MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we will begin. As you know, we have two standing committee meetings going on simultaneously, so to speak, and as a consequence, we have a couple of regular members that are unable to attend today, but Frank Corbett is on his way representing the NDP caucus.
With us today we have Mr. Tim Brownlow and Ms. Tina Battcock. I understand, Mr. Brownlow, you are going to make a presentation on behalf of Offshore/Onshore Technologies Association. Perhaps we can go around the room and just identify ourselves as committee members for the witnesses.
[The members introduced themselves.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brownlow, let us begin.
MR. TIM BROWNLOW: Thank you very much for inviting us. We did have a very lovely - and you will have to take my word for it - overhead presentation ready, but to go very quickly through the slides - I have it on a paper here and you all have a copy. We would like to just quickly go through this and then open up the floor for questions. We would be happy to answer any questions that you have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That would be fine, Mr. Brownlow.
MR. BROWNLOW: Starting off, what is OTANS? Well, OTANS was established in 1983. We are a non-profit association of businesses to promote and support the offshore/onshore industry in Nova Scotia. At present we have approximately 355 member companies and organizations. Our purpose is to identify, promote, support the development of opportunities in hydrocarbon and associated industries, both offshore and onshore.
Our objectives are: to promote the capabilities and expertise of Nova Scotia offshore and onshore industries; identify business opportunities and advise members; maximize Nova Scotia participation in the supply of goods and services; promote members both nationally and internationally.
We offer daily fax bulletins and/or e-mails; breakfast speakers and special interest seminars; oil and gas conferences and trade shows in Halifax. This year it is October 4th and October 5th, which is the CORE show and conference. We offer the "great offshore picnic", which is being held on June 9th this year on Georges Island. The Canadian and International Trade Exhibitions, we travel around the world to promote the province, along with our members, at these exhibits and trade shows. We provide a membership directory, advertising supplement and industry representation.
Our challenge to industry is to: adapt to onshore technologies and services; deliver new technologies to meet emerging needs; infrastructure and training; deliver conventional technologies competitively; enter joint ventures, alliances, partnering, and explain that to our members on how to do that; and to establish a track record in the global industry.
Industry benefits: products have local delivery of supplies and services, which improves reliability of service; and a capable local infrastructure makes the region attractive for future development.
Where are the opportunities? We see the opportunities in: construction and installation - in the pipeline industry, petrochemical industry; exploration drilling - equipment and services; production and operation services; and gas distribution and utilization.
That, and again you missed a beautiful slide presentation, is our presentation. Short and to the point.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Brownlow. We appreciate your brief presentation. We would ask committee members to begin.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Just this one question and we have had a number of discussions about a number of things before. Previously there had been some discussion about how to possibly streamline - and this would certainly have impacts for OTANS members and opportunities - the approvals and the regulatory processes and the one-stop-type of shopping. I am wondering if you could for me, and possibly for others who may know this better than I, outline all of the various bodies, groups and organizations, levels of governments, and so on, that you have to go through and what, in particular, is the suggestion to try to make the process a little bit user-friendly in terms of navigating through it. I can appreciate it is beyond the scope of your presentation.
MR. BROWNLOW: Exactly, and the meeting is what? We have three hours or two hours? No, I think you hit the nail on the head in the very first statement you made, which was a streamlined approach, a single-window approach. A single regulatory regime with, say, the most stringent set of regulations, but just one of them to go through on each different issue, not overlapping for different jurisdictions, whether it be provincially or federally, would be the approach. All the number of regulatory agencies out there and, as I said, I couldn't name them all off the top of my head right now anyway if I could. Tina, I don't know if you could add any more to that.
MS. TINA BATTCOCK: No.
MR. HOLM: Just as a follow-up, do you have a preference as to who that single agency would be? Do you see it being the Petroleum Directorate? Do you see it being the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board which, of course, by its very nature means two levels of government? Have you had discussions, I guess, on what you would like to see done and is there some kind of discussion paper or suggestions that have come forward? I know that there have certainly been discussions about drilling in the offshore and around Georges Bank, and we may even disagree on some of those things, but I am just looking for a clear position paper which is outlining what members think would be helpful for advancing the process and advancing the industry in this area.
MS. BATTCOCK: We are in the process.
MR. BROWNLOW: Exactly, as Tina just stated, we are in the process of working with the Newfoundland Ocean Industries Association, ourselves as chairing and Newfoundland co-chairing a regulatory review committee just to go over that one point. With your joint jurisdiction offshore, you have to have the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board. The Petroleum Directorate does all the onshore. So if you had to choose between one, you couldn't, because when you are dealing on the onshore it is the Petroleum Directorate and with the offshore it is the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board. But the board, as the single window, which I think it was set up to be, would probably be the choice of the industry.
MR. HOLM: I guess I would just say I would be interested in the results of that review.
MR. BROWNLOW: Once that document is finished, we would be more than happy to provide it; it would be a public document.
MR. HOLM: I will stop there for the moment.
MR. WILLIAM DOOKS: Mr. Chairman, just a couple of questions. You have 355 members, do you charge the members a fee? Is this how you gather your money up to go
ahead? Does government contribute any amount of money towards this, or do you get grants or monies allocated to explore or develop, support?
MR. BROWNLOW: Yes, there is a small government grant involved in there as well.
MR. DOOKS: Does someone have to be a company owner to be a member of this organization, or can it be independent? Could I be a member?
MR. BROWNLOW: You could be a member.
MR. DOOKS: What is the fee to belong to this?
MR. BROWNLOW: It depends on the size of your company. Is it just you, yourself, or is it . . .
MR. DOOKS: Yes, just me. I will tell you exactly what I am talking about. I represent the Eastern Shore and a little further down, in Guysborough, it is very active. Between Guysborough and Halifax, very little is taking place when we talk about development. We are not going to get any part of gas because we live in an area that is very costly to supply, although we have Sheet Harbour, a great port. We have large areas where maybe, some company could locate.
What I am concerned about is if you are not a part of, and if you don't have someone lobbying to bring an industry to your particular area, then we are going to be forgotten about. I was just wondering, do you have any knowledge of anyone who lives on the Eastern Shore, that has a company on the Eastern Shore, that is a part of this?
MR. BROWNLOW: Well, one of our past chairmen was Reg Dooks.
MR. DOOKS: Yes, I know him well.
MR. BROWNLOW: You know Reg?
MR. DOOKS: Very well.
MS. BATTCOCK: Delta Catalytic is the company that he represented at that time.
MR. DOOKS: Yes, I am very familiar with that. Yes, for sure.
MR. BROWNLOW: I was just wondering about the gentleman that runs the Sheet Harbour facility now. Was he not a member?
MR. DOOKS: I could check. Anyway, I guess what I am trying to say is, I wonder if all of Nova Scotia is equally represented in this association? I would have some concerns about the areas that are deprived and are going to be deprived of the development of gas, and what it is going to bring to Nova Scotia. So just for interest and being a representative of the area, I would like to be a member so that I could have an opportunity to find out what is going on, what developments are going to take place and if there is any opportunity to lobby for the good people of the Eastern Shore.
