Charles Sousa

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on National Defence, entitled “Strengthening Canada's Resilience on the Critical Mineral Front”. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

Madam Speaker, the recent surge in diesel prices has indeed created real challenges for Canadians. Farmers bringing in this year's harvest are facing higher costs. Trucking companies moving goods across the country are facing higher costs. Businesses that rely on diesel power and equipment are also facing higher costs. When transportation costs rise, Canadians often see those costs reflected in the prices they pay for food and everyday goods. Diesel prices matter to Canadians. They affect household budgets, businesses, farmers and industries across the country. Understanding what is driving those prices is essential if we want to identify solutions that can make a meaningful difference. That is because we oftentimes misunderstand the problem, and if we do, we end up chasing the wrong solutions. One of the challenges in this debate is that many different factors affect the price of diesel. Some of those factors are within Canada's influence and others are not. A responsible energy policy begins by understanding the difference. Let us begin with what Canadians can influence. Governments can act to provide relief when Canadians are facing higher costs. That is exactly what the government did. Earlier this year, the Government of Canada temporarily suspended the federal fuel excise tax on diesel and gasoline. When global pressures persisted, the government extended that relief. That support is expected to provide billions of dollars in relief to Canadians. Members opposite may argue that the relief should go further, and that is a legitimate debate. One of the central proposals in today's motion is tax relief on diesel. On that point, the government has already acted, but the discussion cannot stop there. That is why the government is collaborating with industry, provinces and territories to identify opportunities for Canada to strengthen the resilience of its fuel system, including for transportation networks, storage capacity and other types of infrastructure. By working in lockstep with provinces and territories, we can create the conditions to attract investment in the critical energy systems and infrastructure Canadians rely upon every day. Fuel security is not determined solely by how much fuel is produced. It also depends on whether that fuel can reach the communities, farms and businesses that depend upon it. That requires ensuring that pipelines, rail, storage, and strong distribution networks are always in place to ensure access to the energy that Canadians need. This motion recognizes that fuel security is about more than refining capacity alone. The debate is about how best to strengthen those systems and how quickly Canadians can expect to see results. Now let us consider what Canada cannot control. Canada does not set the global price of crude oil. Canada does not determine global refinery margins. Canada does not control international diesel shortages. Canada does not control wars and geopolitical instability, nor disruptions affecting energy markets around the world. In fact, G7 leaders met virtually on Friday because these challenges are affecting countries around the world, not just Canada, and they agreed to coordinate the release of strategic fuel reserves and diesel in response to pressures affecting global fuel markets. That is a reminder that many of the forces affecting diesel prices extend well beyond the reach of any single government. All of those events can affect the price that Canadians pay. Of course, recognizing that reality is not an excuse. It is simply an acknowledgement of the facts. The fact is that no federal government, regardless of political stripe, can legislate away global energy price volatility. No government can pass a motion in the House of Commons and eliminate geopolitical risk, and no government can guarantee that international supply disruptions will never occur again. What governments can do is strengthen resilience, reduce vulnerabilities and help Canadians weather disruptions when they occur. That is exactly what the government is focused on doing. One aspect of today's motion deserves particular attention. The motion proposes expanding diesel production and building additional fuel infrastructure, including refining capacity, transport networks, and storage. I agree. The government agrees that adequate refining capacity remains important to Canada's long-term energy security. However, it is important to note that Canada already produces more diesel than it consumes. The challenge is not simply how much fuel Canada produces but also ensuring that fuel can move relatively easily and reliably through the systems Canadians depend upon. If market demand supports additional refining capacity, our government should carefully consider proposals to expand its production, but Canadians also deserve a realistic discussion about what refining capacity can and cannot accomplish. A new refinery cannot be planned, financed, approved and constructed in a matter of months. Projects of that scale take years. Even under optimistic assumptions, they cannot address the affordability challenges Canadians are facing right now. That does not make them unimportant. It simply means they solve a different problem. They are not primarily about lowering diesel prices this month. They are about making Canada more resilient in the future. Diesel prices are ultimately linked to North American and global fuel markets, so simply adding refining capacity in Canada would not necessarily translate into significantly lower prices for Canadian consumers. A responsible energy strategy requires both immediate action and long-term planning, not one or the other, and that is exactly the approach the government is taking. First, the government provided relief that Canadians can feel today. Second, it is strengthening the system that will help Canada respond to future disruptions tomorrow. That broader work is already under way. Global instability and associated volatility in diesel prices reinforces the importance of strengthening resilience of our energy systems. Canada already produces significant amounts of energy, but we should also be looking for ways to move that energy more efficiently across the country. That is why the government has focused on strengthening transportation networks and improving market reliance. Recent approvals, including the Wolf Midstream project, the Sunrise expansion project and the Taylor to Gordondale project, will strengthen the infrastructure that moves energy and fuels where Canadians need them most. The Pacific link is another recent example of that work. The Government of Canada recently designated the project as one of national interests under the Building Canada Act. It has the potential to strengthen Canada's energy security and diversify our export opportunities. A resilient country is a better-prepared country. A better-prepared country with energy security is about more than any single project and about more than any single type of fuel. Canada's energy security depends on having reliable conventional fuels, strong transportation networks, adequate storage and, increasingly, abundant clean fuels and clean energy. These are not competing objectives; they strengthen one another. Reliable diesel remains essential for farmers, truckers, construction workers, mining operations and countless businesses across the country, but Canada's energy security is also strengthened when we produce more reliable alternatives to diesel, such as more clean fuels such as renewable diesel and biodiesel. More supply makes energy systems more resilient, and more options make it more reliable. That is why the Government of Canada has also supported the growth of Canada's biofuel sector. The goal is to strengthen Canada's domestic production of renewable alternatives to protect Canadians, to build energy security and to add fuel to the market. They complement conventional fuels rather than replace them. More fuel supply strengthens market resilience and reduces pressure on prices. Energy security is strengthened when Canada produces more energy of all kinds. That means more conventional security, more conventional energy, more clean fuels, more clean energy and more resilience. That is how any country can be prepared for uncertainty. Canadians need relief today. They also need confidence in the future. That means taking action where governments can make a difference and strengthening Canada's energy security over the long term. Our government is doing both. That is the approach Canadians deserve and the approach we will continue to pursue.

Madam Speaker, the question is whether we can do both. Can we walk and chew gum? We need to do both. The fact is that we need to provide clean alternatives within the system as we proceed. There is a demand. We have the resources. Canada's prosperity is dependent upon its ability to provide some of our critical minerals, including fuel and energy from the tar sands. We are already a huge producer of energy around the world. We will continue to be, and we will continue to provide alternates, including clean energy alternatives.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the fact that we are asking questions. We should always ask questions, and the government should be held accountable to the investments it is making for the future benefit of Canadians. I will argue, though, that demand does exist. The prosperity and legacy of that demand over a longer period of time of time may dwindle, which is all the more reason we have to look at alternative forms of energy, but Canada has what the world wants. We have heard that many times. The world needs Canada to be at the table to provide some of the resources and trust. Canada is a trusted partner in these endeavours. We are trusted to provide environmental protection as we proceed. We can continue doing both, and we will.

Madam Speaker, the point is well taken. The government has a responsibility, a duty and an obligation to Canadians to think beyond election cycles. Short-sightedness is not what is going to make what the Canadian future requires. We have to look long-term. We need to make these investments for the benefit of Canadians and our prosperity. At the same time, we can provide relief in transition to that resilience and reliability that is being invested in these major projects. It is important that Canadians work together with all provinces and all parties to look at the long term and invest for our future.