[Page 401]

MR. CHAIRMAN: I call the session to order. The time is now 10:47 a.m.

The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre. You have 59 minutes.

MR. FRANK CORBETT: Well, as someone not just short in stature but with a short memory, I'm going to try to remember what we were saying the other day, but in essence I was happy to see the minister here and his fine staff. I really appreciate the years I've been critic for the Department of Energy and through various ministers the professionalism of the staff and the ability to work with them.

With that said, Mr. Chairman, I want to get on the record that while I believe that Conserve Nova Scotia is a positive step forward, that positive step will always have a cloud over it as long as we have Heather Foley Melvin there who I would articulate as being probably this government's Donald Rumsfeld. She is clearly a political appointment, a political appointment with no basis to sit in that position. This will not be the full tenor of my questioning, but I think I have to get that on the record as critic and to verbalize to the minister as strongly as possible that while we wholeheartedly support the creation of Conserve Nova Scotia, that the choice of a political partisan to head it has darkened it, and I would hope that sometime in the very near future that would be rectified - and I would be saying those words to the minister.

So with that said, I would like to ask some questions around Conserve Nova Scotia. There have been quite a few pilot programs announced by Conserve Nova Scotia, and with the reality of it still being a very new department or agency within your department, Mr. Minister, what are your guidelines for measuring the effectiveness of these pilot programs that you have put forward?

[Page 402]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Energy.

HON. WILLIAM DOOKS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, member, for your question. As you said, Conserve Nova Scotia is a new agency under the Department of Energy and in reflection of that, I'm the minister who watches over that agency. I'm very pleased, as you said, to provide a number of pilot projects to Nova Scotians . . .

MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Minister, would you speak more into the mic - it's hard to believe, but we can't hear you.

MR. DOOKS: I'm trying to be gentle, Mr. Chairman, but I'll take your direction and speak directly into the mic, and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

So, member, not to repeat what I've just said but the department is very creative. The department gathers information from stakeholders and through consultation we decide to put a pilot project out. We do put limitations, of course, monetary ones, and also timelines. As pilot projects move forward, we have mechanisms within the department to track the success of the programs and at the end of the day, when that information is provided, once again we measure the success and determine if that pilot project is good for our people.

I'm very comfortable in the tracking mechanism, but it's done internally, and for instance - maybe a very simple one - we encourage people to replace their traditional light bulbs with energy-efficient ones. What we do is promote and give out light bulbs, but before anyone has an opportunity to accept one, they must provide us with their area code and a few questions to talk about that program. That's a very light program. We know we have other programs that are more involved.

MR. CORBETT: You said area code, you probably meant postal code, I guess?

MR. DOOKS: Yes, I meant postal code.

MR. CORBETT: Thank you. Now, it's strange that you'd be admonished by the chairman to speak more directly into the mic, because one of my questions coming up is that you are on the mic in the sense that you do voice-overs for Conserve Nova Scotia.

MR. DOOKS: Yes, I'm very happy, thank you.

AN HON. MEMBER: Your wife should be there too.

MR. DOOKS: She would like to be, but thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry.

MR. CORBETT: It's a side debate that we'll carry on later, I'm sure. The fact of the matter is with your mellifluous tones, I guess, it inspires Nova Scotians to call into Conserve

[Page 403]

Nova Scotia, which is good. The problem is getting through, that's the biggest problem. What's your fix for that? If you're going to go out and trumpet these programs, how are we going to allow our citizens to get through and not have jammed phone lines or lines where you're put on hold for an exorbitant amount of time?

MR. DOOKS: Well, thank you for that comment. I thank you for recognizing the fact that I played a part in promoting energy efficiency and to provide information to Nova Scotians. I think it's important to demonstrate to our people that I'm able to take a grassroots approach and that advertisement, both on radio and on a number of cable stations, has been seen as being very, very successful and you're quite right in saying that.

Part of the process we're involved in here today is for me to answer questions that you ask, but another part of that is for me to listen to the Opposition's questions and also to members of my own caucus. We do have information lines set up and if you're telling me that line is congested and you're hearing complaints about unreasonable wait times, I'll take that back to the department and I will focus on making sure that if we're promoting it on one end, that the people are properly served on the other. So thank you for that.

