From August 29th to
September 4th, 2010, nine Canadian parliamentarians were in Alberta
to take part in the 37th Annual Meeting of the Canada-France
Interparliamentary Association. Senator Claudette Tardif headed the Canadian
delegation, which consisted of Senators Jean-Claude Rivest and Gérald Comeau,
and Steven Blaney, Lois Brown, Paule Brunelle, Yvon Godin, Bernard Patry and
Mario Silva, Members of Parliament. Serge Pelletier, the delegation’s Executive
Secretary, Jean-Rodrigue Paré, analyst, and Catherine Mathieu, coordinator,
accompanied the delegation.
The French delegation was headed by
Senator Marcel-Pierre Cléach, and consisted of Marie-Noëlle Battistel, Georges
Colombier, Catherine Coutelle and Jacques Desallangre of the National Assembly,
and Bertrand Auban and Joël Bourdin of the Senate. The French delegation was accompanied
by Frédéric Slama, Executive Secretary of the France-Canada Interparliamentary
Association, and Matthieu Meissonnier, Executive Secretary of the Groupe
d’amitié France-Canada in the French Senate.
The Association’s members would like to
acknowledge the invaluable contributions of Marc Berthiaume, Political and
Parliamentary Attaché with the Embassy of Canada in France, and Robert Moulié,
Minister Counsellor and Deputy Head of Mission at the Embassy of France in
Canada who attended the Annual Meeting.
This report is divided into three parts.
1) The first is about the Association’s meetings on the four themes chosen by
the Executive Committee: energy and the environment; support for the
reconstruction of Haiti; regulation of international financial markets; and
institutional reforms. 2) The second is about the delegation’s meetings with
representatives of Alberta’s Francophone communities. 3) The third is about the
formal and informal protocol and courtesy meetings that the Association held
while in Alberta.
1. WORKING MEETINGS
Working meetings are a key part of the
Association’s activities. They enable parliamentarians to address topics of
common interest with a variety of perspectives and political dynamics specific
to France and Canada. The parliamentarians can then convey the results of their
fruitful dialogue to their respective chambers and their country’s executive.
Given the decision by the Association’s
executive to hold this year’s meetings in Alberta, the topic of energy and the
environment, and its role in the debate on the development of the oil sands
industry, accounted for a major share of the discussions.
Energy and the Environment
The Association’s discussions on this
topic were launched on the morning of the 31st of August with
illuminating presentations from three energy experts at the University of
Alberta’s School of Business in Edmonton, followed by a presentation from a
representative of the Rainforest Action Network. The plan was to continue the
discussions the following day with a visit to Fort McMurray, but poor weather
conditions forced the aircraft to turn back. Nonetheless, the discussions
resumed at a working meeting on Thursday, September 2nd, followed by
a meeting with Alberta’s Minister of Energy, the Honourable Ronald Liepert, and
an information session hosted by Jean-Michel Gires, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Canadian subsidiary of Total, a company based in
France. In addition, on Friday, August 30th, the delegation received
a presentation from the Pembina Institute.
Presentations at the University of
Alberta
Professor Joseph Doucet began with a
summary of key facts on the oil sands debate. He noted that, although the land
mass where the resource is contained is immense, only about 3%, or roughly
500 km2, can be exploited. This fact points to the actual value
of Canada’s oil reserves. Although Canada’s reserves are the
second-largest in the world after Saudi Arabia’s, they are much less
accessible. This increases extraction costs considerably. A barrel of Saudi oil
costs roughly $2 to $3 to produce, while a barrel of oil from Canada’s oil
sands costs $40 to $60 to produce. Thus, the advantage of Canadian oil is
its proximity to the US market (with the resulting reduction of transportation
costs), the security of supply guaranteed by the deep political ties between
Canada and the United States, and the close economic integration between
the two countries.
Professor Doucet then discussed the
difference between the open-pit mining method and the in-situ method. The
open-pit mining method leaves a significant environmental footprint, primarily
because of the settling ponds (tailings ponds) and the risks that these ponds
pose to the ecological balance, notably on watercourses. In-situ exploitation
leaves a much less significant impact on the land, but releases far more
greenhouse gases due to the amounts of energy needed to liquefy the bitumen
buried deeper underground.