MR. BROWNLOW: Sure. There you go, Tina. We came here to get a new member.
MR. DOOKS: Yes. So I guess it is probably not the question you were expecting, but reading this and understanding it, certainly, is the avenue or the venue that I have been looking for to tap into the industry. Thank you.
MR. BROWNLOW: You're quite right, the bulk of the industry seems to be around the metropolitan area. No one is going to hide that.That is where it is happening. But we do have members from one end of the province to the other, from Yarmouth to the tip of Cape Breton. You mentioned the Guysborough area, the Strait of Canso.
MR. DOOKS: Well, the port in Sheet Harbour is equally as beautiful as anything that is in any other part of Nova Scotia and is not being utilized at all, and getting very little support from anyone to offer support to the offshore gas. So I would like to be at the table . . .
MR. BROWNLOW: Right. Well, the big thing you had down there was the pipeline.
MR. DOOKS: Yes, but that has since gone.
MR. BROWNLOW: That has since gone.
MR. DOOKS: We would like to get more.
MR. BROWNLOW: Yes, get more. That is the name of the game.
MR. DOOKS: Thank you, sir.
MR. FRANK CHIPMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In regard to the oil and gas industry, and with respect to economic growth and job opportunities, where do you see the greatest benefits and opportunities for Nova Scotians?
MR. BROWNLOW: In the service sector supply to the offshore. The jobs, themselves, with the oil companies, or in the construction, they ramp up, and they come
down. Your long-term jobs are in the service sector and the support of the offshore, like support vessels, rigs, whatever, or in your local industrial parks.
MR. DOOKS: Sheet Harbour.
MR. BROWNLOW: Yes, there you go, Sheet Harbour Industrial Park. Mr. Dooks solved the problem for us.
MR. CHIPMAN: Service opportunities more so than revenue?
MR. BROWNLOW: Revenue from . . .
MR. CHIPMAN: Revenue from the natural gas and oil, overall.
MR. BROWNLOW: You are going to attract new industry because of the cheaper energy sources. Yes, there could be additional revenue from tax bases there. The royalty agreement, when it kicks in, and I am not well versed in that so I don't want to answer too many questions on it, but I think the opportunity would definitely be on the service side.
MR. CHIPMAN: Right. Natural gas is one of the main feed stocks for the petrochemical industry. Are you aware of any developments going on with regard to that?
MR. BROWNLOW: I am aware of some conversations that are going on with some people in the Guysborough area, but not intimately. I know of some companies from the Boston area that have come up and met with them but, again, not intimately. Tina, I don't know if you could . . .
MS. BATTCOCK: Not at this time, no.
MR. BROWNLOW: There has been some sniffing around, it's been tire kicking. The big thing is, this is project number one. This is three and one-half trillion cubic feet. There are 22 trillion cubic feet in that basin.
MR. BROWNLOW: There are five more of these to come, if you do it this way.
MR. DONALD DOWNE: Mr. Chairman. I want to welcome both our guests here today. OTANS is an organization that has kept the faith in the offshore when not too many people had faith in the offshore. Obviously, there is great optimism in regard to the future, within the industry right now, from what I can see.
The Premier, during the election, indicated he would like to set up an energy council of experts to advise him on the offshore - I haven't really seen that committee established yet - basically wanting to take a look at what the advantages or disadvantages may be. Do you
think the creation of the energy council of experts is good, or is it a duplication of what is currently there in the system?
MR. BROWNLOW: It depends on who sits on the council, really. If you have the right players sitting on the council, yes it could be advantageous for the Premier to hear on a daily basis or a weekly basis, whatever the case is, exactly what the industry sees, but it depends on how broad a base this council gets, I think that would determine what the value of it would be.
MR. DOWNE: There are a number of people who are here in this province who understand that industry reasonably well, such as Fred Smithers, or people who have been through the business for a long time. In The Chronicle-Herald I noted they were referring to Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed when he was down, and he talked about the opportunities in the offshore, and he talked about what happened in Alberta; it was a long time coming and to be patient. You are right. He talked about this as a first project, more will come, but industry is watching to see what kind of an environment we have created in the Province of Nova Scotia. Is this a positive place to do business? Is this an environment for which the private sector is prepared to spend billions of dollars to invest in?
I take it that he was basically saying that industry doesn't like the negative side of constantly criticizing whether criticism is due or not due. Do you find that the mood out there is relatively positive and excited about the future, or are we fairly negative? Are we sending the wrong signal to the oil and gas companies from either a government or Parties or public perception, or do you think that the mood out there or the message that we are sending is really good? Are we open for business; are we sending that signal?
MR. BROWNLOW: Some days I would say we are, and some days I would say we are not. I know that is not the exact answer you want to hear, but there are some positive signals some days, that we are ready to get after it and get this industry going, and other days it is like we take a step back. You are 100 per cent correct, the oil industry wants to come in and work, but by the same token you can't just roll over and say we are going to open the doors to you to come in and do whatever you want. I hate to be flip-flopping here but, as I said, some days we are open for business and some days we are not.
Tina, did you want to . . .
MS. BATTOCK: I was just going to add that streamlining the approach for these companies will make a big difference in how we are perceived as a province who wants to really do business with the oil and gas producers.
MR. DOWNE: The single-window approach-issue is what I was really getting at here, sending a signal to the companies. As I understand, members of OTANS have always talked about having the highest standard but the standards can be as high as anywhere in the world
and that is not the issue. Whether it is health and safety or whatever, benefits and everything, go for the highest standard possible. So you establish that, but it is still the question of how you create that better environment for industry to come. The standard is not the issue, it is just the attitude or sense.
In the next room over here, we have CNSOPB. Two weeks ago, I guess we had representatives of labour dealing with occupational health and safety. A number of issues came up about offshore safety and the regulatory regime or the lack of the regulatory regime in regard to safety, I think the comments from labour were that it didn't matter who the regulator is, in regard to offshore safety, as long as there is a standard established and that we know what the rules are and that someone is responsible for the offshore. Currently CNSOPB have jurisdiction.
What I sense was having one standard established was the key issue that both industry and government and the private sector are wanting to see happen. Are you hearing the same thing out there, that the companies are more interested in establishing a standard and who is the regulator of that and let's just get on with it, or not?
MR. BROWNLOW: Most definitely. That was brought to light, I think, in the presentation that we witnessed from CAPP, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, one by Sable at the CORE conference where it showed the method of the offshore with the jurisdictional overlaps, whether it be the National Energy Board or the Coast Guard or CNSOPB. I think that is exactly what the industry is looking at, they would much prefer to have one entity to deal with, which would be the CNSOPB.
MR. DOWNE: I would like to stop now. Maybe I will get a chance later.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That is awful generous of you, Mr. Downe. Mr. Corbett.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: I was quite intrigued by his questioning, I was going to let him go. I would like to thank you folks for coming out today. I remember in Cape Breton when there was a group called CBOTA around, I don't know if you remember that or not, the Cape Breton Offshore Trade Association. It was dealing much more on a local basis than what you folks are doing as a provincial organization. It was like every other region, trying to get a piece of the pie. One of the pies that people in industrial Cape Breton keep looking at is the Laurentian Sub-basin and the problems that have arisen with the jurisdictional dispute. We have heard a couple of people get into the midst of it and say, well here is the way to resolve it. I guess I am going to ask you, what is OTANS position on how to resolve the Laurentian Sub-basin dispute?
