Power Play #2265: LNG Canada greenlights Phase 2 expansion

0:00Hi there and welcome to PowerPlay. I'm Bashikapelo Sinagua on this Tuesday. Tonight a big deal. What a project. What a partnership. What a great day for Canada. LNG Canada's Phase 2 expansion gets the go ahead and move which could double exports of liquefied natural gas to markets overseas. The feds have marked it as a major project, but environmental and indigenous groups have raised concerns about the expansion. Prime Minister Mark Carney will face questions on the project shortly. We'll bring that to you as it happens. Plus I'll go one-on-one with the Energy Minister's Parliamentary Secretary, Khory Hogan, pardon me about some of that pushback. Our front bench panel is also standing by to give us their analysis, Sharon Karr, Shakira Chambers, Tom Mulcare and Laura Stone. We'll all be here just a little bit later on. Plus conservative leader Pierre Pollyette loses another MP.

1:00CTV has just learned conservative MP Scott H. Asin. We'll resign his seat by the end of this year to pursue other opportunities. A source tells me that he is looking for those other opportunities after serving in elected office for 30 years, different forms of elected office. We'll have more details on that breaking news coming up first, though. We are going to head straight over to British Columbia where Prime Minister Mark Carney is fielding questions from reporters after being there for the announcement from LNG, Canada, that they are moving ahead with this expansion project on the West Coast. Let's take a listen in. Thank you Prime Minister. We'll now turn to questions. I don't know if I'm going to make a question. First question. George, you might see B.C. Is Phase 2 of LNG, Canada going to be built with Chinese steel, like Phase 1, or will it be built with Canadian steel? It's a great question for the proponents of Phase 2. They've taken their first investment decision. The process runs for the next five,

2:07six years. I'll leave it to them on the precise timing in early 2030s when expected to be operational. There will be full opportunities to buy Canadian steel and we'll continue to invest in the Canadian steel industry to make sure that's the case, but it'll be for them to decide. Follow up. President Trump said yesterday he thinks Canada will apologise in the next three to four weeks and say we're going to get rid of all the tariffs. Mr. Navarro today told Canadians lobbying in Washington to get the hell out of the country. What are you saying in response to this? I take note of both comments. I have no response to either. Next question. Pression. I'll just say this on trade. It continues to be the case that Canada stands ready to negotiate in good faith. What is there, which is a mutually advantageous trade arrangement that respects both our country's sovereignty?

3:08William Burr, Radio-Canada, Mr. Prime Minister, a combien? Prime Minister, how did you estimate the greenhouse gases linked to the increase in the production of liquid natural gases? How do you intend to counter that? Firstly, as far as GNL-LNG2 is concerned, it is the biggest project and it is the most effective project as far as greenhouse gases are concerned in the world. So the level of greenhouse gases emitted in this process is very low. That's the first point. The second point. The partners of this project. In most of the partners who use the liquid natural gas in order to reduce or stop,

4:09the use of coal so it is an energy transition process, what we know is that it is the more effective project for the environment. As far as such projects are concerned in the world. Next question. You had an important announcement at the beginning of the elections campaigning Quebec at the side of Christian Fichek. Today you were with your colleague. Are you interfering in the provincial elections? You were with your colleague. No, not at all. I must clarify something. Well, it was not during the elections in the elections campaign in Quebec. It was before the official launch of this process and it was the greatest investment in this novel sector in Canadians in Canada's history. Now concerning the announcement which was made today, the energy

5:16to announcement was determined by the five partners of the private sector. The government of Canada has made great efforts in order to get to this point and to have this private investment which is the greatest investment in the history of Canada. So it's important for the Prime Minister of Canada to be here. At the same time, we are making an announcement and the announcement today, our strategy will be very important for the generations to come in Canada. How do you respond to the announcement?

6:17Well, the first is the announcement at the Davieship yard which is the biggest investment in shipbuilding in Quebec's history was made prior to the start of the campaign and natural that of course I would be there and other officials would be there. Today's announcement was determined, the timing of it was determined by the five private sector partners for LNG2, the Canadian government made major efforts over the course of the last year to get to this point, to help them get to this decision point for what is the second largest investment in private sector, sorry private sector investment in Canadian history. So it's an enormous investment and the final point that I made was that I think that we're able to do multiple things at one time, we have to protect as we build and that the ocean conservation efforts that we're taking today as part of a much bigger nature strategy and what we'll follow from

7:20this will be bigger determinants for future generations of this country. Thank you. Next question, question Kisil. My name is Gagard Lohman-Mail. Lots of new information has come to light since the 2024 federal government's review of what happened to Canadian diplomats in Havana. The Globe and Mail has reported that Canadian and American intelligence were collaborating during that time when Canadian and American diplomats began to experience symptoms. The US just reported acquiring a directed energy weapon they're testing that could be responsible for Havana syndrome and they've deemed they're finding serious enough to brief the House and Senate intelligence committees. Former Ceasus and National Security officials are calling for you to open an investigation into what happened. Will your government open some sort of independent investigation or refer this to NCICOP for review? I expect to be briefed on the situation. There's