Professor André Plourde’s dynamic
presentation placed the economic stakes of the exploitation of the oil sands in
context. By virtue of the constitutional division of powers, the Government of
Alberta owns the resource. It is therefore up to the provincial government
to establish the tax and royalty system which enables private businesses to
exploit the resource in the interest of Albertans. Professor Plourde explained
that the pace of oil sands production is directly tied to changing oil prices
and that this partly accounts for the 2009 slowdown following the economic
crisis. He anticipates resumption of the pace in 2010 and 2011. The royalty
system has attracted some criticism due to the spectacular growth of net
exploitation profits having only translated into a moderate growth in royalties
and fees for Alberta. However, the industry’s economic impact is not
limited to Alberta, since 20% of the impact on GDP, and 30% of the impact on
employment, is felt outside Alberta.
Professor Selma E. Guigard’s
presentation followed. It focused on the technological developments that could
limit the environmental consequences of oil sands mining in the future. The two
main challenges are to reduce the amount of water that needs to be drawn from
the Athabasca River, and to accelerate the settling of residue in the ponds. A
significant amount of the water used to extract the bitumen from the sand
cannot be recycled and is placed in settling ponds. The settling period is very
long and the remaining water needs to be filtered before it can be reused, i.e.
reintroduced into the environment. Further research into both of these issues
is needed in order to find sustainable technological solutions to these
problems, which will only aggravate as the pace of production increases.
These three presentations were followed
by a presentation by Eriel Tchekwie Deranger, who heads the Rainforest Action
Network’s Tar Sands Campaign. Based on recent research by Professor David W.
Schindler, she discussed the adverse consequences of oil sands production on
the health of watercourses, especially the Athabasca River. She also noted that
the Fort Chipewyan First Nations communities, which are downstream from a large
concentration of active sites, have had abnormally high cancer rates.
Working Meeting
Paule Brunelle, MP, started off the
discussions with a presentation stressing the precarious balance between
economic growth and respect for the environment. She questioned whether it is
appropriate for the Government of Canada to support the industry’s fast growth.
Indeed, while Canada currently produces roughly 1.5 million barrels of
synthetic crude oil per day, its production is expected to hit 3.3 million
barrels per day in 2015. In her view, commensurate efforts have not been made
to contain the effects of this growth on greenhouse gas production, and the
Government of Canada seems more inclined to withhold relevant information on
the release of toxic substances despite a statutory obligation to disclose such
information. Thus, the Government of Canada is prioritizing economic growth
with no regard for its environmental obligations, notably under the Kyoto
Protocol. This, she said, explains why Canada has aligned its greenhouse
gas reduction targets with those of the United States instead of adopting a
robust environmental policy. Ms. Brunelle criticized the $765-million federal
clean energy development plan, noting that the largest share of this amount
will be used to develop new carbon capture and sequestration technology instead
of limiting emissions. She reiterated the Bloc Québécois’ position that
sustainable development requires a transnational fight against greenhouse gas
emissions. In her view, the best approach is to create a carbon market.
Canadian MP Yvon Godin followed up with
his own presentation, building on Ms. Brunelle’s position that it is preferable
to find ways to reduce emissions instead of capturing or sequestering those
already produced. In his view, the pace of oil sands production should be
slowed and the development of clean energy should be accelerated. He argues
that development should be moderated until technology can keep its consequences
in check.
The presentation by Catherine Coutelle,
a member of France’s National Assembly, aptly highlighted Europe’s different
perspective. In France, the development of renewable energy is well under
way, and efforts are being made to diversify energy sources, notably to limit
dependence on Russia. Following a major debate in French society called the
“Grenelle Environment,” the first phase of which was launched in 2007, a global
ecological awareness has taken root in France. The only element on which
consensus has still not been reached is the role of nuclear power in France’s
future. According to Ms. Coutelle, given the clear relationship between
greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, the minimalist position common to
the United States and Canada is disappointing. As the saying goes,
“the cleanest energy is energy that is never consumed,” so there should be
more emphasis on energy conservation, especially in the building sector, where
France is planning a 23% reduction by 2020. In order to stimulate solutions,
governments can use both carrots and sticks. Carrots include tax incentives and
new technology development, and sticks can include stringent government
standards for new building construction, or a carbon tax. The economic
crisis forced the French government to relax standards. The second phase of the
debate in French society, called “Grenelle 2,” will assist with the
concrete implementation of “Grenelle 1” commitments, but it is difficult to see
how a true consensus on substantive issues can be reached as long as the issue
of nuclear energy is not tackled head on.
