INAN Committee Report

“We're not used to selling trinkets and T-shirts and that kind of stuff.”

Merven Gruben, Mayor of Tuktoyaktuk

 

Cathy McLeod, Member of Parliament for Kamloops–Thompson–Cariboo

Kevin Waugh, Member of Parliament for Saskatoon–Grasswood

Arnold Viersen, Member of Parliament for Peace River–Westlock

Introductory Comments

As Conservatives, we believe the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and the Yukon play crucial roles in Canada’s economy, and have the potential to play even greater roles in the decades to come. However, one of the biggest issues delaying economic prosperity north of the sixtieth parallel is a crippling infrastructure deficit, including the lack of transportation, marine, housing and digital infrastructure.

That is why, as the Conservative members of the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, we supported the following motion on September 24, 2018:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee undertake a comprehensive study of critical northern infrastructure projects and regional strategic infrastructure strategies in the context of possible federal support. For the purpose of this study:

• a) “infrastructure” includes roads, rail, bridges, airports, ports, energy infrastructure, housing, telecoms and any components of broader regional infrastructure strategies; and
• b) “northern” regions included in the Arctic Policy Framework.

Since the Liberal Party of Canada formed government in November 2015, they have displayed a dismissive and paternalistic attitude toward Canadian northerners. We saw this again from the Committee’s Liberal majority during the study of Northern Infrastructure Projects and Strategies that took place in October and November 2018.

The Committee’s final report was absent of practical recommendations. Further, there are three issues we must raise that received scant attention in that report, yet were pivotal in testimony heard by Members.

Review of Infrastructure Proposals

Prior to offering our criticism, we will say that over the course of the study, the Committee heard various proposals for important infrastructure projects. These include, but are not limited to, the Grays Bay Road and Port project; a deep-water port in Tuktoyaktuk; the Kivalliq Hydrofibre Link; significant upgrades to northern airports (such lengthening runways, adding high quality runway lighting, and setting up the Global Positioning System); increased electricity supply; and high-speed broadband connectivity.

Many witnesses were passionate proponents of projects that appeared both well-conceived and evidence-based. It will be the job of the federal government to determine how best to proceed with considering these visions and ideas for Canada’s north, and presenting a clear Arctic policy. 

Thus, we recommend:

That the Government of Canada launch a comprehensive review of all existing and proposed infrastructure projects, with long-term economic benefit analysis, to assist in prioritizing decision-making on capital projects.

Carbon Tax

We note the reference to the implementation of the carbon tax in the final report’s fifth recommendation, that the government of Canada “ensure that carbon pricing, or any other climate change adaptation measures, does not place an excessive financial burden on northerners.”

This does not go far enough. It is clear that climate change affects Canada’s north in profoundly disproportionate ways, but northerners know this is not a problem they have created. In fact, Chris Derksen, a Research Scientist in the Climate Research Division of the Department of Environment Canada, testified as such on October 15, 2018:

It's not the diesel that's burning in the north that's driving climate change in the north. It's diesel and other carbon-emitting processes that are occurring globally.

Yet, the federal Liberals are imposing a carbon tax on northerners without their input. With reliance on diesel for everything – transportation of food and other vital supplies, home heating, power-generation – a price on carbon will lead to a massive increase in the cost of living.

On October 31, the President of AGT Food and Ingredients Inc., Murad Al-Katib, told the Committee, “We certainly see a little angst around the carbon tax. We see a lot of concern in an already relatively difficult environment and cost base in the north that this may be another layer of costs.”

Further, on November 5, Curtis Shaw, President of Northwestel Inc. – whose operations serve 121,000 people across 96 remote northern communities – told of three significant repercussions of the federally-imposed carbon tax, the first two related to the cost of generating power for his business, and the third to his employees’ increased living costs. He stated:

The carbon tax impacts two facets of our business. One is obviously the cost to generate power at our prime power sites where we're consuming diesel, and obviously commercial power that we purchase.

The third thing in the north would be really the cost to our employees, the cost of living. Our average northern employees have to heat a home. In some of our jurisdictions it's below freezing for eight or nine months of the year. It's something that we're monitoring right now, looking at how we deal with the cost of living increases that our employees are faced with.

What is clear is that northern communities can least afford a higher cost of living; they will be the most impacted by the imposed-carbon tax.

When then-Nunavut Premier Peter Taptuna signed, along with his fellow territorial premiers, the Pan-Canadian Climate Framework in December 2016, he was promised that the “unique circumstances” of the territories would be taken into account. He was told that relief would be provided, and that the federal government would launch a study on the potential impacts of a carbon tax on the territories.

As of testimony to the Committee by federal officials on October 15, no such study has been launched, nor accommodations provided to northerners. Thus, we recommend:

That the Government of Canada immediately remove its threat of imposing a price on carbon on northern territories, due to the detrimental impact it will have on the economy and cost of living.

