energy projects will be approved. We do not repeat failed ways; we look for better ones.

Mr. Speaker, our government takes the challenges being faced by the forestry industry very seriously and we are working with our provincial partners to ensure its prosperity.The federal-provincial task force met recently to discuss ways in which we can work together to protect jobs. We will continue to work with the provinces to come to an agreement with the United States and protect the jobs and families that depend on this important sector.

Mr. Speaker, I realize that not all good things are in Manitoba, just many good things.

Mr. Speaker, we are in close collaboration with all of our provincial counterparts, including the Government of Quebec. We understand together that our first responsibility is to do what we can for the producers, for the workers, and for the communities affected by these punitive and unconscionable tariffs. We will continue to work co-operatively, because we believe that together we will come up with the solution that is in the best interests of workers, communities, and producers.

Mr. Speaker, we do support the wonderful energy sector in Canada. I have had the pleasure of having conversations with people around the world about Canada's energy sector and they feel very confident that we will get over this dip in prices and emerge stronger. In part, we will emerge stronger because they will know that our regulatory system carries the confidence of Canadians and they will know that in 2016 we must move responsibly to market, and that is what we intend to do.

Mr. Speaker, the member is not paying attention to what the Premier of Saskatchewan has said, nor is he paying attention to the expansion of export markets, nor is he paying attention to the very interesting meeting that the Minister of Agriculture had in Japan with her counterpart. We will know more about that in a matter of days.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord for his excellent question.We worked intensively with the provinces and the softwood lumber industry. Reaching a new softwood lumber trade agreement remains a priority for our government. Today, I am announcing a federal-provincial task force on softwood lumber. We are joining forces to address the challenges facing the industry, the workers, and their families.

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure my hon. colleague that the Government of Canada has been in very close conversation and co-operation with all of the regions that would be affected by that action. I am particularly impressed with the co-operative spirit that has been displayed by the Quebec government in this matter, because the government understands that working co-operatively with Canada is the best way that we can protect very important jobs in the forestry sector.

Mr. Speaker, the Nova Gas pipeline, 3,000 jobs, has been approved. The Line 3 replacement project, 7,000 jobs, has been approved. The Trans Mountain expansion pipeline, 15,440 jobs, has been approved, and support for the Keystone XL pipeline, 6,440 jobs. That is an impressive total of job creation and economic activity. We are very proud of that accomplishment.

Mr. Speaker, members of the government have said in Vancouver; Calgary; Edmonton; Regina; St. John's, Newfoundland; Montreal; Toronto; and Mississauga that we believe that this pipeline is good for Canada. It is not only a good project for Alberta and British Columbia. It is good for all of Canada. It is good for the energy sector. It is good to expand our export markets. It is good for reconciliation with indigenous people. It is a good project and I am glad the member agrees.

Madam Speaker, the government was very pleased, in the budget of 2016, to announce a program of establishing electric vehicle charging stations, $62.5 million over two years. We are also very pleased that it was the Province of Quebec that was the most enthusiastic of all the provinces.I know it is absolutely consistent with the government's commitment to move to a lower carbon economy while creating good, clean jobs for Canadians, and I am glad the member is on side.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question because it is a chance to remind the House of the significance of the measures that we have undertaken to make sure, both in the short term and in the long term, that the forestry industry is respected in Canada. That includes $605 million from the Export Development Corporation. It includes very timely measures to expand export markets. That includes taking the leaders of the industry in Quebec to China to begin to make the argument that our wood is the best wood in the world.We are very proud of that initiative. We are very proud of how we have stood up for the forestry—

Mr. Speaker, we recognize the importance of forestry in Canada. We have started a very good conversation with the provinces that may be affected by new measures. We will most assuredly take coordinated measures to protect jobs in this country. Canadians can count on us.

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member and the House want to know about more jobs created in the energy sector, I would invite the question.

Mr. Speaker, we agree with the hon. member, and have agreed for some time, that we want the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline to be built, because of the jobs it would create and because of the expansion of our export markets. We believe in the combination of unprecedented investments in an oceans protection plan; looking at ways in which the world can benefit from the terrific resources in Alberta and across our country; and the co-development with indigenous peoples along the line. These are the three pillars for a successful energy policy, and we are very glad that the member agrees with us.

Mr. Speaker, the government did support the Keystone XL energy project, and the government will continue to support the project. All of the approvals north of the border are in place. They will not run out. Now we await the company that will reapply to the United States. We await that decision as we are fully supportive of the project.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure there are millions of Canadians and many more millions of Americans who are celebrating today as the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States restart a constructive relationship of respect between the two greatest countries in the world with the longest border and the most important trade relationship. Compare that with the relationship between the former prime minister and the current president of the United States.Let us take a moment and delight in a reawakening of the Canadian-American relationship that will be in the best interests of Canadians and Americans.