During the ensuing discussions, Mr.
Desallangre, a member of France’s National Assembly, expressed relative
optimism regarding the striking of a balance between economic development and
the environment. He noted, however, that it is the political actors who are
responsible for translating commitments into priorities. In his view,
there is a somewhat broad consensus in France, but it is not always reflected
in the government’s priorities. Mr. Colombier, a member of the same chamber,
expressed optimism following the substantive agreement towards implementing the
Grenelle 1 accords. Their colleague Ms. Coutlelle was more reserved,
noting that it is difficult to change behaviour.
Canadian Senator Rivest asked the
French parliamentarians to explain the European Union’s role in defining
national environmental policies. Several French parliamentarians addressed this
issue; they concluded that Europe adopts directives agreed upon in advance by the
Ministers, and that, once Europe adopts these directives, each state is
responsible for implementing them. Each European state thereby attempts to
respect these objectives through their own national laws, although adapting
them to suit the realities of their country.
A debate ensued after Canadian Senator
Comeau argued that provinces benefiting from equalization payments are hardly
in a position to criticize Alberta’s oil sands industry, given that Alberta’s
contribution to the equalization system is directly linked to the oil sands.
Mr. Godin responded that, regardless of interprovincial disputes, there is a
global responsibility for the environmental consequences of Alberta’s oil
industry, and policymakers need to be concerned about the industry’s repercussions.
Canadian MP Dr. Bernard Patry wondered
whether Total’s significant participation was a concern for French
parliamentarians. Ms. Coutelle stated that Total is first and foremost a
multinational company whose attachments to France have weakened over time.
French Senator Cléach suggested that feelings of attachment and national pride
still exist, but expressed the hope that the extraction process will produce
less pollution in the future. Mr. Desallangre said that he is not too worried
about the repercussions of Total’s oil sand investments in France. Mr.
Colombier agreed, and added that the globalization of companies should not
cause them to abandon their social responsibilities. French Senator
Bourdin was much more enthusiastic about Total’s international strategy, but
stressed the importance of complying with environmental regulations.
Lastly, French Senator Auban informed
the parliamentarians that a new explosion had just taken place in the Gulf of
Mexico. Ms. Coutelle responded that it usually takes a crisis to raise people’s
awareness of issues.
Meeting with Alberta’s Minister of
Energy
The Honourable Ronald Liepert,
Alberta’s Minister of Energy, warmly welcomed the parliamentarians and went
over the main points of his province’s energy policy. He stressed his view that
a strong Alberta supports a strong Canada. He placed great emphasis on the
interprovincial partnerships (highlighting the similarities between Albertan
and Quebec positions) and the way these partnerships strengthen the federation.
He also noted that most of the infrastructure is from Ontario and Quebec and
that the demand for labour benefits Canada as a whole. He asserted that the
equalization system illustrates Canadian values of fairness in wealth
redistribution and that Alberta is a net contributor to the equalization
program.
Ms. Brunelle congratulated Albertans on
their economic success. She then asked the Minister for his reaction to
pressures by environmental groups for more stringent regulations.
The Minister said that he does not like imposing anything on anyone, and
that too many things tend to be imposed in this country. As for the
environmental groups, he feels that they sometimes lack balance and that their
representations are needlessly sensationalistic. However, he acknowledges that
Alberta needs to make progress and improve its environmental performance.
Dr. Patry then asked the Minister for
his reaction to Prof. Schindler’s new study. The study found high pollution
levels in the Athabasca River, and the Premier responded to it by calling for a
more thorough investigation. Dr. Patry asked the Minister how Alberta intends
to reduce the energy consumed by in-situ production. With respect to Prof.
Schindler’s study, Minister Liepert clarified his Premier’s position by stating
that he made a commitment to ask the research teams to work together in order
to agree on conclusions that might be made jointly. With respect to in-situ
production, the Minister noted that this kind of production was not viable 10
years ago and that technological advancements have improved its performance. In
addition, he said that the low price of natural gas, which is used as the
primary energy source for in-situ production, is not fostering innovation.