8:21some new information as you say that's come to light and I'll take a determination after that's happened. So do you think the government owes these diplomats to look into the new information and to Canadian diplomats around the world who could be at risk for similar exposures? The answer is fundamental. We owe a responsibility and we discharge a responsibility a duty of care for Canadian diplomats who serve in the front lines on behalf of Canadians and those front lines can the fact of that service can change very rapidly in a variety of jurisdictions and circumstances and take those responsibilities seriously issues of national security and ongoing investigation. They're appropriate ways to and times to pass that on. As I've said I expect to be briefed. I haven't been briefed in more detail about the latest revelations and I commend you for raising

9:24them and I expect to be briefed and take action from there. Thank you. Next question. Pushing Kisum. Hi there, Brenna Owen with the Canadian Press. So BC's Attorney General, I'm sure you're aware, has asked the federal government to make changes to the criminal code to hold AI companies accountable following new details about the conversations between the Tumblr RID shooter and chat GPT. So is this something that you are considering? Thank you for the question. The independent of the independent of the BC Attorney General. Our government has been looking at and consulting on issues around a series of issues around safe social media, extending related but different extended AI, the responsibilities, the various responsibilities these providers have and any live buildings that they may have. This will be one of the issues that

10:25will be addressed in Parliament in the session. Thank you. So yeah, the American bands on Canadian alcohol and other imports is kicking in today. The clock is ticking down to the US midterms. Are you considering applying new trade pressure at this time or have you ruled out further escalation? Never ruled anything out. I'll stand by my earlier comments and the position of the government which is, look, the reality is that the cost of living is very high in the United States and there's things that Canada can do to help lower that cost of living. The reality is there's a number of industries that are under medium term pressure, competitive pressure in the United States related industries in Canada and those industries were stronger together. The reality is the world's more dangerous and divided and that energy security, food security, information security, financial resilience and security. All of those are fundamental issues

11:26that are best addressed through reliable partnerships. Canada is a reliable partner and we're ready to work in any of all of those areas. Our timing isn't dictated by any specific aspect of the US calendar. The resources are there. That said, we today's events, today's announcements, I think demonstrate something. Canada has what the world wants. There is a host of strong partners around the world who want to do more with Canada and Canada is going to build in the right way. We're going to build in full partnership with indigenous peoples. We're going to build sustainable. We are going to protect before we build and we're going to build for the benefit of all Canadians. This country is getting stronger, is getting more independent, is getting more resilient and we're a better partner, that's better for Canadians, all of that and in the end we're a better partner for whoever we do deeper trade relations with. Thank you.

12:29Next. Hello. The Canada is always ready to have negotiations with the United States in good faith. What is clear is that the cost of life is high in the United States. Yes, we've got difficulties in Canada, but the government is taking action in order to improve the revenue of Canadians, but in the United States there are challenges for everyone as far as for security is concerned, as far as energy supply is concerned. There are issues with financial stability, Canada is a good partner, is one of the best partners in the world. Everyone wants to collaborate more with Canada, that is obvious with the events of today.

13:34Canada will protect by building. Canada will improve its economy, Canada will invest with real partners with indigenous partners as well. Another end, Canada will become increasingly strong, increasingly resilient and increasingly independent. Thank you. In the last few weeks there's been a lot of talk of Canada getting closer, I've been a half-push month with Europe. How do you intend to integrate our pesticide regulatory regime, which your government has been kind of gutting with the more stringent European measures? Well, I'll say a couple of things. One is that it and it follows from the previous question. The world wants to do more with Canada and there's a tremendous opportunity that is being created

14:37with an alliance for the future with the European Union. That's an alliance that will make us stronger, make us more independent and really in our view, and I think the view of European Union providing example for the world. What comes with that is high standards. Now, the specific aspects, specific pesticide standards or phytosanitary or other standards, it depends on the nature of the partnership and you will hear more about the nature of the partnership at our summit in Canada, EU summit in Montreal at the end of October. But so it depends on the breadth and the depth of that. It's not clear that those specific areas would necessarily come to pass and be included given all the other opportunities that are there. You've been asking Canadians essentially to make a trade-off to some degree between

15:42development, you know, in the build Canada strong and environment. Just yesterday, the Canadian Energy Regulator announced that it will be approving a lower toll rate for the Transmountain Pipeline, which over 20 years will amount to about 22 and a half billion dollars of lost revenue. Are we actually benefiting from these essentially this business-friendly approach or are these handouts to corporate? No, I agree with virtually everything you said. The what we're creating in building Canada strong, first and foremost, is the independence, the sovereignty that we need to live our lives as we choose, to not have another country, a trade partner, you can guess which one, that dictates what we watch on our streaming, what language we speak, what environmental rules we have in our country,

16:48what we how we prepare for all these aspects. We're taking our future into our own hands and making ourselves strong. Now if you go specifically to the issue around Transmountain, the Transmountain Pipeline feeds about two billion dollars, more than two billion dollars a year now into the federal government, which helps support. And it will continue to do that year and year up. On top of that, that's directly from the pipeline itself. But then there's a series of other benefits in terms of higher prices for our products, more diversification that comes from that. And that provides the strength that we need or more strength, I should say. Again, to live our lives as we choose to support our social programs to move forward as a country. So look, I'm not familiar with the specific

