Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 241 - 300 of 119369
View Joël Lightbound Profile
Lib. (QC)
That was a very eloquent presentation, as I expect from you, Mr. Carr. Thank you very much.
Without further ado, let's start this conversation with MP Michael Kram for six minutes.
View Michael Kram Profile
CPC (SK)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here today, Mr. Carr, and welcome to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology.
I read Bill C-235. It's my understanding that this bill applies to Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba only. Is that correct?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Michael Kram Profile
CPC (SK)
Those three provinces are represented by 62 members of Parliament. When we voted on this bill last June, 51 of those MPs voted against it and only 10 voted in favour, with one MP abstaining.
The question has to be asked: Why do you suppose this bill is so unpopular in the only three provinces it actually affects?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I wouldn't say it's unpopular. I just haven't persuaded you yet, and I have 52 minutes to try. The framework will be constructed over 18 months, so there will be a lot more time to do this. I can't possibly explain why, in the initial stage, it didn't receive support from members of Parliament. I hope that, when it's examined and the potential is assessed and some of the details are fleshed out, there will be more support than that.
I could turn the question around and ask, “Well, why did it pass on second reading?” That's because there were a number of members of Parliament who believed it was in both the Prairies' interest and the national interest.
I'm going to try harder to persuade you that it's good for our region.
View Michael Kram Profile
CPC (SK)
Okay. That's fair enough.
For years, provincial governments in western Canada and the oil and gas sector have been calling for more pipelines to get built, such as the Keystone XL, Trans Mountain and northern gateway pipelines. However, this bill talks about prioritizing projects such as tree planting and solar energy.
How will that help get more pipelines built in western Canada?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
The goal is not explicitly to build more pipelines in western Canada; it's to look ahead at the next generation of developing the energy sector in our region of the country. That's going to include sustainable development in the oil and gas industry. It's going to include hydrogen in Alberta. It's going to include biofuels across the region and all the traditional sources of alternative energy that are known or will be known to everybody. It doesn't constrain the possibility of moving in well-known directions or in directions that we now know through experience and following the flow of investment capital internationally. Consumers worldwide are demanding more sustainable energy development, and Canada is a part of that. Canada is actually on the cutting edge of it. Never, ever, underestimate the entrepreneurship and the capacity of traditional sectors to adapt, to adjust and to thrive. I'm sure we're going to witness that.
View Michael Kram Profile
CPC (SK)
The Government of Saskatchewan is currently forecasting $4.7 billion in revenue from non-renewable resources for the current fiscal year. That's about one-quarter of the provincial government's budget. If that stream of revenues stops coming in from non-renewable resources, then how would you recommend the Government of Saskatchewan make up that budgetary shortfall?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I'm not going to give Premier Moe advice on how to run his government. I want to reach out to Premier Moe. I have to admit that I'm sure if we try hard enough we will find alignment, because his interests are the same as ours—to create good jobs for his people, where those jobs can be found and where they can be generated, where the public environment will offer incentives for those jobs to be created, but just as there are those around this table who don't want the Government of Canada to creep jurisdictionally, I'm not going to creep jurisdictionally into Premier Moe's territory.
View Michael Kram Profile
CPC (SK)
Have you consulted with Premier Moe or any provincial cabinet ministers in Saskatchewan about this legislation?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
No, but the committee will have to. If this becomes law, it won't be a suggestion; it will be mandated. Not only that, but they're going to have to report back to you and you're going to have a chance to ask those questions. It's clear what the goal is. The goal is that they will do exactly that and they will look for alignment.
Look, if there's no spirit of goodwill ultimately, a bill like this is not going to succeed. There has to be a sense that its direct objectives are honourable and in the interests of the people we represent, and those interests are rooted in the capacity of my kids and my grandkids to choose to stay in Manitoba, or, in your case, home. That, I think, is really at the heart of what we hope to accomplish here.
View Michael Kram Profile
CPC (SK)
I'm not saying that there isn't a sense of goodwill, but what are you going to do with the feedback from the provincial premiers, which is that they do not want this bill and they do not want this framework and they would rather govern their own provinces in their own areas of jurisdiction?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
This bill does not encroach on their areas of jurisdiction, and they're free to do so and they should be encouraged to. It does, however, mandate that federal ministers seek alignment on those policy areas in which we can combine our efforts. There is no attempt to undermine, to encroach or to somehow cajole. It's an exercise in finding common ground. If someone says at the top end that they do not want to find common ground, that they want to be left to their own jurisdiction and that we should go home, that constrains the capacity of other jurisdictions or federal ministers to participate in what I hope to be a positive nation-building exercise.