Mr. Colombier asked the Minister about
the status of the approvals that Total is awaiting in order to be able to start
up its projects. The Minister responded that he was not at all worried
about Total’s ability to comply with the standards, but that Total might be
finding the slow pace of the approval process somewhat frustrating.
On behalf of the delegation, Senator
Comeau thanked the Minister for his sincerity and for Alberta’s contribution to
Canada’s economy.
Information Session Held by Total
Jean-Michel Gires, President and CEO of
Total E&P Canada Ltd., hosted the delegation at the company’s Calgary
office. After going over the history of Total’s oil sands involvement, Mr.
Gires explained the strategic importance of Canada’s reserves. Without the oil
sands, world oil reserves would enable the current pace of production to
continue for the next 50 years. The largest share of these reserves is in the
Middle East, a region to which private companies have no access. The inclusion
of Canada and Venezuela’s oil sands in the world’s reserves adds 20 years of
production in a far more favourable political and commercial setting. As the
world’s conventional crude oil reserves diminish, the strategic importance of
the oil sands will increase. Canada’s oil sands are expected to account for 8%
of the world’s production by 2030, and a much higher percentage thereafter, as
the number of years of conventional oil reserves continues to dwindle.
Mr. Gires condemned the oil sands
industry’s negative press coverage and questioned the sincerity of the motives
behind the approach of certain environmental groups, which, he says, resort to
sensationalism in order to manipulate public opinion.
He then discussed three of Total’s
projects in Alberta: the Surmont in-situ project, the Joslyn mining project,
and the upgrading plant to be built near Edmonton. The Surmont site, which has
been operating since 2007, will quadruple its current production of 27 000
barrels per day by 2015 thanks to a technology called steam‑assisted
gravity drainage (SAGD). This technology leaves a limited footprint on the land
because settling ponds are not required. However, it consumes more energy and
therefore produces more greenhouse gases. As for the Joslyn project, which is
entering the final approval phase, it is expected to begin production in 2017,
at which time it will cover roughly 70 km2.
Mr. Gires also deplored the continuing
uncertainty as to the regulatory regime that will govern greenhouse gas
emissions, and concluded his remarks by reiterating the importance of dialogue
between industry partners with a view to limiting the cumulative effects of oil
sands production. He also assured the parliamentarians that every effort is
being made to involve local communities and First Nations in development
plans. He noted that, in 2008, more than $4,000,000 was invested in
various community support programs.
During the question and answer period,
Senator Rivest noted that the public is concerned that the industry wants to
accelerate production before technological solutions are put in place to limit
its environmental consequences.
Mr. Gires responded that the industry
has been the victim of a media manipulation on a massive scale, expertly
orchestrated by environmental organizations. He acknowledged that efforts
remain to be made to attenuate the impact of settling ponds.
Ms. Coutelle rejected any suspicion of
manipulation, arguing that the facts underlying the public’s concerns have been
confirmed by scholars whose credibility is not in question. She stressed the
wisdom of resisting what she calls [translation] “Alberta’s oil euphoria.”
Senator Cléach asked why Total was
unable to set the facts straight in its own information campaign.
Mr. Gires said that his company needs to do more.
Dr. Patry wanted to know more about the
budgets allocated to new techniques for storing and sequestering carbon, given
the large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, especially from the in-situ
projects. Mr. Gires answered that Total would be devoting a sum of $900 million
to these techniques. He mentioned the Lacq project, in France, where
120 000 tonnes of CO2 will be buried in a decommissioned
natural gas reservoir. Mr. Gires noted that the technology is still
experimental and that the costs of capture are very high, while also pointing
out the lack of public funding.
Mr. Godin expressed concern about what
is happening to the Athabasca River and its tributaries. He said that this
is not a matter of being against the industry itself, but simply a matter of
striking the proper balance between the need for economic development and
environmental protection. Mr. Gires acknowledged the merits of NGOs but
said that it is difficult to dialogue with them.
Senator Bourdin asked what the oil
price needs to be in order for the industry to be profitable. Mr. Gires
responded that it takes a $US80/bbl price point for oil sands exploitation to
make sense.