MR. BROWNLOW: You really have me wading into this, don't you? The Laurentian Sub-basin has to be resolved. In my mind it is the federal government's problem, to deal with the federal government, sign with the Province of Nova Scotia. The federal government has
to solve that problem. Put rigs in there, start drilling right away, was one of the solutions that was suggested and worry about solving it four or five years down the road, once production licences come up and once you find something. The only problem with that is that if a company finds a big discovery and it is on the line, who gets what? I think prior to any drilling taking place, the companies are going to want to see the line defined, who has what and who owns what. Nova Scotia has a deal signed with Ottawa, and a deal is a deal. So we will see what comes out of it.
I know ourselves along with NOIA have written letters to the federal government and to both provinces suggesting we get together on this and let's get it going. That is definitely the next jump-off after Sable, the Laurentian Basin. There has never been a well drilled in the area but the seismic work is phenomenal in that area.
MR. CORBETT: It is interesting, with the corridor off St. Pierre that is being explored now. Certainly it would make an eminent amount of sense to go after that field. It is seen by some in the Cape Breton area as probably a logical step to renewing its economy. With that in mind, you talked before in answering Mr. Dook's question, the pipeline is finished, that phase is finished and that is the cyclical nature, if you will, of petroleum production. This province hasn't really gone in any great direction of establishing itself in a petrochemical type of way.
One of the questions is, assuming we are successful with the Laurentian Sub-basin and we bring that ashore say somewhere in industrial Cape Breton, should that be our next logical move, establishing Nova Scotia as a petrochemical industry? Going back to industrial Cape Breton, its history as an energy provider for the province, do you see that it would probably be a smart thing to do to make it the energy centre, if you will, of Nova Scotia?
MR. BROWNLOW: For the Laurentian Basin?
MR. CORBETT: Yes.
MR. BROWNLOW: It all depends on what they find. That could be all oil. It could be gas. It depends on the mixtures for your components for the petrochemical industry. How much propane, how much butane, how much ethane? So you would have to answer those questions first to figure out whether you could support a petrochemical industry. The question I would ask is, well, with the mix from Sable and the mix from the Laurentian, you would definitely have enough I would say, in my own opinion, I am not a petrochemical expert, to put a petrochemical industry up, but you would have the cheap feedstock as well for energy for that.
MR. CORBETT: I guess that boils down into the next part of the question then. Being an offshore association you see, however you want to cut it, what is left of the mining resource, with the coal resource that is left there, and there are the technologies today and for,
I guess, many years we have been talking about synfuels, would you see your organization promoting a group like that or getting somewhat involved with them?
MR. BROWNLOW: With synfuels?
MR. CORBETT: Synfuels, yes.
MR. BROWNLOW: They could be a part. Right now we are talking to a group in Cape Breton called Grow Cape Breton as being a part of an OTANS' arm. So we are already there with Grow Cape Breton. If that is one of the things from synfuels that could come down, fine, by all means. Another one is called bed methane, you know, how much methane is still around, so there is another opportunity, so by all means.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Corbett. Mr. Brownlow, during the original stages of the Sable Offshore Energy Project, OTANS' members expressed to us, then in Opposition, that they were very concerned about business opportunities and job opportunities, et cetera. How did it subsequently pan out so to speak for the OTANS' members? You have 355 companies.
MR. BROWNLOW: I think we were talking about that this morning, were we not. We have had a couple of complaints and I think you are going to have complaints no matter where, what organization you are associated with.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Sure.
MR. BROWNLOW: I think the organization quickly realized that you have to win these, these are not contracts that are going to be handed to you. You have to competitively bid for them. You either have to go to a strategic alliance or a partnership with some company in order to get it. With future projects down the road, now that we have the expertise in technology transfer, maybe you don't, but I can only think of maybe one or two complaints. Sable did hit a target they say of 32 per cent of Nova Scotia benefits. I have not seen all the paperwork on that to quantify that. I am just referencing a number that they say, but I think as things progressed on the Sable project they got better and, Tina, maybe you would be able to answer any other part of that.
MS. BATTCOCK: I just know, for instance, that we really have not done a good survey of companies to find out what the real lot valuable assets have been. One particular company had only two technicians on staff and they got a contract in the Sable project and they went up to 13 technicians and now they are having difficulty finding people with the proper training. I think perhaps, if anything, we might be a little bit behind on having the educated workforce that is going to be required as we go forward with this industry.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there more opportunities relative to the offshore or onshore? Maritimes & Northeast did the lateral to Point Tupper and to the main line that went through the province, do your member companies also supply a number of goods and services there or how does that sort of balance out against the offshore?
MS. BATTCOCK: I think that probably we had some opportunity in the construction portion of the Maritimes & Northeast pipeline, but there will be a lot more opportunity for our companies as they develop the Sempra distribution system.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I guess some of us have been a little overwhelmed lately by the number of calls and communication we have received from some of the local trades groups out there that are concerned that Maritimes & Northeast might possibly award the contract for the lateral coming from Eureka to Tufts Cove to a company, I think the acronym is CLAC, or something, from outside of the province and I was just curious as to whether or not your organization and OTANS have some concerns?
[1:30 p.m.]
The members of the labour workforce are explaining to us that the government and their union spent a considerable amount of dollars on training them, and I guess the experience has been where this organization or company has been awarded work, they bring most of their help from the West. Have you had any experience or knowledge relative to that?
MR. BROWNLOW: You just mentioned something that I knew nothing about, this acronym, or that company, I have never heard of that.
MR. HOLM: It is unknown.
MR. BROWNLOW: It is a union.
MR. CORBETT: Christian Labour . . .
MR. HOLM: . . . Association from the Reform Church.
MR. BROWNLOW: Under the Pipeline Act, there are certain unions across Canada that have to be involved in each pipeline project although those unions do exist inside this province. The other one is, on the pipeline industry, it is a very transient industry. I wasn't aware if they are talking to anyone else regarding running the lateral.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You indicate in your handout, for your members, you want to identify business opportunities and economic benefits and advise members. I just thought whereas Nova Scotia employees are concerned that perhaps maybe OTANS was also. Thanks very much.
MR. BROWNLOW: No, no, a good point, we will check into that one.
MR. KENNETH MACASKILL: Mr. Chairman, the Laurentian Sub-basin, as we are led to believe on Cape Breton Island, is that if the dispute is not soon settled we may lose an opportunity because we have drilling rigs on the East Coast that are prepared to go in there and start drilling. Are there opportunities elsewhere, around the world, where there are opportunities, and I am making reference to the RG5 which has been in Halifax for a month or so, is that rig here because there is no work for it or are we being misled here and missing an opportunity because the rig is on the East Coast and if delayed, we may never get them back again; they will drill elsewhere?