Mr. Speaker, my fellow Manitoban knows that jobs are being created in our own province. The approval of the Enbridge Line 3 expansion will create many jobs, I am sure, also in his own riding of Brandon. He knows the economic activity that will come from these pipeline approvals—

Mr. Speaker, these consultations were meaningful, and so were the accommodations that are most important to many indigenous peoples. We understand that the relationship with the air, the water, and the land is fundamental and sacred to indigenous people, a lesson that all of us in Canada are learning day by day. The member should know that these conversations were impactful and meaningful, and so was the accommodation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the members of the Senate committee for their report and recommendations on this important file.I have appointed a panel of distinguished Canadians to look at ways that we can create the best energy regulator in the world and ensure that Canadians feel confident that their views on energy projects have been heard. The panel will be reporting back to me by May 15, 2017. Addressing concerns head-on and building a process that is more inclusive and transparent, our energy regulator will make decisions that will carry the confidence of Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, there will be hope when Canadians are faced with a regulatory regime that has their confidence, and that will only be done if we meaningfully consult with indigenous communities, with industry, with environmental groups, and across regions of the country. With good process and good regulatory controls, we have a much better chance of being where all members of the House want to be: moving our resources to tidewater sustainably.

Mr. Speaker, we are determined to modernize the National Energy Board. We will be asking Canadians from coast to coast to offer constructive opinions about how that could best be done. Those Canadians include members opposite, who one would think would have more of an interest than anybody else in a credible regulatory process.

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. It was just this week when I had meetings with, for example, the president of the Manitoba Metis Federation, who said that the 400,000 members of his community support this pipeline. I think the hon. member will have to say that is pretty impressive consultation.

Mr. Speaker, we are working very closely with all our provincial counterparts, including those in the Government of Quebec.We realize that our main responsibility is do to everything we can to help the producers, workers, and communities affected by these punitive and, in our opinion, inappropriate, tariffs.We will continue to work with our partners because we believe that, together, we will find the solution that best serves the interests of workers and communities—

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House continue to be proud of and impressed with the contribution of Alberta to the Canadian economy, principally in the energy sector. I was very happy to be in Alberta last week and, along with the provincial government and the private sector, to announce significant investments that will lower the carbon footprint within the oil sands. We know that Alberta has been an essential driver of the Canadian economy and will continue to be.

Mr. Speaker, it is not the job of the Government of Canada to make sure that a project gets built. It is up to the Government of Canada to make sure the regulatory process is transparent, carries the confidence of Canadians, and understands the balance between economic growth, environmental stewardship, and partnership with indigenous peoples.Since we came into power, more than 38,000 jobs will created in the energy sector, more than $30 billion for Canada's economy inside of two years, more than that government did in 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, I am trying to understand the Conservatives' position on China. On Monday, they told us that we were way too close. On Tuesday, they said that we were not close enough. However, we probably can agree on one thing; that a $40 billion investment that will send clean Canadian LNG to Asia is good for us, it is good for the planet, and we do not have to ask anybody for permission.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say I am surprised at the hon. member's response to a panel of five distinguished Canadians who represent many interests. There are two indigenous leaders as part of this five-person panel. There are those who have long experience with the regulatory process. Would the member have us appoint people who have no experience with the process? We are proud of the five. They will do great work for Canada.

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.

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, we recognize the importance of Canada's forestry sector. We have initiated a very good dialogue with the provinces that could be affected by new measures. We will absolutely have a plan to work together to protect jobs in this country. Canadians can count on us.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, to provide provinces in Canada with clean, renewable sources of energy is absolutely consistent with the goals of this government. We understand that it is very important that provinces have the opportunity to make sure that their electrical systems are intact so that we can, as the Minister of Environment and Climate Change says almost every day in this House, find sustainable ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, that sevenfold increase is from five to 35 a month, so one tanker a day. The $1.5 billion oceans protection plan strengthens the eyes and the ears of the Coast Guard to ensure better communication with vessels. It adds new radar sites in strategic locations. It puts more enforcement officers on the coast. It adds more primary environmental response teams to bolster Coast Guard capacity. It invests in new technology. We are conducting scientific research to make cleanups more effective. We reopened the Kitsilano Coast Guard station that was—

Mr. Speaker, there is no one in the House who speaks more clearly, more loudly, more passionately for the people of Saint John than the member does. We hear it all the time. There is no political party in the House that has a monopoly on compassion. I can assure the House and the member that there are members of this caucus who understand that the best way that we will deliver to market is—

Mr. Speaker, the energy sector is good for all of Canada in whatever region Canadians live. It is good for the people of British Columbia, Alberta, my home province of Manitoba, and Quebec. People come from all over Canada to work in the energy sector in Alberta. When the Prime Minister and I were in Fort McMurray just two weeks ago, we talked to workers from virtually every region of the country, and they share our ambition to make sure that Canada's energy sector leads the world.