17:49what the Canadian energy, I've got a lot of things on my mind. I didn't follow up. I'll go back and read it. I suspect it's probably something as basic as the change in the cost of capital that they have and that flows through and that's what happens with rate-based regulation. But that's that's a guess I haven't looked at the detail. But the general point is what we're doing. And let's just go to an ill penback, but to what we're talking about today is whether it's L&G2 or the potential expansions of Robert's Bank, a Robert's Bank terminal or a port of Vancouver, which is going to be at full capacity by the end of the decade, which is already at such tight capacity and we're so inefficient in moving goods from this port to the rest of the country that if you go beyond Stanley Part, there's a bunch of ships idling out there, polluting out there because they can't just come in and drop and leave. So part of the expansion of the

18:51capacity, the very expansion of the capacity itself helps address some of these issues that we have. But then it creates the ability for us to trade more with different partners to diversify to reinforce our sovereignty. But the only way we're going to do that is if we make these big investments now to protect our ecosystem. And the only way we're going to build it is if we build in the right way, we build with partners, we use the knowledge is here and build in the right way so that construction literally stops when there is the beginnings of threat to the, in this, you know, as of today, 74 Southern resident killer whales as one very important example of that. And we do all of those things because we're Canadian because we value, yes, the growth, but we value our natural heritage and the environment and we believe in building and partnership. So

19:51it is, it is connected, not a trade off. That's the core point. And, you know, it's a message, well, I'll leave it at that. I've probably gone on too long. You're not at very, that I should leave it at that. Yes, okay. Sorry. We'll have time for one last question. Thank you. Hi, apologies. Hi, Prime Minister, Sarah McDonald, Global News, kind of along actually the same lines of, as that last question, on phase two, energy announcements obviously always gone a lot of strong response on either end. There's protesters downstairs right now. What do you say to the environmental groups and the critics who say that your government is handing taxpayer money to foreign gas giants? And on top of that, to expand a facility that we now know burned off more methane than any other LNG export facility in the world last year, your response. The, a couple of things. One, the, in terms of the tax regime and one of the things we've been doing with the tax regime is to equalize broadly the tax. This is the productivity mega-deduction,

20:53if I could plug in for that, it is to equalize the incentives for tax, for investment that's going to grow the economy, your respective of the type of investment that's going to grow the economy. So whether it's in the energy sector, it can be in tech, it can be in traditional manufacturing, precision manufacturing, agriculture, etc. All of that treated the same way, so that we're creating that level playing field. So that's the first part of that. The second is, you know, it is a fact that this is a facility and a train, which is the lowest, lowest GHG, it's top desial GHG in terms of scope one, scope two. So that's the answer to that. And look there, there is transition fuels and natural gas is one of the core transition fuels and that's the role there. Okay, and a question on this. And I may be the other thing I would add, which is an important thing, is to look at the entirety of what the government is doing on energy. So it was six weeks ago,

22:02two months ago maybe, that I was at the other coast, announcing the largest ever investment in North America, clean energy, 14 gigawatts in Churchill Falls, an investment made possible by the federal government and demonstrated by the fact that through the process of getting that agreement, the new agreement between Newfoundland and Labrador and the province of Quebec, an additional four gigawatts of clean energy was found and the federal government will be an equity participant in that. That's great for Quebec, it's great for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is a big step to our very clear goal, which is to double the grid, electricity grid, which is the biggest return to emission reduction in this country has and a huge huge competitive opportunity Canada has and that's why we're pursuing it so aggressively. Hello, follow up. An unrelated question on the

23:02Stelco news that we heard yesterday, can you outline what kind of financial support the feds were willing to give to Cleveland Cliffs to avoid steel layoffs in Hamilton and is your government considering legal action to make the company respect its agreement with the government to not have any layoffs? Yeah, I will, I'll make a couple of observations. One, we were very disappointed at this decision by Stelco, my personal and our thoughts are with the workers and the families who were have been betrayed by the company. Let's put it blank. There's money on the table from the federal government, number one, and the company made representations and has legal obligations for employment. We intend to use all powers that we have and pursue them to the full extent of the law and I would just take note that this situation is caused by the U.S. tariffs and that the

24:08ultimate owner of the CEO of the ultimate owner of Stelco, Cleveland Cliffs applauded President Trump for putting those tariffs on. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, that is Prime Minister Mark Kerney in British Columbia, alongside a host of other ministers, they're making an announcement or sort of reiterating an announcement from LNG Canada that they're moving ahead with the second phase of their expansion. It's an export facility in Kidamat, British Columbia. If it materializes, wouldn't materialize, it will double the production there. A lot of questions for the Prime Minister on that subject. Hello Canada. This is Brian Adams Radio. I hosted by Brian Adams himself. We'll play a few of mine, a ton of my favorites, and some must hear behind the scenes stories from the world of rock and roll. One thing about doing rock and roll so long is you end up meeting a lot of the people that you admire. Sometimes you can get to work with them. Brian Adams Radio. Now available on the free IHR radio app.