Let's see where the framework goes, how it's developed, where the opposition lies and why, and seek to answer questions that are motivating people who may start here, but who, I hope, will end up in a different place.
View Joël Lightbound Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much.
Ms. Lapointe will now have six minutes.
View Viviane Lapointe Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Viviane Lapointe Profile
2022-09-22 16:22
I'll be sharing my time today with my colleague MP Fillmore.
MP Carr, the rural and northern immigration program is a very successful program in northern Ontario. It helps our businesses with their workforce shortages and labour needs. It grew out of a very successful initiative in Atlantic Canada. In your opinion, would this model you're proposing be relevant to other parts of Canada?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I'm glad you brought up immigration because it was actually my home province of Manitoba that initiated increases to the provincial nominee program. When we began our advocacy in 1999, Manitoba was taking in 500 provincial nominees a year. Now it's taking in more than 15,000. It fuelled the economic development of Manitoba. That model has been replicated across the country and is thought by many to be a model for the world.
It's an extraordinary example of how creative and ambitious immigration targets and a change in the way we administer the program can allow us to take full advantage of our economic potential, which was not the case in Manitoba. It was not the case in many parts of Atlantic Canada or in rural Canada.
I'm very glad you brought up that example.
View Viviane Lapointe Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Viviane Lapointe Profile
2022-09-22 16:24
There are many very good goals in that bill, but how do we ensure that the bill complements what's already happening in the Prairies to build a green economy?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
We do that by assessing where we are and where we want to be, and then by aligning the interests of everybody around the table to work together to get there.
The successes are fabulous. The story of the development of prairie Canada from so many perspectives is really a model for the world, I would say. We opened the door to the talent, the creativity and the entrepreneurship from every continent. We have the wisdom and the savvy to find a way to make those people who are so diverse feel at home. In the first place, it was agriculture that drove it and subsequently it was other industries.
If you look at the development of the demographic profile of prairie Canada, you will see a success story that should help inform us as we move forward to debate immigration policy, temporary foreign worker issues and how we relate to the rest of the world. This is an important role for us to play because we have to diversify our trading partners. We're still so dependent on our relationship with the United States. Because of our profile and because Saskatchewan—as an example—is by far the most diverse trading province in Canada, doing business with so many nations around the world, there are lessons there, too.
If you combine a progressive immigration policy with a trade policy that reaches out to those parts of the world where we have not been successful, you have a recipe for very exciting potential.
View Viviane Lapointe Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Viviane Lapointe Profile
2022-09-22 16:26
That's the end of my questions.
View Andy Fillmore Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Andy Fillmore Profile
2022-09-22 16:26
Thank you, Chair. I will take it up if there's still time.
Jim, it's wonderful to see you. Congratulations on a wonderful PMB. I've been happy to support it so far and I look forward to continuing to support it.
You will remember back to when our government tabled a motion declaring a climate emergency. I listened carefully as we debated that in the House to my prairie colleagues and I listened to all of the debate. We learned from that debate that even though, for many Canadians—even many corporations, including energy corporations—the existential threat is climate change, for a segment of the population, which is concentrated in the Prairies, the existential threat is loss of job, not being able to pay a mortgage or put food on the table. I learned a lot from listening to that.
Now you're here today to convince parliamentarians that there's a better, cleaner and greener way to transition. If your bill passes, government and Parliament will have to work with those residents to win them over and show them a better way.
I wonder if you have any advice for us in that eventuality. How can we bring the people for whom the existential threat is economic along with us in this transition?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
It's by the force of argument and by the use of measurable statistics, which will be compelling to people who have open minds and an open hearts.
If they've made up their mind and if they're not interested in entertaining argument—that is to say that they dissent from their own position of “I don't know”.... This is a question for the ages: What do you do in a conversation if nobody wants to listen to you?
I happen to believe—I'm just built in a way that wants to believe—that most Canadians are open to reasonable argument and debate. If that assumption is wrong, then I wish all of us luck. I'm pretty certain that I'm not wrong. I have lots of evidence to think that people do change their minds. They change their minds when circumstances change. If they don't care about circumstance, then I don't think they have an open mind and I don't think they have an open heart.
I would remain optimistic based on that presumption of human nature, the Canadian national character and building on the success that we've already achieved together. I hope I'm right.
View Andy Fillmore Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Andy Fillmore Profile
2022-09-22 16:28
I think you are, Jim. Thank you.
View Joël Lightbound Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much, Mr. Fillmore.