Mr. Speaker, we agree with the hon. member. We think this kind of investment in Canada's energy sector is good not only for Alberta and British Columbia but for all of the country. When the Prime Minister and the Minister of Infrastructure and I were in Fort McMurray, we met with Canadians from every region of the country. We were reminded then, as we are reminded every day, that a strong energy sector for Canada is good for all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

Madam Speaker, we know that the company is doing business right around the world and, in conducting that business, employing many thousands of Canadians. It is very important economic development.We also know that we have embarked on a very aggressive trade diversification strategy. We meet with companies around the world to take the best advantage of that. We believe that Canada is better positioned now to be a leader in international trade than it ever has been before.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday was a great day, a historic day, for this Parliament and for Canada. We ratified the Paris Agreement on climate change. Regrettably, not all of it us did. We invite members of the Conservative opposition—

Mr. Speaker, we are pleased to have a strategy that incorporates all regions of the country. We will have an opportunity later on in the House to debate energy workers in Alberta and across the country. It will be an opportunity for all of us to talk about what we have done and what we can do.The government will remind all Canadians that the Nova gas pipeline will create 3,000 jobs. The Line 3 replacement will create 7,000 jobs. The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion will create 15,400 jobs. That is laying the foundation for long-term, sustainable jobs, good jobs, jobs people can raise—

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Nickel Belt for his excellent question.I recently announced that our government will extend the 15% mining exploration tax credit for an additional year. The credit helps exploration companies finance their projects and contributes to creating good jobs in remote and indigenous communities.

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad to know that the member from Saskatoon is interested in job creation. He will also know that thousands of jobs have been created in Saskatchewan by decisions taken by the government. He will also know that Evraz, which is the producer of hundreds of kilometres of steel that would go into these pipes, is giving additional employment opportunity for people in his home province.I invite the member for join with us in our support for the energy workers right across the west, including in Saskatchewan.

Mr. Speaker, indigenous communities have not been meaningfully consulted about major energy projects. Because the former government did not do a very good job, we have decided to do a better one. We announced a set of principles on January 27, the centre point of which was that kind of meaningful consultation. We have asked a ministerial panel of three individuals to go up and down the line for that kind of consultation. Two out of those three representatives are aboriginal women.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to provide the provinces with a source of clean and reliable energy to meet their energy needs. We are monitoring the projects and working closely with the province.Under the existing agreement, it is the province's responsibility to cover the increases in cost. No decision has been made on this yet.

Mr. Speaker, we prioritize. We are prioritizing the creation of good jobs for Canadians, particularly in western Canada. We are prioritizing environmental stewardship. We are prioritizing important engagement with indigenous peoples. Those are the three pillars of responsible development in Canada: job creation, environmental stewardship, and meaningful consultation with indigenous peoples.If the Harper government would have been loyal to those principles, more pipelines would have been built.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, it is the responsibility of those who created the problem in the first place to clean it up. If the premier of Alberta or the premier of Saskatchewan believe it is a top priority for infrastructure investments in their province, then I am sure the government would be interested in considering their request.

Mr. Speaker, we are very encouraged to learn that the Government of Quebec has determined that it would be a good idea to engage in conversation with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, which is a very good example of two provinces working together in common cause. When provinces work together with the support of the national government, only good things can happen.

Mr. Speaker, we knew that there had to be more consultation, and for good reason. We consulted in a fulsome way.The member also knows that among those who have differing points of view would be mayors and reeves in his own riding. I have met with them, and they believe in responsible resource development and they actually support the Trans Mountain expansion, even in his riding. They understand that responsible resource development combined with environmental stewardship is where Canadians want their government to be.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to consult with Canadians in Winnipeg and in Halifax, and in two weeks in Vancouver. My first trip outside of Ottawa was to Calgary, where I had an excellent conversation with industry leaders who had just come to the realization that if we are to determine the best way of getting our resources to market, we will need government, environmentalists, indigenous leaders, and industry.If we are not able to accomplish that, we will have the record about which the people across should not be very boastful.

Mr. Speaker, the government is working very hard both with all departments across the Government of Canada and with our provincial counterparts. I have had the pleasure of meeting with ministers, and we keep in touch regularly, to make sure that Canada's response is a coordinated one. We understand the importance of the forestry sector to Canada. We understand it is important to make sure those jobs are protected as best as we can. We are working tirelessly to make sure that happens.

Mr. Speaker, phasing out inefficient fuel subsidies is a G20 commitment, and Canada is part of that commitment. We have already taken significant steps in budget 2016 and budget 2017, and we will continue to do that, as it is our international commitment and what we believe is good for the Canadian economy.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said just this morning, the decision we took on the Trans Mountain pipeline was based on facts and evidence and on what is in the best interests of Canadians.Regardless of a change in government in British Columbia, or anywhere, the facts and evidence do not change. We understand that growing a strong economy for the future requires taking leadership on the environment, and we have to do those two things together. That is what drives us in the choices we make, and we stand by those choices.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member will agree that the National Energy Board that we inherited was not perfect, and I am sure he might agree that significant reform would be a good thing for Canada's energy industry. He might also acknowledge that, since this government took power, three pipelines have been approved. We will now take the recommendations that have been given to us by an expert panel of five who have consulted Canadians, and we will review that with the objective in mind of creating the greatest regulator in the world right here in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, just two days ago, there was a question from a member of the Bloc Québécois. He said that the government was about to impose the energy east pipeline on the people of Quebec.The day before that, there was a member from the Conservative Party who said that the budget should announce its approval of a pipeline, which application has not yet been received by the regulator and without a single community having yet been consulted.We are going to follow a more rational process, a more principled one, that has a better chance of carrying the confidence of Canadians.