25:16Everybody, how are you tonight? Sounds great. And I'm going to get to them in a moment and we've got the parliamentary secretary to the minister of energy on hand in a few minutes to take some of those questions and some of the challenges presented there to the Prime Minister. But first, I just want to outline some of what the Prime Minister said there on other subjects that are salient as well. First off, the last question he got on Stelco. Remember, this is the steel company owned by an American company in the United, pardon me, in Hamilton, who it came to light yesterday. We'll be laying off about 350 workers there. He used very strong language talking about this. The Prime Minister said that those workers who thought were the workers who were, quote, betrayed by the company that his government is very disappointed. He was asked by the reporter, what kind of financial incentives or supports were put on the table? Because other ministers have said there were financial incentives put on the table in order for the company to keep the level of employment it has or to keep those people employed. He did not provide a direct answer to that question. Just said they were very disappointed that the employees had been betrayed by the company and that the government would pursue

26:21any sort of legal means necessary because it was his view that there are some legal obligations on behalf of the company. And he pointed out, of course, that the company is owned by someone aligned with Donald Trump. On the subject of Donald Trump and Donald Trump's terror regime, some questions for the Prime Minister as well and some of the comments yesterday from President Trump who said that he expected Canada to apologize in three to four weeks. They might be back at the table. The Prime Minister kind of laughed that off. And then was also asked about Peter Navarro's comments today. You'll hear more about this a little bit later on the program. But basically, sort of telling Canadian lobbyists ahead of the midterms to get out of the United States. He sort of laughed that off as well. Said he took note of the comments and reiterated what he said quite frequently over the past few weeks that there is sort of this mutually beneficial deal to be had. But ultimately, you know, leaving things where they are. In any event, more on that subject as promised with the Prime Minister Secretary to the Minister of Energy, Cory Hogan, he'll join me in

27:22two minutes. But first, I've got to deliver you some breaking news about something occurring right here in Ottawa, or relevant right here in Ottawa. Concert of leader Pierre Paulier of CTV News has learned is losing another member of parliament, a source close to Scott H. Asin, the MP for Perry Sound, Miss focus in 2019, confirms that Mr. H. Asin will resign his seat before the end of this year. The source tells us that Mr. H. Asin informed Mr. Paulier's office last week of that resignation. And that after 30 years in elected office, H. Asin wants to pursue, quote, other opportunities. His departure, it's worth noting, brings the total number of MPs who have departed since the election from the conservatives to eight. We are awaiting a statement from the conservative leader's office. We've been told that there is one coming. So I'll share it to you. I'll share it with you rather whenever we get it. And of course, our front bench will talk about Mr. H. Asin's departure in a few moments. First, though, as promised, Cory Hogan is the parliamentary secretary to the energy minister. I spoke to him just before the prime minister's announcement about LNG Canada phase

28:26two moving forward. Hi, Mr. Hogan. Welcome back to the show. Thanks for making the time. Yeah, glad to be here. Is it a bit disingenuous for your government to claim such a high level of credit for this project advancing? It was referred to the major project's office a full year ago. And it was appeared at the time and now seems to have materialized to be just waiting on a final investment decision from the private backers now. Well, I mean, we you and I talked about this in September last year and we talked about some of the hurdles that they needed to go forward on. They needed to understand the regulatory environment. They hadn't finished their financial considerations. They then considered their or fully considered their consultations with First Nations and how we were going to include Indigenous economic reconciliation. And we've worked through those in large part because of the work of the major project office. And I think that if you talked to the proponents, they would really credit the major project office and that concierge service for really being the thing that helped get it over the finish line. And I think that's a great thing and I think we learned a lot from it and I think that's that's just going to help us build more of major projects going forward. Is that what it is?

29:29A concierge service because I'm I guess I'm kind of confused. Even the stuff that that you laid out, you know, rollbacks, for example, of regulations that existed under the previous liberal government that your government has embarked on, the changes to the regulatory framework through C5 and now further ones anticipated through C39. Like all of that is done through the mechanism of just government. Like why do you need a whole other bureaucracy to facilitate this? Because anytime you've got a major project, you've got considerations that are bespoke, right? When somebody's investing $33 billion, there's going to be, you know, it's going to touch many, many departments. You've got to get them all in line. You've got to help people work through that. It's going to include multiple governments. For example, the government of British Columbia and the government of Canada need to work together on a number of those things. And you've got to make sure that capital stack is attractive because they can invest anywhere in the world and you want to make sure that those jobs and this this unlock 6100 jobs in Canada. You want to make sure those jobs happen here. And so it's one of those things that is it's just a practical way

30:31to get things done. And from there, we also learn an awful lot about how we can make projects go faster in general, which is also part of what's informed this bill, C39, building Canada strong that we've now gotten from the parliament. So what informed that exactly that the ministers need more discretionary power to override rules that for the last 10 years, Liberals said were necessary? Well, I think what it informed was pragmatism, right? We got to see exactly where the limits of some of those decisions were. We got to see how sometimes when you do a waterfall of one approval after the other, that's not fully considered the entire picture, which is why we've now got strength in regional planning in it and why we're doing concurrent consultations and concurrent engagements with departments. And that's the kind of thing that the major project office was able to facilitate in this case and be able to on stake a lot of things. But now we've got opportunities that we can push forward. And that's great because this was a $33 billion investment in our country and more to come. But to be clear, the pragmatism that you speak of, this Bill C39 not only puts a huge amount of power in discretionary power in minister's hands to override certain environmental and