Mr. Lemire, you have six minutes.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for your bill, Mr. Carr. One senses the influence your career has had on this one, but one also recognizes in it a dream to be realized. I'm disappointed that it's for the Prairies. I'm from a so-called resource region, and mining, forestry and agriculture are particularly important to us. There are a lot of similarities between the Prairie economy and ours.
I feel that a government could even use a bill like this as a blueprint for reforming Canada's and Quebec's economies by building on the strength of the territories. We need to focus more on the royalties that we can give to these places and the economic development tools specific to each of them.
I'm appalled that we're unable to build a normal everyday abattoir in Quebec with help from the federal government. It would make a world of difference to the 100 to 200 beef producers in Abitibi‑Témiscamingue. They have to drive over eight hours and 800 kilometres to have their livestock slaughtered. We know that affects product quality, the environment, etc.
In my opinion, your bill should be more national in scope because it could benefit the whole country. However, the Bloc Québécois supports it because of the solutions it may bring. That could lead to other reforms that could drive economic development across Canada.
I would add with sincerity that one of Bloc Québécois' initiatives would be to have Canada sell the infamous Kinder Morgan pipeline. They said it cost $14 billion, and that figure has now risen to $18 billion or more. The proceeds from that could be used to set up an economic development fund for the Prairies.
Of course, at the Bloc Québécois we'll say that some of our money was used to buy that pipeline but at the same time, if it's resold it might become a driver for economic development that could fund university research, and more specifically green initiatives, as you say. That would be a plausible option for a bill like yours, giving it more depth.
First, how do you see these financing tools? Would it be through banks, insurance companies or federal transfers?
You spoke of working with the provinces and municipalities and financial products, hopefully outside the oil and gas industry, to diversify the economy. How do we do that?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
The bill is not prescriptive because that would undercut the very idea that we spend these months determining what the priorities ought to be in building this framework. However, let me agree with the premise of your introduction that this way of making decisions and coming up with what I hope is enlightened public policy is not restricted to one region of the country. If this is going to work in the Prairies, which is as diverse as I've been suggesting, why won't it work in other regions of the country, including Quebec? I think it will.
This could be seen as a template. It could be seen as a way of experimenting with a new way of going about public policy-making that could be equally applicable.
I wouldn't have any comment to make about setting up a fund of economic development on the basis of selling an asset, but I hope that the framework will include commentary on investment tools and ways in which we can properly fund the next chapter of energy development and sustainability in prairie Canada.
What you're doing is challenging the team of federal ministers, given the mandate that will be part of Canadian law if this bill passes, in order to do exactly the kind of investigations that you're calling for.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
You're suggesting we take an interest in several new energy sources, including nuclear energy.
Can you tell us more about how you see nuclear energy being used in the Prairies?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
We didn't want to exclude anything by virtue of including a list of possibilities. The framework will establish recommendations on the precise way in which various sources of energy might be used, but it didn't make any sense to me or to those of us who were involved in drafting to exclude any possible source of energy. Maybe it's there to be rejected by others at a later date, but it made no sense to leave it out.
That's why it's there. Let them have a go at it. Let them explore it. Let the controversy be joined. Let the debate be robust, as I'm sure it will be. We know people are of different views.
It was my judgment—and I still say it's a good judgment to make—to have a go and to have a debate. I think the country needs it. It's timely.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
I have one last question to ask.
Why do we need to go through a bill, like you're doing now? What's the added value compared to other initiatives that have been carried out?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I don't know that we can assume partnerships will happen all on their own. I think to mandate the kinds of conversations that will have to happen is to concentrate the public mind. And let me say the private mind, too, because the role of the private sector in making these policies breathe life is essential. Without it, it's not going to happen. You're not going to have governments acting on their own to tackle all of the problems that our region is facing. It has to be in concert with the academic community that's going to drive research and development, the private sector that's going to drive investment patterns, and the public policy environment that is the responsibility of government to set.
I think we have to have a certain amount of confidence that what we're creating here is going to allow for all of those conversations to happen in a way that's going to lead to a better result than we've had before. People will say, “Yeah, but you had all this time to do what it is that you want this bill to accomplish, but it hasn't happened.” They ask, “Why hasn't it happened?”
I'm not interested in why something hasn't happened. I'm interested in helping things happen, and that's what this bill seeks to do.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
I didn't dare ask you that question.
Thank you very much.
View Joël Lightbound Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much.
We'll move to MP Masse for six minutes.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:36
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome back, and thank you for your service over the years in Parliament.
I'm going to go through an idea here. Your summary talks about local co-operation, engagement and a number of different things. Do you have any municipalities that are supporting this bill?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I've had conversations with mayors and reeves, and organizations of municipalities. I think there is a consensus among them that to be a part of this kind of conversation in itself....