Presentation by the Pembina Institute
On behalf of the Pembina Institute,
Terra Simieritsch gave a presentation focussing on the federal government’s
responsibilities and on the repercussions of oil sands exploitation on people,
animals and the boreal forest. She confirmed much of the information that the
parliamentarians had been given over the course of the week, but took a much
more critical look at Ottawa’s inaction on greenhouse gas emissions regulation.
In addition, she showed that the production objectives initially slated for
2020 had been reached by 2004, noting that this could account for the
difficulties in managing the environmental aspects of such rapid growth. She
also questioned whether the industry is making any real efforts to reclaim and
restore sites affected by mining operations. Although the industry claims that
13.6% of mined land has been reclaimed, certifications have only been given for
0.2% of that land.
Parliamentary and Civil Service Reform
The working meeting on this topic was
held on the morning of August 30th in Edmonton. Senator Rivest
outlined the institutional reform initiatives in Canada. In his view, these
projects have yielded little concrete change. The Senator went over the major
principles of Canada’s federal constitutional monarchy, in which the convention
of responsible government is duplicated in the constitutional distribution of
powers between the provinces and the federal government. In the minority
government context, which has prevailed for the last few years, it is difficult
to make controversial decisions that could cause the government to fall if it
loses the confidence of the House of Commons. Senator Rivest presented the
current proposals to change representation in the House of Commons, noting the
underrepresentation of Western Canada and the problems related to the potential
dilution of Quebec’s representation. He then presented current bills that
seek to reform the way in which senators are appointed and to limit their term
to eight years. In his view, the rigidity of the constitutional amendment
formula makes Senate reform projects rather difficult to execute.
Next, Senator Cléach presented the
major constitutional reforms adopted in France in July 2008, notably the
reform giving Parliament closer oversight in relation to Presidential powers.
In the Senator’s view, these reforms are to some extent Americanizing the
French system, in part due to the President no longer being able to hold office
for more than two consecutive five-year mandates. Another reform gives the
parliamentary opposition more say over the executive’s exercise of exceptional
powers in the event of a crisis. Furthermore, Parliament will exercise more
supervision over appointments to the most important positions, with the
exception of state company presidencies, which are excluded from this reform.
Lastly, Senator Cléach described how the reforms instituted since 2008
have enabled Parliament to take back some control over its agenda; it had
largely lost that control following the adoption of the Constitution of the
Fifth Republic in 1958.
In the ensuing discussion period, Ms.
Brunelle argued that it is unacceptable for the percentage of Quebec’s seats in
the House of Commons to diminish. Ms. Coutelle then asserted that the
constitutional reforms have not resulted in any true counter-powers for
Parliament. Mr. Colombier responded that one has to allow some time for the new
rules to translate into new parliamentary practices.
The Canadian and French Commitment to
the Reconstruction of Haiti
Canadian MP Mario Silva’s presentation
focused on the scope of Canada and France’s commitments. At the conference
held in New York on March 31st, 2010, the international community
pledged to spend US$5.6 billion over the course of fiscal years 2010 and 2011.
The largest share of this would be paid to the Haiti Reconstruction Fund,
managed jointly by international organizations and the Haitian government. Last
July, the two co-chairs of the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission, Jean‑Max Bellerive
and Bill Clinton, expressed concern that only 10% of the promised amounts
had actually been paid. In reaction to this news, the Government of Canada
confirmed its $400-million commitment, to which it will add $110 million as a
result of its promise to match individual Canadians’ donations to charities.
To date, just over $150 million of this $510 million has been paid, either
under direct bilateral agreements with the Haitian government, or as
contributions to NGOs. So far, no money has been paid into the Haiti
Reconstruction Fund.
France has expressly chosen not to
provide its support to Haiti through the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, to which it
will pay only one million euros. Consequently, France’s financial support,
which will total US$245 million in new money, will essentially be provided
under bilateral agreements and as contributions to NGOs on the ground in Haiti.
Mr. Colombier reiterated France’s
commitments in the wake of this terrible tragedy, which claimed 250,000 lives.
He praised the French authorities’ rapid mobilization immediately after the
earthquake and the French government’s support of efforts by the Red Cross in
the weeks following the quake.