31:36other regulations that are in place or stipulations or processes, approval processes that are impact assessment processes, but it also gets rid of the sunset part of Bill C5, which is a huge part of your pitch initially when you said you needed to pass these extraordinary powers that they would be on a temporary basis. They no longer are why do you need to do all this? Again, when for the last 10 years we've been told as Canadians that none of this was standing in the way to all of that. Look, I can't speak to the last 10 years. I got here 18 months ago, so did the prime minister, so did the minister of energy and natural resources. Basically everyone else didn't? Well, what I can tell you, I don't know, it's a pretty robustly new caucus. But what I can tell you is that when you talk about things like the sunset clause, we learn, right? We pass the major projects legislation. We go through this, we hear from people like, hey, look, you know, we like what you're doing, but the fact it's going away doesn't exactly fill us with a lot of confidence. So maybe there's an opportunity here that zero costs to any regulation, any approval, because we're already doing it just by saying, yeah, no, we think this is a pretty sensible way

32:38to ensure that we have a backstop to allow projects to proceed in a pragmatic sense. We'll still maintain an environmental and social standards. But I guess that's where I would challenge you. I do understand the imperative from industry, right? That doesn't want to think this is going to go away after five years or something like that. But part of what I remember when you were pushing that bill through a very expedited legislative process was a lot of the groups that stood to be impacted by greater ministerial power. So indigenous groups, for example, environmental groups advocating on behalf of species that might be impacted. They were, you know, part of the pitch that your government made at the time was this won't be forever. We will re-examine whether it's necessary once its sunset it. Like what do you say to those groups now about all of a sudden deciding in an omnibus bill that no longer is the case? Well, first, you know, nothing in the legislation affected indigenous rights. That's it's not something you can affect with a bill. That is something that is guaranteed by the Constitution. But in terms of the sunset, if we learn part way through that process that the sunset is being an impediment, why would we wait five years?

33:40I think that's something that the Canadian people wouldn't want. I know it's something the Prime Minister wouldn't want. We've got to get down to building and we've got to make sure that we're doing it in a way that is not, we don't want to be in our own way, frankly, on this. And so why do you put it there in person? Well, because as you mentioned, it was very early days and we wanted to make sure that we were creating a process through which we could learn. But it's now been an additional year plus and we have learned things. And this has not passed parliament. And I look forward to talking with the Conservatives about it. But I suspect they'll support it at the end of the day because it's something that allows us to build faster, build stronger, diversify our economy. All of the things that we want to do and need to do as a country. I do want to also ask about in particular this LNG project, others like it, and the way in which your government has framed it as sort of low carbon and a lower impact on the environment. Because I do think that's important to a lot of people who voted for your party, a lot of people particularly in British Columbia who voted for your party. I noticed that the mega, pardon me, the mega, not the super, the mega deduction that the Prime Minister announced in September. If you go through a lot of what's

34:44written on the website for how it will work has very specific allowances for LNG facilities in which they are permitted to write off immediately what's known as class 47 liquefocation equipment. And it builds on capital costs allowances that had already been put in, for example, the economic update, the most recent one released by your government. The interesting part of the economic update version of it was that it included emissions test. And this most recent one in September removes that emissions test. Are you conceding that these facilities are not good for the environment? No, not at all. We all know that natural gas is a really important transition fuel for the world. We also know that when we talk about net zero, we don't talk about zero for a reason. There are going to be hard to evade sectors of the economy. And we know that natural gas is well situated to support in those areas. And so as we build out these things, as we move towards net zero and 2050, what we want to make sure we're doing is creating these fuels at the highest standards possible. But we're seeing that's also where the economy is pushing us. And I'll tell you,

35:47I've had a lot of conversations in the past couple of weeks with potential customers for Canada in the LNG space. And they like this. They like that we build it at a high environmental standard, at a high social standard, and that we're a reliable trading partner that doesn't use energy as a cudgel. So, you know, we can have our cake and eat it too, in part because of this strong reputation that Canada enjoys. And we don't have any intention of doing anything that would jeopardize that. But we are not having our cake in eating it to bluntly challenge you, Mr. Hogan. When you talk about the highest standards possible, you're not addressing the substance of my question, which was very specific to why the emissions requirement that would enforce such a standard, for example, has now been removed to allow for greater write downs on behalf of projects like this one. And it does not, that your government, nor the provincial government, does not require, there is no regulation when it comes to electrification on either phase one or phase two of this facility. So, what are the high environmental standards that you're referring to, because I can't find them? Well, I think you can. I mean, we have very high standards for,

