Ellis Ross

Not analysed yet

A requested analysis is usually ready within half an hour; come back to this page or reload it.

Madam Speaker, as always, it is a pleasure to speak on behalf of the constituents of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, especially when we are talking about something important like Bill C-269, which has been brought here by my colleague. I support it. I come from a small reserve in Kitamaat Village. For those who do not know, we are basically the heart of industry in northwest B.C. For the last 70 years, we have been the heart of industrial development. Kitimat has an aluminum smelter, which at one time was one of the dirtiest smelters in Canada if not North America or the world. Our band then supported the modernization of that smelter into one of the cleanest smelters in Canada, or North America, producing a high-quality product for the world. That old smelter was dumping out a lot of CO2, carbon and heat, not just into the atmosphere but into our waters. Heat is a form of pollution. It does, in fact, affect the environment. Nature does not like extreme heat. It does not like artificial heat. If members do not believe me, they should come to Kitimat. At a time when there were no regulations being enforced, or in existence, the heat itself actually caused a lot of problems in terms of the seaweed, salmon and shellfish going away. Now we are starting to fix that with updated technology and learning more about what heat means. What is being talked about in Bill C-269 is the capturing of waste heat and turning it into electricity. This is at a time when the topic seems to be reducing our carbon footprint, but also how to make Canada more competitive and how to diversify our economy and try to reduce our reliance on the U.S. economy. I do not understand why there is opposition to this bill. Members can call it what they like. They can call it value-added or manufacturing. They can call it whatever they want, but it is an efficient way to take something that would normally get into our environment and make use of it. This is especially true in British Columbia when talking about electricity demand and supply, where the conversation has now shifted to Site C, the multi-billion-dollar dam in northern B.C., not being enough for B.C.’s demand. It is not enough, and given the politics, I doubt I will see another dam being built in my lifetime, so we have to think about other ways to meet that demand. Vancouver actually put a ban on using natural gas for new home builds. That ban was reversed last year because the electricity demand could not be met. In fact, B.C., at peak times, has a deficit of electricity, so it imports electricity from neighbouring provinces as well as from the United States. The United States still produces electricity from coal. Yes, the electricity we use when we plug into the wall is green, but we have to trace that back to where it comes from. If it is coming from the United States, and the U.S. is using coal, that electricity we are using is not so green. There are now different conversations about how to use natural gas for electricity. This is a complete reversal of the conversation that was being held 10 years ago, and it all comes down to the demand for electricity. If we are going to become an energy superpower, like the promise made by our Prime Minister, then we have to look at all the components that go into that, including domestic use. If we can make industry more efficient by capturing waste coming from it and turning it into a usable product to make industry’s own operations more efficient, then we should seriously consider it. This should be going to committee. Canadians do want this. They want us to do more, not only to compete with the United States but also to reduce our footprint and be more competitive. Nobody is looking forward to the blackouts that are going to come when one of our energy sources goes down. We saw that in B.C. when the natural gas pipeline went down. All the demand shifted to the electricity grid, which is in danger of blackouts. There are energy shortages in the United States, where there are rolling blackouts to keep up with the demand. This might not seem like a big issue with respect to how it is going to affect us, but everything counts. Everything matters when we are talking about energy efficiency. Yes, Canada is doing a good job, but I agree with our Conservative leader, who is saying that we should be looking at technology to reduce our footprint. Here it is, right here. This would not cost taxpayers anything. It would make industry more competitive with the United States. The government is talking about incentives that are already in place that could be utilized by industry. Why is industry not using them, then? Why is industry going to the United States and making investments in the United States but not here? It is because converting waste heat to electricity is simply not incentivized in Canada. It makes sense for a company to go to the United States, which actually encourages that type of investment. If we do want to compete with the United States, then we have to seriously consider these types of measures. With respect to industry in Kitimat, we have had pulp and paper mills that distributed a large amount of heat into our environment. We had a methane export facility, and now we have the largest private investment in Canadian history, LNG Canada, which produces a lot of heat. The bill would not be the cure for everything, but it would be a good step in the right direction. I do like the comments made by our Bloc colleagues, saying that they could support it in principle and that they agree it should go to committee for more review. I agree as well, but we hear the government already shutting this down without giving the public a chance to see the reality of what this could actually mean to places such as Kitimat and other industrial centres. We want to attract investment. We want to keep investment here. We do not want what is happening in eastern Canada, where all the companies are starting to move to the United States just for competitive reasons. We do not want that, because when it happens, people start to leave, especially our young people. With the way it is going right now, I can tell the House that I do not agree with giving our young people a leaving Canada tax, when the overall economy in all its forms is what is driving people away from Canada. It is the brain drain, and this is just going to keep building up. This is what is needed in small measures, for all the reasons pointed out by my colleagues as well as by the Bloc, because ultimately what we are talking about is turning waste into value and treating heat as a form of pollution and addressing it seriously. I am sure every centre around B.C., or throughout Canada, for that matter, that has an industrial centre can see this, and they can see it comparable to other issues that are facing industry. We do want to do good by Canadians and industry, in small measures, medium measures and big measures. Bill C-269 would be a step in the right direction, and I encourage all my colleagues to encourage the government to accept the bill’s going to committee.