The ensuing discussion focused on
whether it is appropriate to provide assistance pursuant to bilateral
agreements instead of coordinating assistance through an independent agency
that can ensure a more coherent approach while respecting the Haitian
government’s priorities. The parliamentarians in attendance acknowledged that a
central agency is better able to ensure coherent action, but that political
imperatives within donor countries do not always lend themselves to such an
approach. Dr. Patry raised the issue of family reunification but noted that the
operations in this regard concern a few hundred families at most.
G-20 Negotiations on Regulation of
Financial Markets
Following are excerpts from Dr. Patry’s
presentation, which launched the discussions on this topic:
The financial crisis that has affected
our economies over the past few years has had consequences for the financial
security of all citizens of the countries affected. Hundreds of billions of
dollars have gone up in smoke because it was realized too late that these
billions really only existed in a virtual world. Hundreds of thousands of real
people lost their real jobs. Hundreds of thousands of families lost their homes
because they mistakenly thought that the houses belonged to them.
Faced with this situation, states had
to react rapidly and inject billions of dollars, taken, once again, from the
pockets of their taxpayers, in order to refloat their economies, which had run
aground because of an excessive taste for risk fuelled by the promise of
obscene profits. Taxpayers, the people who elect us, have paid twice, and they
won’t forgive us for another failure. As an elected official, my duty is to
make sure that we never lose sight of the fundamental and very simple objective
of all these discussions: protecting consumers.
The most important measure is the
creation of a Financial Stability Board that will be in some sense the
financial equivalent of an early warning system for natural disasters.
First and foremost, the FSB will monitor states’ capacities to anticipate
the macroeconomic risks brought on by major movements of capital. Up until now,
they have been unable to predict that the very aggressive actions of highly
speculative funds could have repercussions on the economy as a whole. That is
why, from now on, all financial institutions, whatever their nature or sector
of activity, will have to be regulated and monitored. Financial institutions
will also need sufficient cash reserves, that is, available money that belongs
to them.
In Europe, three measures adopted by
the G-20 were considered a great achievement:
·Stricter frameworks for executive bonus and
compensation schemes in order to make executives more conscious of their social
responsibility;
·Sanctions on “uncooperative jurisdictions,” i.e.
delinquent states whose actions can nullify the combined efforts of all the
others;
·Stricter standards on rating agencies to prevent
conflicts of interest.
We will now have to see whether all
these measures have the expected result. When the crisis resolves itself, it
will be very difficult for governments and parliamentarians to maintain the
same intensity of interest in the problem. This is why I feel that our role as
parliamentarians in coming years will be to listen to the Financial Stability
Board’s recommendations and to bring our respective governments to order if
they do not appear to be taking these recommendations seriously enough.
Senator Bourdin then gave a
presentation on European monetary policy. He reiterated how hard it is to set a
joint monetary and budget policy when national differences are so significant.
These differences are not limited to the specific economic situation of
each European state; there are also country-specific points of view on the best
way to combat the effects of the economic crisis. In this respect, the European
Central Bank is condemned either to impotence, if it cannot adopt vigorous
measures, or to a loss of legitimacy, if it adopts vigorous measures that are
certain to have a more negative effect on some countries than on others. The EU
member states have nonetheless found a consensus on “convergence criteria,”
that is, deficit and debt reduction targets that governments can use as
guidelines. These targets were set at 3% of the GDP for deficits, and 60% of
the GDP for debt.
The discussion that followed the
presentations dealt mainly with the consequences of the crisis on the capacity
of households to save. French MP Coutelle contrasted the apparent Anglo-Saxon
propensity for overindebtedness with the apparent French propensity for
oversaving. Senator Bourdin replied that the law somewhat limited the risks of
excessive household debt, while Spanish policies, for example, favoured easier
access to homeownership, causing private debt to rise. In short, everything
depends on national priorities and traditions. One thing is certain: French households’
savings rates are made possible by the government’s social safety net. If
vigorous fiscal consolidation measures are adopted in the public sector, an
increase in private debt can be expected to result.
2. MEETINGS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF
ALBERTA’S FRANCOPHONE COMMUNITIES
Visit to the Cité francophone
d’Edmonton
On Monday, August 30th, the
delegation was welcomed to the Cité francophone d’Edmonton by its Chairman of
the Board, Denis Magnan. Daniel Cournoyer, Artistic Director of L’Unithéâtre
and member of the Cité francophone’s board of directors, went over the history
of the Centre, looking back on the epic struggles of Alberta’s Francophone
communities to gain respect for their right to quality French-language
services. The French parliamentarians were pleasantly surprised at the vitality
of Edmonton’s Francophone community. The delegation then visited the new rooms
that have been built following the recent expansion of the Cité Francophone.