36:49you know, industrial carbon pricing. We have the ability to push benefits of electrification through our various industrial tax credits. We're looking at carrots as well as sticks in order to get the job done. And it's always been a bundle. It's always been a sweet. And the question is just where we put the emphasis. And right now, we're putting the emphasis on drawing capital in to build at those high standards that the market is demanding anyways to allow us to access those markets and retool our economy towards this greener economy that we all want. I mean, the reality is Canada right now, our electricity is 80% non-emitting. And the reality is we can very easily improve our overall emissions profile by electrifying more of the economy. So, here we have the ability to incentivize the production of natural gas. Make sure we're maintaining those ratios overall. And get the job done. We can have our K-Canada too. And we're doing excellent work towards that. And it's in part because people see the opportunities in front of us. And just the last thing I want to say, this is a project that is well supported by the people of British Columbia. This is not something that even divides British Columbians. This is something they've seen the opportunity and

37:53they benefit from. And Canadians are on board. Sure, but just because it's popular doesn't mean that there aren't valid questions to ask about the claims that your government is making from an environmental perspective. These kinds of things, things that add emissions to the environment to our environment ultimately will have a tangible impact on both the economy and the environment in the long run. Again, I'll put to you, I don't understand the standards that you speak of. You're talking about the free market incentivizing your government incentivizing. There's nothing from a regulatory perspective that forces electrification on any of these facilities, which would make them lower carbon. But again, you've got to look towards, do you need a tool when you're getting the outcome you want? Everybody is pushing in that direction anyhow. The market is pushing in that direction. And we are incentivizing the kind of production that is ultimately having the effect you're talking about. We continue to push towards 2050 and at zero. And what we have here is just a very pragmatic way to do it. Fewer tools finally refined, making sure that we're going to get done what we need to get done. Okay, I'll leave it on that. Mr. Hogan, pleasure as always. Thanks for

38:54making the time. Thank you. That's Corey Hogan. We've got a lot to talk about when it comes to economic and political news. Our front bench is coming up in just a few moments. We're going to start off with those still go layoffs. We've got Sharon Carr, Shakira Chambers, Tom Mulcare and Laura Stone. There they are. Just two minutes away. We're back all together. Let's do this. This record is on. Miley is having a moment. New name, new album. Two exclusive shows. So IHR Radio is sending you to experience all life at the Hollywood pool. Lights, hotel, tickets and a thousand dollars cash. Listen to IHR new music for 10 minutes a day on the IHR Radio app and click enter. Every day you listen is another chance to win. Stream Miley's new album, Bass Persuades, today.

39:58I mean, it's just not really a surprise after a year and eight months that something like this has happened. We all hope and thought that it wouldn't happen. But this is what unresolved the tariff talks or war or whatever you want to call it looks like. There's a human aspect to have at the company was not willing to accept supports to help keep those employees on and to help keep that business continuity going. There's money on the table from the federal government. Number one, and the company made representations and has legal obligations for employment. We intend to use all powers that we have and pursue them to the full extent of the law. And I would just take note that this situation is caused by the U.S. tariffs and that the ultimate owner of the CEO of the ultimate owner of Stelko Cleveland Cliffs applauded President Trump for putting those tariffs on. Hamilton is reeling from the news that Stelko is set to lay off 350

41:03workers from its plant in the city. Stelko said in a statement to C.V. News that it's currently idling its finishing operations at that plant and concentrating production at its facility in Lake Erie. About 50 of the laid off employees could be hired at that facility. But the feds, as you heard from the Prime Minister and the minister there, did try and stop the layoffs with offers of financial support offers the company turned down. Some of Donald Trump's most punishing tariff supports are on steel to the tune of 50%. Let's bring in the front bench to talk about the dynamics of all of this playing out. Sharon Carr is a C.V. News political analyst and former deputy chief of staff to former finance minister Phil Morno. Shikir Chambers worked in Prime Minister Steven Harper's office before becoming a policy advisor to the international trade minister. C.V. News political analyst and former Indie P. Leader Tom Mulcares with us and Laura Stone Rounds us out this evening. She's a Queens park reporter for the Globe and Mail. Hi everybody. Good to see you tonight. Shikir, I'll start with you. What really jumps out at me in this story is the fact that the feds basically offered this company money. The Prime Minister wouldn't say

42:06how much in response to a question just a few moments ago, but offered the money and they still didn't take it and they still went with the layoffs. What does that tell you? I don't know what that number was, but I mean the fact that the feds are even offered public money to a private company just seems like an unsustainable proposition, right? Given that we're in a U.S. trade world with the U.S. So they probably just crunched the numbers instead of didn't make any sense. And I think we're going to see a lot more of this. It's fine to talk about the elbows of strategies, fine to talk about we want to oppose your trade policy. I actually get all that. It's fine to do that when you're sitting in a comfortable office or your retiree, get all that, but when you're on the front lines like these steel workers, it's a completely different proposition when you're losing your job. And so in January, when we face those auto tariffs as well, those auto workers on the front line, it should be a much different proposition when those folks are losing their jobs because of tariffs. So I don't know where the prime minister goes from here, but there has to be some path to have a conversation or get back to negotiations. They're at least bringing the tariffs down to make being in Canada more