MR. BROWNLOW: There are a lot of areas in the world right now, with the price of oil being where it is at, more attractive than Nova Scotia. For example, Angola, Nigeria, Brazil, where it would cost, maybe for the sake of the argument; Nigeria, $6.00 a barrel to lift oil from the ground, where here it could be $12 a barrel, whatever the case is, at the price of oil that is. But with reference to the RG5, no, the RG5 is sitting here on spec and, hopefully in the not too distant future, they will have a job in our offshore region. That is about all I can say on that issue, but there are other areas in the world that are attractive to oil companies right now.
MR. MACASKILL: We hear occasionally from fishermen who don't want drilling rigs and there are people other than fishermen, environmentalists, who don't want to see drilling rigs on our East Coast. What is OTANS doing to pave the way for the oil rigs to come in and settle the disputes with the fishermen and environmentalists before the drilling takes place? Are you involved in such a program?
MR. BROWNLOW: Yes, we are, but I am going to let Tina talk about that one because that is her baby.
MS. BATTCOCK: Oh, really.
MR. BROWNLOW: I will jump in and then you can, whatever.
MS. BATTCOCK: We are working very closely with a lot of other interest groups, groups interested in the development of the offshore industry such as CAPP, the Petroleum Directorate, and the community colleges. Grow Cape Breton is now on board. We are going out and having open houses. We had one in Sydney where we had over 300 people come in and visit us and their first question was, when is the oil and gas industry coming to Cape Breton? On the other hand, you have the fishing groups who don't want to see development and their voice is becoming very strong based on the fact that the Georges Bank moratorium went back on for 12 years. Now all the offshore development is at risk because of that moratorium.
As an association, we would have not minded the moratorium going back on, but we would have preferred that it was three to five years, and if there is a special study they needed, that would have given us the opportunity to do it, but with 12 years, at that time the window of opportunity to develop in that area is probably going to be gone. Then we have all these other opportunities along the coast and we would like to see the opportunity to work with the fishing industry. That is why we are having these open houses.
MR. BROWNLOW: We plan on continuing down at the South Shore with education, whether it be the high schools, the community colleges, whatever the case be.
On the environmental question, nowadays, are built to a zero discharge, is their classification. So even a drop of water that lands on that rig can be saved and treated, dumped or put on a barge or shipped to town, whatever the case may be. I don't really see a pollution problem coming from a rig. I think, quite frankly, it is much easier to frighten people than it is to educate them.
MR. MACASKILL: Tina, that was going to be my next question, was relative to Georges Bank. Apparently, you are not satisfied or OTANS was not pleased with the decision to leave the moratorium in place for 12 years. I agree with you. I think it is too long.
Getting back to where I started, I don't believe we have people educated on the facts of how oil rigs can drill and be non-pollutive. We see it in the North Sea. Not that I know an awful lot about drilling but where we see fishermen and drill rigs work side by side in the North Sea, I wonder why we can't do that on the East Coast. We can't be educating people on how these two industries can work side by side.
MS. BATTCOCK: One of the things that Gordon MacIntosh, the Director of Economic Development for the City of Aberdeen, has offered to Nova Scotia is taking some fishers over to Aberdeen and working with those fishers, in how they cooperated with the oil and gas industry to get it up and running in the North Sea 25 years ago.
Now we have offered that in a couple of our open houses and we haven't had any takers yet, but we see that as being something that could be very beneficial in trying to get the fishing industry and the oil and gas industry co-existing here in Nova Scotia.
MR. MACASKILL: I guess that is the point I am trying to raise. Are we behind the 8 ball in doing that, educating people?
MS. BATTCOCK: Well, we probably got slow off the mark but we are sure trying hard to get it accomplished now.
MR. BROWNLOW: One thing, it is education, education, education. We have to educate.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Holm.
MR. HOLM: Two things about what Ken was saying. I thought that you were the Minister of Natural Resources when the moratorium of Nova Scotia went on.
Just on the CLAC, if I might, CLAC is a kind of a union. It is a supposedly Christian-based labour union, (Interruption) Well, many would argue that it is not.
The concern is that if the company that is awarded the contract to build the line is not a signature to the labour contracts in Nova Scotia, but rather to CLAC, then they can bring workers in from outside the province. If the company that gets it are signatures to the Nova Scotia agreements, then the Nova Scotia workers would end up having to be used. That would normally mean in the range of about 75 per cent, at least, Nova Scotians.
The National Energy Board, which regulates that pipeline, does not set standards or quotas for the percentage of Nova Scotia content. That is where the concern comes in, in terms of who does or does not get work.
I just want to go back to a couple of things. Tina, you had talked about some companies identifying that they are having difficulty getting technicians, one particular company. I am wondering if OTANS has, through its members, tried to develop, I guess, a shopping list or identified what skill sets are lacking in Nova Scotia or going to be in short supply?
I know that the gas technicians are now able to be writing their exams, and so on, since the gas regulations. That exam process was able to be resolved.
Have you identified what skill sets your members are going to need and what kind, then, of collaborative approach have you been able to develop with the community college, the government in general, to ensure that we do have the skill sets here to be able to take advantage of the job opportunities?
MR. BROWNLOW: If I may, and then Tina will cover it off. There is one list here, that we will read, of to some of the opportunities that we have found. With the province, with community colleges, we have sat down and discussed different ones that we see coming up. One of the big problems is that you have to get the oil companies themselves to tell you exactly what they need. If you train a person too soon, that person's ticket could lapse and then you end up retraining that person or, if you don't train them, then they don't have a job. So it is like a chicken-and-egg thing, but it is a very fine line. Actually that gas technician course that you just mentioned, I think the opening is tomorrow, over at Akerley Campus at 11:00 a.m.. That is a whole new industry for Nova Scotia, for these installers and whatnot.
Some of the ones that we have highlighted are: electricians; material handlers; welders; technicians; mechanics; NDT testers, non-destructive testing; tool pushers for the offshore . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: What was that?
MR. BROWNLOW: NDT. (Laughter)
MR. HOLM: They are progressive people, New Democrats.
MR. BROWNLOW: . . . mud loggers; radio operators; purchasers; pipefitters; crane operators; engineers; millwrights; inspectors; drillers; geologists; ballast control operators; and marine crews, just to mention a few of the ones that we have come forward with.
MR. HOLM: I just have a follow-up question to that, because in your answer you said part of what I thought you might, and that is that it depends in part upon what the industry needs and you don't always get the advance warning as to what skill sets are needed. Again it is a matter of knowing what the rules are upfront, and I want to see as much Nova Scotia content as is possible. Some other countries in the development stages set down very clear criteria as to what percentage of content had to be provided by that home, either country or jurisdiction; Norway might be one example that comes to mind. I am not saying we go that far and I don't know what the level is.
Would it not be helpful to your industries for government to make a requirement that whether it is 35 per cent, whether it is 50 per cent, or that it is going to be ratcheted-up for each additional program, that would provide the incentive, would it not, for the companies to identify what skill sets and what resources they are going to need and then give lead time to the province and to Nova Scotia businesses to develop the capacity to meet those needs? If they aren't going to tell us until the last minute and we don't know what we need, then they are quite free to run off to Houston or to wherever to bring in those whom they are comfortable with and have a tradition of dealing with.