Reception at Campus Saint-Jean
Late in the afternoon of August 31st,
the delegation was invited to a reception at the University of Alberta’s Campus
Saint-Jean. The initial presentation was by Prof. Frank McMahon, who spoke on
the history of the institution, describing the tribulations and successes of
Edmonton’s Francophone community. Radio-Canada personality Ève‑Marie
Forcier then took over as Master of Ceremonies.
Campus Dean Marc Arnal emphasized the
importance of maintaining the CBC’s regional French-language services. He also
spoke of what he called “the political and social mission” that the Campus
could play in shaping the vision of Canada in the West. Lastly, he proudly
described the programs offered in French to some 700 undergraduates and 90
master’s-level students.
Dolorèse Nolette, president of the Association
canadienne-française de l’Alberta, presented the organization’s priorities for
action, notably plans to encourage Francophone immigration to Alberta.
Mr. Luketa M’Pindou, of the Alliance
Jeunesse-Famille de l’Alberta Society, spoke on the diversity of Alberta’s
Francophones. He mentioned the special challenges requiring community action,
notably getting support to combat violence against women.
Senator Bourdin presented a medal to
the Dean of Campus Saint-Jean and expressed how pleased he was to see the
renewal of Francophone life in Western Canada.
Finally, Senator Tardif, former Dean of
the Campus Saint-Jean, was warmly applauded on her speech. With much emotion,
she thanked the Association canadienne-française de l’Alberta and Campus
Saint-Jean for their past and present struggles: [translation] “There is still
a lot of work to be done in Canada and the world for La Francophonie, and I’m
happy to be here at home, along with you today, so that we can share our love
for this community.”
Reception at the Calgary Alliance
Française
Late in the afternoon of Thursday,
September 2nd, the parliamentarians attended a reception at the
Alliance Française, with its president, Mr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, along with representatives
of the Francophone community and of the cultural and economic sectors, as well
as French citizens living in Calgary. Members of the French and Canadian
delegations were introduced, and informal discussions took place.
Presentation by Roy Klassen
On September 3rd, Mr.
Klassen, a Francophone legal professional based in Alberta, outlined various
elements of the Canadian justice system for the French parliamentarians. He is
occasionally called upon to advise European businesses wishing to set up shop
in Alberta. The business environment is generally favourable, but French
businesses sometimes find it difficult to find their way through the
particularities of common law – which occasionally overlaps with Quebec civil
law – let alone the provincial and federal levels of government.
3. OTHER MEETINGS AND VISITS
Visit to the Legislative Assembly of
Alberta and meeting with Speaker Kowalski
The first morning of activities began
with a visit to the Legislative Assembly of Alberta. The Honourable Ken
Kowalski, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, warmly welcomed the delegation,
noting the historic ties between Alberta and France, in particular the fact
that more than 10% of Canadians who served in the Great War were from Alberta.
Senator Cléach said how happy he was to visit Western Canada, which has
strengths that are not well known in France. Senator Tardif thanked the Speaker
for his welcome and for his unwavering support of Francophones in Alberta.
Visit to the Fort Edmonton Historic
Site
On the evening of August 30th,
parliamentarians had the pleasure of being invited to a reception hosted by the
Honourable Ken Kowalski, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, at Fort Edmonton.
During her speech, Senator Tardif thanked Speaker Kowalski for his welcome
and noted the presence of the Honourable Hector Goudreau, Alberta’s Minister of
Municipal Affairs and President of the province’s Francophone Secretariat, and
Wayne Cao, MLA for Calgary-Fort. She recalled the historical roots that have
united Alberta and France since the time of the explorers and fur traders in
the early 18th century, and the shared energy interests that bring
them together today. Mr. Colombier and Senator Cléach expressed their pleasant
surprise on discovering the vibrant Francophone life outside Quebec.