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:37
There have been no endorsements yet—
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I haven't sought endorsements. That's something that the....
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:37
Other than Saskatchewan, is there any provincial support for it, any premiers or provincial explicit support from ministers?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I haven't sought that.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:37
Okay. How about first nations?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
Yes, I've had conversations with first nations communities. They are mentioned explicitly in the bill.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:37
Right, but have you an endorsement from them for the bill?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
Again, I'm not seeking endorsements—
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I'm seeking agreement from this committee in the first place, and then subsequently by the House to mitigate those conversations—
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:37
Do you have any citizen petitioners who have been in favour of the bill? Do you have petitions running or public support?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
You're giving me lots of great ideas, but as I said, I've not sought at this stage to do any of that.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:37
I'm looking for consistency here, and here's the reason. I have a private member's bill, too, Bill C-248, that you voted against. It's been accused by the government side, by some members—not all—of being top-down.
I have, as converse to yours, the City of Windsor's actual explicit endorsement for the bill, including the mayor and all of council unanimously. It's the same with the Town of LaSalle. I have not only just the first nations that are supporting it explicitly. Caldwell First Nation historically used this bill, and my bill, as part of their actual reconciliation process. I also have the Province of Ontario that just passed a motion in the legislature in their first weeks of the House sitting in favour of what's taking place. I have thousands of petitioners. I have almost 10 years in the making of the entire idea for the national urban park. I have Unifor onside, the Windsor and District Labour Council, and I also have the Wildlands League, NGOs, all universally in support of it. The only opposition comes from you and government members.
I want you to reflect on that, and if you're open I want to find out—what do you think is top-down? It appears that your bill here is a little more top-down than my bill, which actually comes from the community.
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I wouldn't purport to be able to compare these two bills from that perspective when the objective of my bill is to end up exactly where you are now. We're just starting from different places.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:39
If we are, I started from the other place, so I'm curious. This is what has been spoken in the House of Commons against my bill. It was voted against by your members, and I still think that I want to reflect on this in terms of the accusation that mine is top-down, whereas yours does not have explicit support from anyone yet, and this appears to be more top-down.
I think we need consistency.
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:39
I will move on with regards to canola. It's one of the things that I think has been underestimated in the Canadian economy. Can you maybe highlight a little bit about how this could help with that? I know that in the past we had the Wheat Board that would push out policies and so forth, and that's changed over time. Canola has emerged as very much a dominant staple market export. Maybe you can explain how this will help on an issue like that in a more practical sense.
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I think it just underlines the importance of converting our natural resources not only into traditional sources of energy, but also into alternate sources of energy in demand worldwide. We produce much of it. We have to be more aggressive in the way we market it, and that's an obstacle.
When I was minister of international trade—you notice they added the word “diversification”—as Shannon knows, we travelled around the world looking for new markets, and there was a reluctance among Canadian entrepreneurs to get out of their comfort zones: We speak the same language as the Americans; they're comfortable; we've done business with them forever. Business was okay, and people were risk averse. They shouldn't be risk averse; they should embrace the challenge. You say that canola is a good example of that, and I agree with you.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:41
With regards to the transportation of goods and services to the product destination for international trade, often pipelines are focused on, but the other modes of transportation are CP and CN, and there are container issues right now. I know that in a number of different areas they're not getting out to the different markets. Is this a forum where transportation to market can also be addressed?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
Absolutely. You may have read the one example. There hasn't been a train to move from Calgary to Edmonton since 1985. You probably know—members around this table will know—that bus service is almost unavailable in prairie Canada. The airline connections are inadequate to say the least. So, who is grabbing that? This could easily be a forum where the interests come to the table and say that this is unacceptable. I mean, our people.... Imagine seniors in rural prairie Canada trying to go from one place to another, and there's nothing available to them. Who's debating it? Who's looking for public policy solutions? This offers them an opportunity.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:42
Lastly, with regards to the groups and organizations I referenced at the start, do you think there are many out there that want to testify to this committee, and do you have a list to help us to gain access to those organizations, whether they be municipal, provincial, first nations and so forth? Can you provide that?
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
I'm glad to work with you on the lists. I'm happy to do that.
View Brian Masse Profile
NDP (ON)
View Brian Masse Profile
2022-09-22 16:42
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witness.
View Joël Lightbound Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much.
We'll move to Mrs. Stubbs.
View Shannon Stubbs Profile
CPC (AB)
View Shannon Stubbs Profile
2022-09-22 16:43
Thank you, Chair. It's nice to see you again. I enjoyed working with you on the public safety committee.