MR. CORBETT: Thank you. Just around that a little bit, Mr. Minister, is that a lot of these, you end up going to a machine and leaving a message, and I think a lot of people would like to talk to somebody rather than just leave a message. I suppose, if we even go back to our own constituency offices from time to time we find that constituents don't, for some reason, they just don't like leaving messages. I know it would be unrealistic to say that we should have phone lines managed 24/7, but I would hope there would be a reasonable amount of time spent during the business day, if you will, or maybe beyond it, to allow our citizens to contact and talk to a live voice. I, again, appreciate the minister saying he will look into this and I thank him for that.

But what we're looking for and what we're expecting from Conserve Nova Scotia is a whole lot.

MR. DOOKS: Yes.

MR. CORBETT: I believe the minister is up to it. The fact is though, while I appreciate the newness of Conserve Nova Scotia, there doesn't appear to be the information that we really need to grab on to. We're looking for a strategic document and an energy efficiency framework, so we're, in round numbers, a year into Conserve Nova Scotia, so where are you with a strategy document and an energy efficiency framework?

MR. DOOKS: I guess we could say we're in about a year - that's up for interpretation of the member - aggressively, with Conserve Nova Scotia, it's been only a number of months. But getting back to your first question - it's important to monitor and to measure success in any agency, department, or program.

[Page 404]

We are somewhat moving forward with the strategy and working on sort of a mission statement, so to speak. We're not quite there yet because it's a part of giving information back on some of the pilot projects, it's a point of still grasping information. We have to work with our federal counterparts and we work with people from other countries - the United States, for instance - and what we're doing is pooling all of our information together.

What we have to be very careful of - and you've heard me say in the House and I've probably answered your question with the same answer a couple of times - is Conserve Nova Scotia's mandate is energy efficiency but, in saying that, it's about changing people's behaviour in regard to energy efficiency. That sometimes can be a difficult task because what you have to try to do is basically change the habits of people, and how you do that is through education, through demonstrating, and for us setting examples.

So eventually - I've just been passed a note here, our business plan for the new fiscal year, 2007-08, is posted on Conserve Nova Scotia's Web site. I think you were looking for a little something more than a business plan, you were looking for, I'd say, a mission statement - where are we going and what do we have to do as Nova Scotians to contribute to energy efficiency, set out some targets, set out some guidelines, set up all these things are what you're asking for.

Eventually - I wish I had been able to give you a date on this - but we're moving forward and we have a very capable staff, as you're aware, and the thing that impressed me about our Conserve Nova Scotia, there's a range of people there between very young and there are some very seasoned people there, and that makes us good.

[11:00 a.m.]

Today, we're recruiting and putting people in place, some of the brightest minds in Nova Scotia are a part of this new agency. I expect - to go a little further, I demand - from them great things. You'll have to trust in that I take this portfolio very, very seriously. When it comes to my ministerial duties, I may not necessarily always be the pleasant guy that you see me to be, I have goals, I have objectives, I have a plan, and it's up to staff to work with me to make sure that we can deliver that to Nova Scotians.

MR. CORBETT: I appreciate that you have a plan and you have desires for your department - Nova Scotians do too. One would hope that was the reason why Conserve Nova Scotia was created. Still, you haven't come within a country mile of answering the question - where is your energy efficiency framework?

Did the Premier, in his haste to set up Conserve Nova Scotia, do this and really hasn't given you, or those parameters haven't been set up? There's no energy efficiency framework yet - is this also new - and if it's being worked on, can you give me a timeline?

[Page 405]

MR. DOOKS: Well, the Premier certainly created Conserve Nova Scotia and appointed me to that portfolio, to manage that portfolio or agency. To be quite honest with you, I do not at this time have a date for you, but he instructed me to work with staff - and as I said, some of the brightest minds in regard to energy efficiency that we're aware of - to move forward in regard to behaviourial changes of people in energy efficiency. If you're specifically asking me for a date on which I can pass to you the mission statement - I'm going to make a reference to a mission statement as we talk on this - that will be forwarded at the appropriate time.

With anything, member, when something is brand new we have to create the appropriate direction in which to take, and how we gain our information is setting up a structure to go out to stakeholders, and for stakeholders to be a part of advising us. Now, we have an energy efficient - well, just a second now, what's the name of our committee? (Interruption) Yes, the ministerial advisory committee.

Now, I've spent considerable time on this and I don't know if I made reference, member, to you before on this, or if you're aware of it, we're pooling a number of people together and we've sent out to different groups and organizations for their recommendation - they have not been hand-picked by the minister and that's important. So a variety of people, coming from a cross-section of Nova Scotians, will come and sit on the ministerial advisory committee and those names will be public in May.