I want to find out what your thoughts are on breaking that comfort or that tradition of going to whom they normally do and rather to be looking at in-house - and when I say in-house, in Nova Scotia - as to what our businesses can provide them, and to provide them with the motivation to do that. We have had that kind of discussion before, but I would like to get your thoughts on how we can go about encouraging that.
MR. BROWNLOW: When you get to the percentages, you want x number of percentages. That can backfire, down the road, on you, there is no question there.
MR. HOLM: I appreciate that.
MR. BROWNLOW: Once you get up, farther along on the food chain, then you are only going to get a certain per cent or you could get more, and the other thing is geology. Geology dictates what you can dictate to oil companies. Right now we have one project, which is Sable . . .
MR. HOLM: We know the geology.
MR. BROWNLOW: We don't know the geology well enough to start dictating. Norway knows their geology well enough to start dictating; we are still virgin drilling offshore. We haven't even drilled the deepwater properties, we haven't drilled the Laurentian Basin, but the Sable Basin . . .
MR. HOLM: But we have done all the seismic work for the deepwater projects and they have looked at the geology in other areas, so they have very good projections as to what is out there.
MR. BROWNLOW: Good projections, but those anomalies that they see on the seismic could be water. That doesn't mean it is oil, it doesn't mean it is gas; it could be salt water, it could be freshwater. Until you drill your well, you don't know what you will get.
MR. HOLM: But good percentages . . .
MR. BROWNLOW: A good percentage is all a guess. I mean that is why they do the seismic.
MR. HOLM: That has all been done and it has been sold.
MR. BROWNLOW: That was done this summer and there will be a lot more seismic going on this summer with Shell and PanCanadian plan to do some.
I don't know, percentages in their development plan, maybe as we get further down and become a more mature industry, maybe percentages is the way to go but, at present, I wouldn't . . .
MR. DOWNE: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to change the topic a little bit. I know OTANS is really part of the promotional side of the industry, as well as bringing the industry together and getting ready. I think the question that my colleague just asked was that the infrastructure of Nova Scotia, for meeting the requirements of the offshore, was pretty small in comparison to some of the other jurisdictions. We are just new. We are learning that. We are learning how to get there, and I like to take my hat off to OTANS for its leadership role in trying to bring together these smaller companies. How do you get into this business, what do you need to do? The standards are higher than probably any standard that has ever been
established before in Nova Scotia. How do you make the connections? Who do you go see and so on and so forth?
So I compliment OTANS for its leadership in that and I think the Petroleum Secretariat somewhat played a role in that and I think we need to do more, but I think it has moved a long way. This one project, as Tim was saying, is really the springboard for other projects for allowing us to have the content levels and the businesses to be able to be competitive enough and to get into that business so that they could actually, as Irving and some of the others were talking about, make some prefabs, some of the operations, here.
I just think that that is important to state because it is not black and white or, put a percentage and everybody gets a job, if you can't do the work, you are not going to get the people to do the job.
What do you see as the horizon for the offshore? Tim talked about 3.5 TCF, there is 20-some TCFs out there - PanCanadian's announcement recently - what do you see happening over the next, say, 5 years to 10 years for the offshore, and what should government be doing to work with the industry to make the best benefit for all our people?
MR. BROWNLOW: I will go and you kick in, what I forget, you help out. At a speech that was made in Newfoundland two years ago, Ken Miller, from Mobil Oil at the time, now I guess Exxon-Mobil, stated that there will be $30 billion spent on East Coast Canada over the next 10 years for drilling, production, infrastructure, whatever the case may be. In the short five-year time-span off Nova Scotia, I see Tier 2 up and running, and hopefully we will see this PanCanadian-find up and running. You will see a lot of drilling activity of the Shelf. You will see Shell, Norsk, Drill, Marathon, all drilling off the Shelf in the deeper water to see if that trend continues to go. Hopefully, also in the next five years, we will have the Laurentian Basin open up and also the west coast of Cape Breton, with that corridor and you have your onshore. You have North Star onshore, Amvest, Nova Scotia Power, so that is what I see in the next five years. I would even venture to say that hopefully Sable Tier 2 won't be that far away.
MR. DOWNE: A lot of optimism, the future is ours as long as we make sure we work with industry; work with the private sector and create a better environment; streamline the environment; single window and government; let the industry know that we want things to happen at the highest standard possible.
MR. BROWNLOW: Put the highest standard to one, as long as there is one. I have appeased this regulatory body, now I have to appease this regulatory body and this next regulatory one.
MR. RICHARD HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to hear in your opening comments that you have members all over Nova Scotia. Could you tell me who the member is for Yarmouth? Is there one or more than one?
MS. BATTCOCK: There is one.
MR. BROWNLOW: Dick Stewart. Do you know, Dick?
MR. HURLBURT: Very well.
MR. BROWNLOW: Dick is a member. Dick was also a member of our Georges Bank Review Committee. I know from my days working offshore, there are probably 10 or 15 gentlemen who are in the Yarmouth area who are still working in the offshore today, maybe more than that. I am just trying to think, there are another two members, and I apologize, we will have to go through our membership list.
MR. HURLBURT: Could I get that list, please?
MR. BROWNLOW: Most definitely, no problem. Do you want us to send a copy to you, Mr. Taylor?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, please.
MR. HURLBURT: The moratorium was extended by the Americans before the Canadians jumped on and extended theirs, was it not? That was 10 years, am I correct?
MR. BROWNLOW: Twelve years.
MR. HURLBURT: Was it not 10 years by the Americans, though?
MS. BATTCOCK: Ten years . . .
MR. HURLBURT: Ten by the Americans and 12 years by the Canadians, by the Canadian Government, am I correct?
MS. BATTCOCK: Yes, I think you are. I know it is 12 years by the Canadians and I am pretty sure it is 10 years by the Americans.
MR. HURLBURT: Now in saying that, when the committee was in my home town, I blamed industry for the input that came from community, any how. The only industry that we have left in Southwest Nova is our fishing. They see themselves as being threatened by your industry. I blame your industry for not doing what you are saying, which is education. So you can't blame the communities, when you are threatening somebody with their
livelihood, they are going to stand up and take offense to it and they are going to protect their own ground, and that is what the community did. It is the last fisheries that we have in Atlantic Canada, the richest fisheries are in Southwest Nova. They see that as a threat.
Now if you people are saying that you can work hand in hand with the two industries, I think that you have a real education job to do and a PR job. When you see the ads on TV, the ducks and the seagulls coming in plastered in oil, they blame it on your industry, do they not? Even though it is a tanker going across the channel, and it gets hit by another boat, they still blame your industry, do they not? So I think it is entirely up to the industry to get out to the communities, especially down in our end of Nova Scotia because fishing is the backbone of our community.
In saying that, have any of the members who sit on your community expressed to you people that we have an international airport, that we have a massive piece of land adjacent to the airport for future development, where we can building something, a factory of some sort, maybe to help out in the gas industry? Has anybody brought that up?
MR. BROWNLOW: No one has brought that to our table.
MR. HURLBURT: Well, would you please make a note that I just brought it to the table.