Mr. Carr, it's nice to see you again. I did enjoy working both with and against you on natural resource issues during your years as natural resources minister. I also want to recognize your service both in Manitoba and to Canada, and it's nice to see you well and in person.
Far be it from me to be surprised today to agree with an NDP member from Ontario, but I'm just here to speak on behalf of the Alberta constituents I represent. Following up on the point that our colleague from Ontario made and also our Conservative colleague here from Saskatchewan, I think your bill, seven years into the Liberals being in government, is quite a negative commentary on this federal government's track record on negotiating and consulting with prairie provinces. It seems to me that your aspirations and intentions in this legislation, which I know are good, would imply that consultations so far between the various levels of government have been ineffective or lacking.
I guess what I'm curious about is how you sort of reconcile what you clearly have identified as a need for this sort of legislation against a federal government that is, for example, facing lawsuits from all three provincial governments on the carbon tax, on the shipping ban, Bill C-48, the “no more pipeline spills”, and Bill C-69, which will also have major consequences, of course, not just for resources projects but all kinds of other economic development.
On those three issues, the vast majority of prairie representatives who happen to sit federally in the Conservative caucus as well as those prairie provincial representatives say they are among the top threats destroying economic development in their provinces and livelihoods of their citizens and of the people I represent.
It just seems that you are asking for a committee and politicians to create a framework and a mandate, which I presume is going to cost something, to enable a process to occur, which clearly already should be happening, but we are sitting here where we are in reality with the federal government that is being opposed on all kinds of major pieces of legislation and their policy agenda by those very provinces.
View Jim Carr Profile
Lib. (MB)
We all could look backwards together and determine where we've gone wrong, and we might even agree, but that's not what I want to do. I want to look forward, and I want to take accomplishments where we can find them and parlay them into a bit of a road map, acknowledging that there have been mistakes made and that there are relationships that should have been developed that haven't been developed.
I spent most of two years on the second floor of my house on my little computer traversing the Prairies. Do you know what I found? In spite of all of the noise and all the confusion about political messaging, I found alignment everywhere, including in Alberta. I was surprised by it, not only because of some demographic changes that have occurred over the last number of years, but because the very nature of the way in which we organize ourselves as provinces has changed.
I was surprised that, in the course of the day, I could, through the magic of my Surface Pro and not getting on an airplane, visit cattle ranchers in the morning, talk to the chamber of commerce at lunch and then talk to power producers in the afternoon. I would come out of that day and say that we agreed on four or five things. Why isn't anybody talking about the agreement across unions, industry, academia and government officials, a lot of important conversations with ministers of the Alberta government, as an example on issues that really matter?
View Shannon Stubbs Profile
CPC (AB)
View Shannon Stubbs Profile
2022-09-22 16:47
This is what is confusing about this initiative. Those provinces, their federal representatives, their provincial representatives and their citizens, by and large, are speaking loud and clear about these consequential aspects of the cornerstone of the Liberal government's policy agenda, and they're being ignored. I guess the Liberals can take up your individual initiative to consult, but if that two-way dynamic and listening to what is being said continues to be ignored, we will gain nothing.
I think the central issue with this bill is that if we need it, it's an indictment of the current government. If the government wants to contend that consultation is already happening, it's not necessary.
Also, about your aim.... In greening the economy—you and I have had this conversation many times—I agree with you wholeheartedly about the stereotypes that are applied to various provinces. You know it's a passion of mine to bust myths about Alberta, which, of course, was the first province to have an environment minister, the first province to set, report and regulate emissions, and the first province to have a major industrial emitter levy targeted to clean tech. The oil and gas industry accounts for 75% of investment in this country for clean tech. Alberta's the biggest hydrogen producer. We are the first province with a 100% renewable energy-powered LRT. We have the largest contiguous green space. We have the oldest commercial wind farm. We have the oldest and largest commercial solar farm.
The reality is that in the province of Alberta, this environmental stewardship and leadership has been happening already because of the public policy agenda of the provincial governments and a thriving private sector fuelled by energy and agriculture, so that money is available to invest in technology. Also, to your point, there's a co-operative development of public policy framework to allow these things to happen, just like when Prime Minister Chrétien worked with Premier Klein to bring in some fiscal policies to unleash the development of in situ oil sands projects.
Here we are now with four pipelines having been killed, because of the regulatory mistakes of the Liberal government, and 18 LNG projects that have gone by the wayside, killing Canada's opportunity to be both self-sufficient and a world-leading provider of LNG across the country.
I notice—
Results: 241 - 300 of 119369 | Page: 5 of 1990

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data