So I think, if you're asking me the question about the framework, I think substantial information will be able to be provided to you when the ministerial advisory committee gets working. So it's one more piece of the puzzle that you're asking me for. I have, you know, plans and thoughts, staff has plans and thoughts, and now the advisory council is coming in from a variety of stakeholders across Nova Scotia. I think that's the appropriate way to develop our strategy to move forward on.

So in the meantime we are, through promotion and advertisement, and I must say the appropriate funds are there to encourage people to be energy efficient, and in saying that it's all pulling together. We have an agency that has only been a number of months old and I think in speaking to people like the Ecology Action Centre, speaking to Clean Nova Scotia, and ACAP Cape Breton, these people have made positive comments on the direction in which we're going and that's very pleasing.

MR. CORBETT: The advisory group - who's involved? I know you don't have the actual names of who will be sitting on it but, you know, obviously a group got together and said we're going to pick this group, this group, this group, this group, to take in and discuss this. So who were the folks that said here's who we're going to pick, and who did you consult with? What were the names of the groups you consulted with?

[Page 406]

MR. DOOKS: I will give you a few examples, I think as long as you know where I'm going here. I was very much a part of wanting to go out to bring in stakeholders. Heather Foley Melvin, Allan Crandlemire on my right, staff from the Department of Energy, in once again creating this awareness group we've asked for the traditional people who would be seen as stakeholders - people from the educational system, people from the Homebuilders Association, people from Health, and I believe - and don't quote me - activist groups of different natures, so there has been no limitation really on who or who could not be there. I had to limit numbers because committees can certainly grow.

Allan, I think there will be 12, or how many people will be on that committee? (Interruption) Yes, 14 or 15. We had, of course, as I said - when I say "activist groups" I say that respectfully, people who fight for the benefits of others, the low-income community, people who represent the low-income community. No one from the three caucus Parties have been invited to sit on this. I just left that part of it out and went out to community stakeholder groups, people who are traditionally part of stakeholder groups, the environmental groups and so on. I have a really good sense of the people and the mechanism.

As I said, I wanted to be very upfront about it. The groups that we have approached are putting names forward. So their body would recommend to me the person who should be sitting on the committee and I will be announcing the names of those people in May.

MR. CORBETT: Mr. Minister, I wonder if you would take an undertaking to table the groups you have talked to about putting this list together. I would appreciate that.

MR. DOOKS: I sure can. Yes.

MR. CORBETT: I was saddened to hear last week when I asked the Minister of Transportation and Public Works about energy-efficiency plans for the almost 1,500 government buildings in this province. He said it was zero, there was no plan. I would have hoped that government would be the leader. I was kind of hoping that the answer would be, well, the member has it wrong, we're taking a leadership role. But the lead landlord, if you will, Public Works, has said no. Since that question, has that inspired any dialogue between your department and in particular Conserve Nova Scotia and Transportation and Public Works about perhaps being in front of the pack instead of being behind it?

MR. DOOKS: Well, as you can recall, you honestly only asked the question, I think it was this week.

MR. CORBETT: Last week.

MR. DOOKS: Last week, okay. Excuse me. We're all very busy. We are in estimates and/or the duties of the House but to say that, and I am certainly not going to pretend to answer or to speak of the response that you received from our good minister, Minister

[Page 407]

MacIsaac. The story I would like to share with you though is that we have already started a process before you actually asked the question, from within the Department of Energy. We had given monies for an efficiency study, so to speak, on this building, and this is an important building because, as I said, we have to demonstrate by example. We spent up to $2,000 - don't quote me on that figure, but $2,000 - for an assessment on this building before the member from the Liberal Party had passed the resolution that all the lights should be efficient in this building. So we're well underway with that recommendation.

Our office in the Department of Energy, of course, has been assessed and the changes have been made to make sure that it's now an energy-efficient working environment. The staff has signed up to a green plan. Computers are shut off or shut down at appropriate times. We have timers on some of our more busy areas that maybe don't see that level of activity in the evening. Our washroom lights are shut off and there are signs to shut them off. In saying that, we have talked to other groups as well, from the Department of Energy. So there is a move from within the Department of Energy. We have been talking to Economic Development, to the Department of Transportation and Public Works, at a directors level.

There's no policy set but we are moving forward with that and I don't want to fool you to say is there a signed policy, but we're doing it. We're creating it and, once again, member, as I said to you and I will keep repeating, Conserve Nova Scotia is in its very infancy. I know you expect great things, as Nova Scotia expects great things from the department.