Moratorium in the Beaufort Sea

The second area that is nearly absent in the Committee’s final report is the effect of the federal government’s moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration and development in the Beaufort Sea. Just before Christmas 2016, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau travelled to Washington D.C. to make the announcement with then-United States President Barack Obama. There had been no consultation with northerners; despite consistent rhetoric about consulting with Canada’s Indigenous peoples prior to decision-making, this resolution was made unilaterally from the Prime Minister’s office.

Elected leaders in Canada’s north were made aware of the announcement less than an hour before it was made. The Hon. Wally Schumann, Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, and Minister of Infrastructure, for the Northwest Territories, said as much in his testimony on October 17:

I guess we can be very frank because we're in front of the committee. When it first came out, we never got very much notice on the whole issue of the moratorium and the potential that was in the Beaufort Sea. There were millions and millions, if not billions, of dollars in bid deposits and land leases up there. That took away any hope we had of developing the Beaufort Sea.

Further, Merven Gruben, Mayor of Tuktoyaktuk, told the Committee on October 22:

I agree the Liberals should be helping us. They shut down our offshore gasification and put a moratorium right across the whole freaking Arctic without even consulting us. They never said a word to us.

The imposed-moratorium prompted then-Nunavut Premier Taptuna to issue a “red alert” regarding the territory’s economic development. He told the CBC:

We do want to be getting to a state where we can make our own determination of our priorities, and the way to do that is gain meaningful revenue from resource development. At the same time, when one potential source of revenue is taken off the table, it puts us back at practically square one where Ottawa will make the decisions for us.

The Committee heard quite clearly: the moratorium must end, yet the final report contains no reference to this in its recommendations to the Government of Canada. No one said it better than the Mayor of Tuktoyaktuk, when he told the Committee on October 22:

It’s so easy to sit down here and make judgments on people and lives that are 3,500 clicks away, and make decisions on our behalf, especially with that moratorium on the Beaufort. That should be taken away, lifted, please and thank you. That is going to open up and give jobs to our people–training and all the stuff we’re wishing for.

Tom Zubko, President of the New North Networks, went so far as to testify on October 17 that the moratorium was influenced by foreign-funded “special interest and environmental groups” who are “not acting in the best interests of Canada or Canada’s north.” He went on:

Such government-funded or -supported activities perpetuate and accelerate the view that studying and consulting is superior to taking a chance on development. Given this backdrop, it was deeply disturbing when the Prime Minister placed a moratorium on drilling in the Beaufort Sea with absolutely no consultation.

The Liberal Governments’ imposed-moratorium has devastating impacts on the economy of remote northern communities. The former Conservative government provided funding for a key all-season road, the Inuvik Tuktoyaktuk Highway, yet the community of Tuktoyaktuk will not realize the full possibilities of that infrastructure without resource extraction from the Beaufort Sea. “We’re a proud people who like to work for a living,” the Mayor said to Committee members on October 22. He spoke of the increasing reliance on social assistance, and the “small change” provided by tourists compared to the promise of oil and gas development. “We're not used to selling trinkets and T-shirts and that kind of stuff,” he said.

Therefore, with the powerful testimony of northerners in mind, we recommend:

That the Government of Canada immediately lift the moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the Beaufort Sea, and consult elected territorial governments on best paths forward for the environmentally- and economically-sustainable development of the region.

Canadian Sovereignty

The third and final important area we will touch upon, though not the only ones that received scant mention in the Committee’s final report, is testimony related to Canadian sovereignty.

Despite the report’s assertion that Arctic sovereignty was “not at the centre of the Committee’s study”, it was a crucial issue raised by five witnesses and in a brief submitted by the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC). The IRC wrote:

Arctic sovereignty requires more today than lofty statements in international venues and dictates from Ottawa. Our region is decades behind when it comes to certain key pieces of infrastructure, which causes [foreign] states to see this region as one that might be “taken” rather than “negotiated with.” Real sovereignty requires, in part, strategically placed infrastructure that invites industry on terms beneficial to Canada and Northerners and which sponsors sustainable growth and lasting security.

On October 31, Dr. Barry Prentice urged the Committee to consider the impact melting ice and increased shipping in the north would have on threats to our sovereignty. Murad Al-Katib testified on same day that, “We as a Canadian nation have a decision to make on whether we are going to control that northern passage or whether we’re going to allow China and Russia to control it.”

This is a pivotal issue to northerners, not just to southern Canada as many have alleged. The IRC went so far as to speak to the necessity of “a visible military infrastructure that is interwoven with the people that actually occupy the territory…” It is their call for action that we must heed.

With that in mind, we recommend:

That the Government of Canada, including the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs and the Department of National Defence, explore specific actions that can be taken to protect the sovereignty of Canadian waters and territories, in consultation with territorial governments and Inuit peoples.

Closing Remarks

Canada’s three northern territories have much potential, if the federal government were to release its paternalistic grip and allow for innovation and exploration in a northern-focussed way. This is why the quotes of northerners are so prominent in the paragraphs above. It is their voice that must be heard. Announcements must not be made on their behalf in foreign countries, following influence by foreign-funded organizations.

The Committee’s final report reflects the federal Liberals’ continued desire to ignore the expressed wishes of northerners. This is not how the Government of Canada should operate.