Meeting with Stephen Mandel, Mayor of
Edmonton
Early in the afternoon of Tuesday,
August 31st, the delegation was welcomed to the office of Edmonton
Mayor Stephen Mandel. The Mayor explained the economic challenges facing the
municipality, especially in the areas of housing and downtown safety. The
parliamentarians were impressed by the municipality’s balanced budget, which is
attributable not only to the oil industry, but also to EPCOR, a wastewater
treatment and utility company that is wholly owned by the City of Edmonton and
nets the City an annual profit of roughly $150 million. The delegation briefly
visited the elegant City Hall before a photo session.
Visit to Edmonton Waste Management
Centre
On the afternoon of Tuesday, August 31st,
parliamentarians visited one of the most innovative recycling facilities in
North America. Under pressure from a lack of space to bury its garbage, the
municipality turned toward recycling in the mid-1980s. Today, roughly 60% of
residential waste is recycled, and the target for 2013 and beyond is 90%.
Meeting on Albertan economic
perspectives
On September 3rd, Doug
Cameron, Senior Director, US Trade and Investment for the Government of
Alberta, presented lesser-known facets of Alberta’s economy. He reminded
participants that the provincial economy is export-based, with revenues of $118
billion, 88% of which are from the United States. Naturally, the main goal
is to nurture economic growth related to oil sands development.
Advantages for businesses interested in
establishing a presence in Alberta are the high education levels, the quality
of the infrastructure, and a favourable tax system. Aside from the oil sector,
Alberta’s economic strengths are in information technology, nanotechnology,
aerospace (drones and defence), agriculture and tourism.
Mr. Cameron stated that 80% of systems
developed in Alberta for the aerospace sector are exported to the United
States. This sector is very important and can be traced to the presence of four
military bases in the province.
Lise Fenez explained that the
Government of Alberta is emphasizing information technology as a way to
diversify the province’s economy and make it less dependent on the cyclical
nature of the resource-based economy. The IT industry generated revenues of
$8.5 billion, roughly one-quarter of which are from exports.
Robert Kuperis, an economist with
Alberta’s Department of Agriculture, gave a presentation on the agricultural
sector. Its revenues have reached $10.2 billion, which is roughly 20% of all
agricultural revenues in Canada. He described efforts under way to encourage
free trade between the European Union and Canada in this sector.
Meeting with Representatives of French
Companies in Alberta
Emmanuel Giry, Business Development
Manager at Oxand Canada Inc., explained that French companies that wish to
establish a Canadian presence almost always start in Quebec. He said that
roughly 80% of French businesses with a presence in Canada have their principal
place of business in Montréal. Constraints on interprovincial labour
mobility sometimes make recruitment difficult, but there are more and more agreements
in place.
Dinner at the Residence of Honourable
Dan Hays, Former Speaker of the Senate of Canada
Early in the afternoon of Friday,
September 3rd, the delegation was welcomed to the residence of the
Honourable Dan Hays in Calgary for informal discussions.
SUMMARY OF THE 37TH ANNUAL
MEETING
The 37th Annual Meeting was
extremely busy. The discussions were very rich in content, and the meetings
gave parliamentarians a much better idea of the stakes associated with oil
sands exploitation. The meeting was also an opportunity, particularly for the
French participants, to discover the little-known vitality of Alberta’s
Francophone community.
On the evening of Friday, September 3rd,
the co-chair of the Association, Senator Tardif, capped the whirlwind week
with the following remarks:
Dear Friends:
First let me
repeat once again how happy your presence in Alberta, my home, has made me.
This week has been an emotional one. I must thank you for your patience and
kindness during our long and disappointing excursion above the unruly clouds of
Fort McMurray.
Despite the
disappointment, I think that I can speak for each and every member of our group
when I say that the predominant feeling in our meetings and exchanges was
friendship, the very sincere friendship that gives our association a warmth
that other groups envy.
Our friendship
for each other is also reflected in the quality and vigour of the discussions
during our working sessions. Despite our very diverse political allegiances, we
found unity in the profound values that we share, especially our sincere
concern for the welfare of the citizens we serve as parliamentarians.
I am a little
sad to be saying goodbye before you leave tomorrow morning.
Thank you
again for being here. I wish all of you, dear friends from France and Canada,
an excellent evening and a pleasant return home.
Respectfully submitted,
The Honourable Claudette Tardif,
Senator Chair of the Canada-France Interparliamentary
Association