43:10viable to a lot of these companies. The one other thing I would just add, I think if you were on the U.S. side and your president Trump or someone like Peter Nevaro who talks very aggressively about Canada, when you're seeing the results that your tariffs are actually causing Canada, you're probably looking in the mirror and say, you know what, this is working. This is what we want to do. And so if our prime minister, Karin, or anyone on our negotiating team, it's hard to look at this policy and say, how do we get the president off these high tariffs, given what he's put them in place for it? They're actually achieving their results, even though it's so bad for our country. Yeah, there's two ways to look at it, Tom. I think from the perspective of, you know, if the policy imperative was for the president to resure different forms of manufacturing, steel is definitely an example in the auto sector, perhaps, to a degree where there is more potential for that to actually be the case, but it's also driving up prices in a really salient way. And so like you do have a little bit of pushback on that front, I would imagine both things are true. I couldn't agree with you more. And that's why I disagree with you respectfully with what

44:12Shakira just said. American consumers are starting to figure out that unlike what the great salesman Trump has been trying to tell them since these tariffs started. This isn't money that flows into the US treasury like a gentle rain from heaven. This is a tax on consumers as Ronald Reagan famously said. And the cost of a house is going up. A new house construction is going up because most of the lumber that goes into that house comes from Canada and it's being tariff. And the cost of a new truck or a new car is going up because the cost of bringing things back and forth across the border is being tariff. This is what we're seeing today. And it's very rare for Mark Arne who has access to all of this information to push back on a company like Cleveland Cliffs, but that company is well known for its tactics. And we've cut more than enough experience with them here and go back to know about them and how they do things. But for him to write out say, and by the way, this guy was applauding Trump's tariffs. Don't be surprised that he's trying to put more pressure on Canada by losing those Canadian jobs. I thought that that was a remarkable move on the part of Mark Arne.

45:16And I think that Melanisia Lee, who again, she's the industry minister. She's there always trying to keep everybody together, keep things going. She came out very strongly as well today. So I think that we're dealing with a company that's a bit rogue. We've got some in the foxes in the Ann House with the, the mega is in the steel mill in Halton and going to get their day. But it has nothing to do with getting this right or accepting what Trump is doing. He's breaking trade deals that he himself signed and boasted where the best in the world. And that's the reality of the current situation. There were other layoffs though, Laura. And I'll go with Al Goma for example. Is the imperative, or is there an imperative for the government to kind of say, hey, like beyond, there's going to be extended EI, beyond we're going to pursue legal action. And like, what's the bigger plan? How long do you anticipate, for example, you can offer financial incentives to keep employees on board? If there are other companies that that end up going that way, just because 50% tariffs on steel, if they don't abate anytime soon, are pretty obviously very punitive.

46:21Yeah, I mean, I would just say layoffs of Canadian workers are a feature, not a bug of the Trump administration, right? This is their goal. And they've outright said it when it comes to the auto industry. And they're clearly trying to do it with steel. I think it's a bit of a lesson for Ottawa that you can't just buy away out of the problem. And I'm not saying I have the solution, or that any of the other parties have presented a viable solution when it comes to the impacts of these tariffs on some of these key sectors, like steel, but just continually trying to throw money at the problem or buy your way out of the problem, keep offering these companies. They don't want to exist in Canada. They don't want to run their businesses here. And it's no coincidence that President Trump announced a huge factory opening in Iowa, I believe, a steel factory on the same day that these layoffs were happening in Hamilton. So they are trying to bring these companies and back to the United States, whether the impacts of that on costs for everyday Americans and

47:25pressure on the administration and the results of the midterms will have any sustainable impact on President Trump. I think that's the big question heading into next month, right? Does the pressure build internally that this strategy is not working? But I think it should come as no surprise to anyone who's been watching this administration for the past year that they are trying to put Canadians out of business. That is their business plan. Sharon, what do you think? Let's say I think that's completely right. This is actually not something that is a surprise or should be a surprise to anybody. Trump wants to cause a maximum amount of pain on Canadians, on our government, on our economy. He's doing exactly that. And unfortunately what we're seeing here is it's horrendous. We're seeing Hamilton, which is like the center of steel, 350 families, people who are going to be impacted by this. That's exactly what Trump wants. Now, when people say that we have to find a way to work with him so that we can avoid this, I don't think that is even possible. This is a guy who has reneged on a deal that he signed himself. And he is using people

48:30as collateral. And I don't think he cares. So for him, this is him achieving exactly what he wants. And you're going to hear opposition and other folks say, you know, well, Karin, he's got to take a deal to stop this. But there's no guarantee that this is going to be preventable. And I don't think there is a solution. Subsidies are not always the answer. I think they're temporary. And it's unfortunate that the company decided not to take what the government offered. And they had a whole bunch of strings they wanted attached to it. And I think that's just not how this works. This is unfortunately the reality of how some businesses operate where they put their politics and their profits over people. And it's a sad day for families in the Hamilton. I'm still curious how much the government was offering them. But I'm sure that will be disclosed soon. I got to switch here as hard turn. But we were learning that conservative MP Shakir Scott H. Asin is going to resign his seat by the end of this year. Somebody close to him told me that basically it's, you know, he's been in public life for 30 years. He's looking at new opportunities. It's maybe not the, you know, isolated incident of it drawing headlines. But it's in