MR. BROWNLOW: Will do. To come back to your point about your community. We at OTANS got involved late in the game on the Georges Bank issue, probably, what would you say, Tina, . . .
MS. BATTCOCK: Just two years, the last two years.
MR. BROWNLOW: The last two years, it was oil company-led. The education process has to start in the junior high schools and up to the high schools that the two industries can exist together. They exist together around the world, there is no reason why they can't exist together in Nova Scotia. I am a Nova Scotian and the last thing I would want to do is hurt my fishing industry.
MR. HURLBURT: Absolutely.
MR. BROWNLOW: That is why we wanted Nova Scotians educating Nova Scotians, not Texans, not Calgarians, not Aberdonians coming in. Nova Scotians talking to grassroots Nova Scotians and explaining it one on one as to exactly what we see, because that would be the last thing we would want to do, to hurt the fishing industry.
MR. HURLBURT: But if I may be so bold, when the committee was in our community and the gas companies were in our community, they looked down at the
fishermen, like you are just little fishermen, we are the big boys. We are telling you that everything is perfect, the world is great, everybody is going to thrive and it is going to be a perfect world. I don't think that is the way you would address their concerns, coming in and looking down at them.
MR. BROWNLOW: That is certainly not the way we addressed it. If you are referring to the one - I think Tina and I went to one -
MR. HURLBURT: At the Grand Hotel.
MR. BROWNLOW: At the Grand Hotel . . .
MR. HURLBURT: Yes, I was there.
MR. BROWNLOW: . . . and that was organized by Texaco, I think. I want to stand to be corrected on that. I think it was organized by Texaco. We found it very militant on both sides, if I may be so bold.
MR. HURLBURT: Yes.
MR. BROWNLOW: They did bring a fishing community over from Aberdeen. They brought experts in to talk about it. It turned into more of an argument, I thought, than a discussion. Actually that evening there was some more going on but we decided we were not going to sit around listening to arguments so we just came home. But no, it has to be Nova Scotians talking to Nova Scotians and educated properly.
MR. HURLBURT: That's right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Richard.
MR. HURLBURT: I will be looking forward to that entry at Yarmouth airport.
MR. CHAIRMAN: In that 1999 study, Harnessing the Potential of Atlantic Canada's Gas and Oil industry, you spoke of Atlantic Canada's inability to meet the demands of exploration. I am just wondering what improvements have been made? Are there any specific areas where we have made steps to . . .
MR. BROWNLOW: If I may clarify one point on Harnessing Potential. Even though our name is associated with this.
MR. CHAIRMAN: A disclaimer. (Laughter)
MR. BROWNLOW: Here is our disclaimer. That was a Newfoundland-led study. We received the final copy of it a couple of weeks before it went to press. I will try to elaborate, if I may.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. BROWNLOW: It was with reference to exploration, drilling.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Exploration, yes.
MR. BROWNLOW: I would have to review it and get back to you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's fine, no, that's fair. I understood you had played . . .
MR. BROWNLOW: No, we did not play a very big role. We didn't play as big a role as we were led to believe in this. Now the next study we are doing, we are playing a much bigger role.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, that's fine. Mr. Chipman.
MR. FRANK CHIPMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There has been a fair amount of discussion in the papers lately about the province's role, whether it is the present government or the previous government's role in offshore exploration with regard to Nova Scotia Resources Limited. What role do you see the province playing in offshore exploration?
MR. BROWNLOW: Well, you have to ask yourself can you afford to lose. If you can't afford to lose, don't play the game.
MR. CHIPMAN: No, I am saying, what role do you see the province playing . . .
MR. BROWNLOW: With reference to Nova Scotia Resources Limited or the province as a regulator?
MR. CHIPMAN: What I guess I am basically saying to you, do you feel the government should be involved with exploration as a partner? What role do you see the government playing?
MR. BROWNLOW: Again, I would have to go back to that statement. In order to explore and develop in the offshore, you need very deep pockets. You need pockets that you can win and you need pockets that you can lose. If you can't afford to lose, you shouldn't be in the oil and gas game.
MR. CHIPMAN: But what role do you see the province playing, I am referring to, let's say, training, education, that sort of thing?
MR. BROWNLOW: Training, education, regulations. The province does produce the regulations now. As you said, education, promoting. Now, if the province was to turn Nova Scotia Resources around and make it an oil company and put the proper staff in there, then fine, but that is a decision that the province has to make. Do they want to be in the oil and gas business or do they not want to be in the oil and gas business?
MR. CHIPMAN: One other question, Mr. Chairman. Would you say Nova Scotia was leading the Atlantic Provinces in the service industries in regard to oil exploration, yes or not? What are the strengths and weaknesses in the role the province is playing?
MR. BROWNLOW: We have two projects: one going and one starting. Newfoundland has three. On the service side, your headquarters of your service bases seem to be leaning more to Nova Scotia because of our in and out better transportation routes, even though a lot of them are being duplicated in Newfoundland. Industry will drive it. I know I am not answering your question, but industry will drive where the services are going to be. If there happens to be more drilling activity production in Newfoundland then Newfoundland will win. If it is more Nova Scotia, then Nova Scotia will be the leader.
MR. CHIPMAN: Where do you feel the weaknesses and the strengths of the province would be in the offshore?
MR. BROWNLOW: In the offshore, I guess the weaknesses would be just the one project right now. We need more projects on the go. Tina, would you agree with that?
MS. BATTCOCK: Yes, we definitely need to have more than just the one.
MR. BROWNLOW: More than just the one project. I think the strength is the Nova Scotia determination, the Nova Scotia workforce. I would put this workforce against any workforce in the world. That's our strength. And our businesses, yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: A couple of final questions, Mr. MacAskill. We will go to you.
MR. MACASKILL: I will make them short, Mr. Chairman. Tim, we hear a lot about safety on the offshore, on the oil rigs. In your opinion, are the safety guidelines too strict? We hear it from both sides. An example we may hear is that if somebody goes to the washroom without reporting to his superintendent, when he comes out he might lose his job and that type of thing. We hear these things through sources that are available to us. How do you see the safety regulations on the offshore, too stringent, too tight or not enough?
MR. BROWNLOW: Well, let me answer your question about the washroom. If a person has to go to the washroom, you go to the washroom. I worked offshore for 12 years and if I had to go to the washroom, and my boss said you can't go to the washroom, I would just shut the operation down and go to the washroom. Somebody might have been pulling his leg. I don't know what the story was on that, but you don't go, what was it, 13 hours or something without going to the washroom.
MR. DOWNE: Wasn't allowed to go.
MR. BROWNLOW: No that is a fallacy. Safety offshore, I would compare the safety offshore to any place in the world.
[2:00 p.m.]
MR. MACASKILL: The record has been pretty good.
MR. BROWNLOW: You would have to ask an offshore worker today. I came in from the offshore in 1988. I found personally the part that got on my nerves the most or was the most dangerous part in my mind was flying back and forth in the helicopter, it wasn't actually working on the rig. The rig didn't bother you because you knew you were trained, you were in control, course after course after course. But with the helicopter, you have no control, and you are flying over open water.
MR. HOLM: Was that off Nova Scotia that you were working?
