Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 1 of 1
View Shannon Stubbs Profile
CPC (AB)
View Shannon Stubbs Profile
2020-02-25 10:32 [p.1475]
Mr. Speaker, I am requesting an emergency debate on the economic impact on all of Canada caused by the cancellation of Teck Frontier.
It is an economic crisis for Canada, because energy is the biggest private sector investor in the economy and creates jobs in every province. However, nearly $200 billion in oil and gas projects have been cancelled or stalled, and 200,000 Canadian oil and gas workers have lost their jobs in the last five years. Every oil sands job creates five other indirect and induced jobs in other sectors in other provinces. Canada has the third-largest oil reserves in the world; 97.3% of which is in the oil sands.
Teck's cancellation is the 11th major multi-billion-dollar oil and gas project to be withdrawn, and Teck is the latest in a list of 18 companies that have cancelled or frozen their Canadian energy assets in the same time frame.
This flight of capital from Canada's energy sector represents a bigger loss of investment and jobs than at any comparable time frame in more than seven decades. It is the equivalent of losing both the automotive and aerospace sectors in Canada, which I am confident would rightly be considered a national economic catastrophe and a severe crisis by every member of every party in this House of Commons.
The cancellation of Teck Frontier will cost Alberta 10,000 badly needed jobs and $20 billion in investment. It will cost 14 indigenous communities, all locally impacted and all supportive, their agreements with financial, education and skills training opportunities. It will eliminate the potential of $70 billion in revenue to all levels of government, municipal, provincial and federal.
Its cancellation represents a crisis of investor confidence in the fairness, predictability, independence, and certainty of Canada's regulatory system, policy framework, and the economy overall. Teck invested $1 billion while meeting every requirement during eight years of a rigorous multi-jurisdictional review, and even recently took the unprecedented step of self-imposing a goal to be net zero by 2050, far beyond the already world-leading standards of Canada.
Seven months ago, Teck Frontier was recommended by the independent expert joint panel to be in the public interest of Canada, based on its science, evidence, technical, environmental and economic merits, but within a week of the final political decision, media reported that Teck board members concluded that public safety concerns and political risk in Canada made it impossible to continue to pursue the Frontier project.
Already this week, economists and commentators are wondering and warning whether any major energy projects can be proposed or built in Canada.
A painful truth is that it also represents an escalating national unity crisis from the perspective of western Canadians, who see political double standards for oil and gas compared to other sectors and other provinces.
All these factors combined present a national emergency that ought to seize the attention of every member of the House of Commons. An emergency debate is the bare minimum.
Previously, emergency debates were granted when Kinder Morgan announced its withdrawal from the Trans Mountain expansion and when General Motors announced the closure of their automobile assembly plant in Oshawa. Every member here agreed those were emergencies that deserved debate in Parliament, and it happens to be the case that Teck Frontier is larger, both in investment and in jobs.
For these reasons I request again, and thank you in advance for, your consideration for this important emergency debate.
Result: 1 - 1 of 1

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data