49:34the aggregate, right? The eighth person to leave the conservatives either through just resignation or crossing the floor or moving to the Senate since the election. What's your read on it? Yeah, listen, you have to be frank here. I think there's a variety of factors. I can't sit here and say that maybe the leadership and the polling numbers are impacting him. But I think if you're someone like Scott H. Asin and you know, you are in opposition, you're in peer shadow cabinet. It looks like the conservatives have a slam dunk to form government. Even a majority government, you're probably going to be in cabinet. And then you lose the election in such a spectacular fashion. Not even to hold them to a minority, but now they have a majority. So your chances of even contesting this, contesting the government to expand into it three or four years from now. I think ultimately, you probably got to explore a few different options. And I think that's what's happening to the sky. Just right now and looking at the numbers that we see the conservative. I mean, if you're supporter of hearing caucus, you just can't be happy with those numbers. I think you look at what are my options to kind of leave government do other things. Because I think right now, given the highs that we had pre-election, this is such a low point. If you do have opportunities, you're probably

50:37looking at what those can possibly be. Tom, what do you think? I really like Scott H. Asin Hire. I really, you know, found him at one of the more interesting personalities in that caucus. And it's a real bodyboat for P.F. Whitey Avenue. Now we'll be up to seven by elections. And Mr. Cardi's going to have to call once Mr. H. Asin does lock in his resignation. They had there's six month limits. So you might have to call some of them prior to to an interest. But again, Cardi has painstakingly built up through court floor crossers and by elections. The majority of the Canadian voters didn't give them in the last election. And it's going to get more comfortable. Because I think that this is the type of writing that Cardi is absolutely capable of taking. In fact, without getting too cynical of Ashia, I do think that Mr. Cardi has to be careful that he doesn't win all of them. Because if he were to win all seven of those by elections, I think it's a pretty safe bet that Mr. Cardi might be in serious trouble with his party and with his caucus. Although

51:38the average member of the party, I think, would vote again tomorrow morning for Mr. Cardi. I'm starting to sense that in caucus, there's a lot of agitation. Laura, what's your reaction to Mr. H. Asin's departure? Look, I mean, there are just so many people on the conservative side looking for new opportunities. I could barely keep it straight across in the floor, send it back to be a crown prosecutor. And now just some kind of vague unknown opportunities. I mean, we don't even know if he has any employment in place. It sounds like not. I think two things are troubling for Pierre Paulier. One, the way this trickles out, not in a very controlled manner, not having the party do this and Pierre Paulier of thank him properly for you to break the story, Vashi. I think that's pretty devastating for conservative morale. And then you have the trouble, as Tom noted, of by elections, whether the conservatives can win these writings back. And we're looking at what's going to happen potentially in Brentford and the controversy around the conservatives appointing a candidate there.

52:42And whether the liberals may have a chance. I mean, this starts to get pretty difficult for Mr. Paulier. If he starts to lose, you so-called, quote unquote, safe seats, I think, you know, caucus morale could really go down and there could be some agitation for maybe not just a new direction, but some new leadership in that caucus. Got about 30 seconds left. I have to be fair. The Hill Times tweeted the rumor first. That's how I was able to follow up on it. I don't deserve props to the Hill Times as always as well. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. You've had Sharon Lassard to you. Listen, this isn't another, it's just another unfortunate blow to peer Paulier and his leadership, whether whatever Mr. H is doing next. I don't know. Maybe he wants to look at opportunities across the floor and talk to the liberals. But this is a blow for him. It is a blow for him continuously to lose, lose marries like someone like Scott H. Justin. And I would say, I think the liberals want to keep Mr. Paulier where he is. But it's starting to look pretty grim. There's a stopwatch kind of attached to his leadership at this point. Okay. I got to leave our discussion there.

53:45Everyone, thank you so much. I appreciate it. Our front bench Sharon Carr. She cured chambers. Tom Llecare and Laura Stone will take a quick commercial break. We've got to look at what's next. Next. Canada, the station that champions Canadian music. Loud, proud and all yours. No passports required. Just press play. Tap into mating Canada now on iHerRadio.ca or the free iHeartRadio app. Welcome back to Powerplay. A couple of things we're looking for as far as what snacks. Of course, we were just reporting on the news that a conservative MP Scott Ageson intends to resign his seat

54:47before the end of the year. We'll be looking for a formal announcement from Mr. Ageson. And then also we have asked for reaction from the leaders, the pure polyevs office. His office was informed last week. We have yet to receive that reaction. But of course, we'll share it with you whenever we do. And I do also want to let you know about an important day tomorrow that we will be marking here at CTV News with special coverage. It's of course the national day for truth and reconciliation. Our special coverage gets underway right here on CTV News channel at noon, eastern time and nine Pacific. We hope you can join us that I'm going to leave power play there. Thank you very much for watching. I'm Bashi Kipelo. So your top headlines are up next. This record is on. Miley is having a moment. New name, new album. Two exclusive shows. So I.R. Radio is sending you to experience all life at the Hollywood pool. My God.

55:47Lights, hotel, tickets, and a thousand dollars cash. Listen to I.R. New music for 10 minutes a day on the I.R. Radio app and click answer. Every day you listen is another chance to win. Stream Miley's new album, Bass per Swades, today.