MR. BROWNLOW: Yes, 8 of my 12 years was off Nova Scotia.
MR. MACASKILL: Let me follow up on the discussion Mr. Hurlburt had relative to the controversy between the fishers and the oil industry. How do you see negotiations in the future if the Natives become a large part of the fishers in Nova Scotia? Do you see negotiations probably being tougher, easier, how would you interpret it?
MR. BROWNLOW: I don't know how they can get any tougher than they are now. I think that as long as everyone is at the table at the same time, if the Natives do become fishers - I mean they are fishers now, don't get me wrong - but become part of the negotiations, I think that if they all negotiate at the same time it would streamline the process a little bit.
MR. MACASKILL: We have reason to believe that there are a lot of fishers who are getting on in life and it is an opportunity for them to sell their licence back to the government and get out with a fairly decent settlement, so that leaves the door open for Natives to be a large part of fishers in Nova Scotia. That is the reason I asked the question, how would you see negotiations in the future if that were to happen.
MR. BROWNLOW: I think they would be the same, I really don't see there being any changes as long as everyone is at the table and willing to deal.
MR. MACASKILL: From the very beginning.
MR. BROWNLOW: Exactly.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I want to thank our witnesses for coming in today. I would like to thank all the committee members for their helpful interventions. Mr. Brownlow and Ms. Battcock, please come back and visit us again soon.
MS. BATTCOCK: Oh, we would like to.
MR. BROWNLOW: We will be sure that we provide that information.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, please.
MR. BROWNLOW: And if I could just have one closing statement.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Absolutely, yes.
MR. BROWNLOW: Our vision of how we see the world from 10,000 miles up, Nova Scotia has always been led by its natural resources whether it has been fishing, whether it has been forestry, whether it has been mining. Hydrocarbon is just another natural resource to lead us into the next millennium, that is the bottom line. Thank you very much for inviting us, we appreciate it. If you have any other questions, please feel free to get hold of us and we will provide you with membership lists for all of you and membership forms.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee members, don't go away, we have some other business to deal with here. We have some letters and witness list additions. Committee members, you will see on your agenda, we have a letter of request to appear before the Standing Committee on Economic Development from Mr. Leon Thompson. How do you want to handle that? Mr. Chipman.
MR. CHIPMAN: Mr. Chairman, we have several other people coming beforehand, do we not? We have already met with the Truckers' Association. My recommendation would be to set it to the side temporarily until we have seen the others.
MR. DOWNE: I agree with Mr. Chipman. We were asked to submit lists of names of people. I think his letter is pretty self-explanatory. We are into a matter of a match between one individual saying we can do it cheaper and the other saying we can. I don't know if that is going to resolve anything from the committee's point of view. We all understand the importance of the trucking industry and the plight they are going through, the very serious
problems they are going through. I think it would be counter-productive for us to get in the middle of a battle between two private sector people. I agree with Mr. Chipman, I think we could move on to other initiatives. (Interruptions)
MR. HOLM: I am wondering what the Chairman thinks.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I do understand that Mr. Thompson does have a lawsuit or something against the province. Darlene, do you have any information on that?
MRS. DARLENE HENRY (Legislative Committee Clerk): The last that I heard was that some of his issues were before the courts or going before the courts. I am not sure exactly what it is.
MR. CHAIRMAN: What is the protocol? Do we require a motion to more or less put that aside, or do we just move on? Are we in agreement that we will reschedule Mr. Thompson?
MR. DOOKS: Are you saying reschedule or not have him in at all? I would be in favour of giving him his opportunity but if it is before the courts, I would have to stand down on that.
MR. HOLM: I am not a member of the committee, but I think that is something that clarification should be obtained on prior to the committee revisiting that, maybe at a future date.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there agreement that we seek clarification?
MR. HURLBURT: Could I have clarification? If we let this man come in, are we going to let every person in Nova Scotia, any individual who wants to come in and meet with this group, because they have branched off from their organization or whatever? That is what you are doing here if you open the door to this chap, in my opinion. Because he is in a battle with TANS and the province, I don't think we should even be entertaining it. That is my view.
MR. CORBETT: I may not agree with what Mr. Thompson is doing, but I don't think that by examining it and saying make a decision on it at some point, we are opening ourselves up to anybody. We should be open to anybody, really, in real terms.
MR. HURLBURT: Individuals?
MR. CORBETT: Individuals. If we think on their merit that they should be here, I think they have the right to write to us and ask to get on here. As a committee, if we look at it and then the majority makes a decision that they don't have the right to appear, that is fine. I think I agree with my colleague, the member for Sackville-Cobequid, who says for the time
being, let's further investigate Mr. Thompson and if he has proceedings against the province, then I think we should wait until that is resolved before we consider it.
MR. MACASKILL: I don't like to agree with my colleague , the member for Cape Breton Centre, I don't want to make a habit of it. (Laughter) If Mr. Thompson is a businessman operating in Nova Scotia, I think we should give him the opportunity of hearing his concerns.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it agreed then by committee members that we will defer Mr. Thompson's request until we have clarification on potential or possible court proceedings?
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
We also have a letter of response from the Honourable Ronald Russell, Minister of Transportation, to our committee regarding the Truckers' Association. If I recall correctly, we agreed as a committee to ask the Minister of Transportation and his department to ensure that the kilometres are marked on the Department of Transportation and Public Works slip. Mr. Russell indicated in his letter that he would like to perhaps deal with that through the Department of Transportation and the Truckers' Association. Is there any action we have to take on that response, committee members?
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
MR. DOWNE: That would be a normal process. It would be appreciated if they would report back to us on the outcome of the discussions between the department and TANS with regard to that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That letter - and I quickly perused it - do all members have a copy, of the minutes? It indicated that there was some agreement, I guess, where the Truckers Association and the department would have a pre-job meeting.
MR. DOWNE: They do now. They did, anyway. That was part of the agreement. They would have pre-job meetings where the contractor would outline how many kilometres, the truck routes and how they can make it work, how many trucks they needed. All that was normally done. That is a normal process. The committee has been working, functioning, reasonably well. The outcome would be interesting here.
This is also talking about the 80/20 rule. Is there any indication whether or not the Department of Transportation is seriously considering eliminating the 80/20 rule? That is really a question, I think, now, that is in the forefront. I think most members realize the importance of the 80/20 rule to a lot of the small trucking firms, small Mom and Dad, brother and sister-types of operations, that with the 80/20 rule, there is a benefit for them. So if the Chairman would be willing, I would ask - and I hope my colleagues would support me - if we could send a letter to the Honourable Ronald Russell, indicating our support for the retention of the 80/20 rule and that the minister respond back as to how he is going to handle the 80/20 rule for the upcoming year.
They have already indicated that salt hauling is not going to be given to the TANS, it is going to be contracted out. There are a lot of truckers that are hurting bad and they are upset over that. I was at a trucking meeting on the weekend and I can tell you, these people are really feeling it, the fuel costs and everything else.
This 80/20 rule, if that goes, you may as well as stick a spike right in the backs of the truckers in the Province of Nova Scotia. The small independent truckers, they are not big companies, they just have one or two trucks and, my gosh, if that 80/20 rule goes, you may as well kill them. It will put them right out of business.
I would ask if the committee members, because certainly everybody here is from rural Nova Scotia and we understand the importance of that issue for the 80/20 rule. (Interruption) Well, he wants to be rural. He is in my constituency in the summertime. I am his MLA in the summertime.
MR. HOLM: For a week or two. (Laughter)
MR. DOWNE: I would ask if the Chairman would entertain that motion?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Oh, absolutely. This committee will entertain motions but, quite honestly, Mr. Downe, we are talking about two different issues. We have decided that no replies are necessitated as a consequence of this letter for Mr. Russell. That actually dealt with the distance that the truckers were hauling.
All members received copies of a letter that we sent off asking that the department post the kilometres on the way slips. This is the response we got. The 20/80 rule is not a new concern but it is new business and if you want to put a motion forward for the committee's consideration, I would certainly be . . .
MR. HOLM: I second that.
MR. DOWNE: Well, I move, and maybe this wording is not perfect . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, here is the motion, everybody listen very intently.
MR. DOWNE: . . . that we write a letter to the Honourable Ronald Russell, Minister of Transportation, indicating our support for the department to maintain the 80/20 rule for the truckers in the Province of Nova Scotia, that (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, Mr. Holm did second it but we will put Mr. Corbett down in the official transcript.
MR. DOOKS: I was just wondering about the review of the 80/20 rule. We were in Public Accounts and heard Martin Delaney say that it was under review. I was just wondering what this request will do to the review process. If we could just have some discussion on that. There is no discussion on that? (Interruptions) The purpose of the motion is, I guess, it is a request to support keeping it in place, but would that not interfere with a review?
MR. CORBETT: Mr. Dooks, I don't think it is interfering, I think it is stating a position. Certainly, if it is under review and our position is one that it is to be retained, and in the process of review they find that it is not viable, for whatever reason, and they could substantiate it, well, then, fine, maybe we have to revisit it. But I don't think by us making that statement of support here precludes Transportation to probably go back and see whether the validity, or whatever, of the 80/20 rule.
MR. HOLM: Yes, just very briefly because I am also on the Public Accounts Committee, certainly we were told that the department is reviewing, and the department, of course, looks at it in terms of counting beans only. This is a Committee on Economic Development which is looking at the economic well-being of the province from one end to the other. This is a very important issue for many small businesses - and that is what these truckers are, small businesses in your constituency, in the constituency for member for Lunenburg West and, in fact, right across this province, there are people who are benefiting from that 80/20 rule. There are people who are then spending those monies within their local communities and it is a way to help to keep things going. So this would not stop the department from doing a review, but what it would be a signal of is that this committee recognizes the importance of those truckers and those businesses across the province and are suggesting that the members here would encourage that it continue. It would not bind the hands of government. It would really just be a recommendation.
MR. DOOKS: I am fine with that, Mr. Chairman. The reason I brought it up was just to bring the review issue at play here. I am certainly not against the rural people and thank you for explaining exactly the benefit of that to the rural communities, but I think this is a committee where we have an opportunity to express ourselves and I was just wondering where this fit in with the department doing the review. Sometimes motions, even meant in a
very positive way, can change a direction one way or the other. So I just wanted to make sure this committee knew the responsibility, that indeed it was under review, and we will take it from there.
MR. MACASKILL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support my colleagues to my right here. I think the timing would be bad to (Interruption).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.
MR. MACASKILL: We have an industry that is facing a crisis, not only the 80/20 rule, but also the fuel prices. I think this is going to be the final dagger in their flesh if the government is to proceed with the disbanding of the 80/20 rule. I think it is fair we express to the department our feelings on that issue. I think it is fair and it is right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Perhaps I might comment that I respect the motion and I trust that the motion is only that, to in fact support the 80/20 rule and not one to perhaps pit government members against the review that is being carried out by (Interruption) I just throw that out, just as hope that that would not be the case at all, but I think we are all in support of rural Nova Scotia and the trucking industry. I know, personally, for example, when the salt rate was cut some 25 per cent, Mr. MacAskill, compound that with the high price of fuel and the industry is certainly threatened. There is no question about it.
MR. HURLBURT: Can I have the motion read back, please.
MRS. HENRY: I hope I have it all here, it is to write a letter to the Honourable Russell stating that the committee would support the retention of the 80/20 rule and to maintain the 80/20 rule.
MR. DOWNE: Request the minister to retain the 80/20 rule in the Department of Transportation and Public Works. I think it is as simple as that and I think, Mr. Chairman, you said it well. It gives an indication of where we stand on it and the economic benefits for rural Nova Scotia are real, and if we don't say something, I think we actually are to blame if this thing goes down, if we don't express our concern. We have a right to express that concern. It doesn't tie anybody up. It doesn't lock the government's hand, they make their own decision. But it is an important issue and I know that the Chairman has been a big supporter, and I know that with our organizations, he understands as well as others in this room, whether you are buying tires or you are buying fuel or you are buying trucks or you are fixing them up, whatever, everybody gets those dollars. It is not going somewhere else.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
There is an addition to the witness list. Mr. Brian K. Reid, of Britech Information Systems Limited. Does anybody want to speak to that?
MR. CHIPMAN: This is a classic example of a Horatio Alger story. Brian Reid, who lives in Lawrencetown, Annapolis County, has been at this business for approximately 10 years but it is growing phenomenally. I have some information here. He is developing software for hospitals. I think he has 24 hospitals in Nova Scotia now and he is dealing internationally. He has got a couple of other companies he is working with. He is about to put up a $1.5 million facility without any government money so I think it would be a great thing to have him appear before this committee. The less involvement there is with government funds in economic development, the much better it is.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So it is agreed we will add his name to the list?
SOME HON.MEMBERS: Agreed.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Just before we go on to our next meeting dates, does the committee have any difficulty if we encourage witness, Peter Stokdijk, from Stokdijk Greenhouse, in Old Barns, Colchester County, to appear before this committee? Mr. Stokdijk is the largest producer of cucumbers and tomatoes in the province. He has some very important and timely concerns he would like to bring to the committee's attention regarding economic development, along the lines of job opportunities and economic benefits that possibly could accrue to the province. Obviously, we have our scheduled meetings for March 28th and April 4th, but subsequent to April 4th, if it could be arranged.
MR. DOWNE: I would have no problem, Mr. Chairman, as long as we don't bump other people out of the system.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Exactly. I am not. . .
MR. DOWNE: I have seen his operation and, sure, I would support that.
MR. CHIPMAN: Mr. Chairman, I don't want to argue with you but I was under the impression that Den Haan Enterprises who are in my riding, are the largest producers of cucumbers and tomatoes in the Maritime Provinces. (Interruption) They just did a $6 million development here. I was at the grand opening on the weekend.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Chipman, that may well be, I could have gotten the wrong impression and I do apologize. No offence to the business in your constituency. Our next meeting day is Tuesday, March 28th, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. The House will be in session. So unless there is anything else, I would entertain a motion to adjourn?
The meeting is adjourned.
Thank you, committee members. You have been very cooperative and most polite.
[The committee adjourned at 2:25 p.m.]