You know, member, it is a funny thing. It's quick to catch on, I don't know if it's the name or if it's the attitude of people, but most people understand the agency, Conserve Nova Scotia. They understand and are buying into the fact that they believe within themselves they must take ownership in energy efficiency and at a very young age. Of course, as we talk about Conserve Nova Scotia, they join up with the energy side of the department and they go out into the schools and talk to our youth about energy efficiency.

I'm getting off a little bit but it's exciting. I did the resolution the other day about the Ecology Action Centre teaming up with Conserve Nova Scotia and going out and sharing good thoughts and good talks with our youth. So we'll talk about that maybe a little later on, but to answer your question - it's getting rather lengthy now - you talked about the Minister of Transportation and Public Works and I dare not speak for him, but I would like to say what we're doing is preparing to move ahead to do what you're speaking of.

MR. CORBETT: That's good. While I wouldn't want you to put your elbow out of joint patting yourself on the back about Conserve Nova Scotia, I will tell you, Mr. Minister, that Nova Scotians were into conserving in Nova Scotia long before Conserve Nova Scotia came around. I'm one who puts a lot of faith in the people of this province and it was something clearly whose time had come, and it had come through I think the forces of Nova Scotians, but I would have hoped that, again as I said, this had been in the front of the pack

[Page 408]

instead of behind the pack when it came to buildings that could have been looked at. TPW should have been the lead, but you chose most of your time to talk about rental properties that you take up space in as opposed to government buildings that are controlled by the government department and owned outright by them.

[11:15 p.m.]

I will leave that alone and talk about an issue that affects more Nova Scotians than I would care to think about and that's the energy poverty issue. You know we have some plans out there. The problem with them is that there are really no front-end incentives for retrofit for people, especially people on low and fixed income, because what we have is you pay for this and then we'll reimburse you. This is fine in some cases, but this is really an inhibitor for take-up by families on low income. I understand when I see some of your documents come out that you waive certain things for people on low and fixed income, but the reality is that it inhibits them from getting it in the first place. So what is your department doing about stopping this energy poverty and recognizing the fact that these folks need front-end money, not back-end money?

MR. DOOKS: Well, as minister I have to represent all Nova Scotians. As an MLA, I have to represent the people in my riding, but let's not forget I'm a person and a resident and have been brought up and lived and worked in the Province of Nova Scotia most of my life. I've chosen to stay here and to bring up my family. No one person can choose to be the defender of the low-income person and I want to set the record straight that I have the greatest sensitivity and caring as a person to those who are struggling financially in our province in regard to energy or in fact who just simply provide for their families. So in my comments as I address this, I don't want you to at the end of my statement think that these issues are not real to me. Energy costs a lot. It's not only something that we're experiencing but the nation and many countries are experiencing it. Conserve Nova Scotia is a new agency that has been designed to promote energy efficiency and it's true, it's hard for people on low income to be able to adapt readily and quickly to an energy-efficient home. Your question is what are we doing to help promote energy efficiency for people with low income.

MR. CORBETT: No, that was not my question.

MR. DOOKS: Okay, then you can clearly repeat your question, if you would like.

MR. CORBETT: My question is simple. What are you doing to front-end payments for people on low income because once you have front-end costs, it inhibits them from accessing the programs?

MR. DOOKS: I'll give you one quick answer to that then. We have just announced the 105 homes that would be upgraded in concert with Communities Services and a Community Services program at no cost for people of low income. So if you qualify for a

[Page 409]

housing grant, you will also get your housing grant to fix your bad shingles, your patio, whatever, and there's a substantial amount of money also available for our pilot program of 105 homes in Nova Scotia to do just energy programs - new insulation, new windows and/or whatever. That is a tremendous pilot program that's going on. So I make myself very clear, 105 homes in Nova Scotia under our pilot project, low income earners, will get direct benefit to upgrade energy efficiency without costing them a cent. This is a front-end initiative by this government and I've answered your question clearly. It's a pilot project and guess what, member, we are measuring the results of this. If this is successful, we are going to provide more opportunities.

Now, I worked very hard on this file because as I said, understanding, and you know that I would understand about the housing grant programs, having a background in construction in my younger life, I've been able to do some of those programs for people. So the Department of Housing or Community Services will identify and monies come from our department, go over there, and also a number of thousands of dollars to upgrade their homes. That's just one front-end initiative and that's one answer to your question.

MR. CORBETT: So you say 105 homes. How many homes in this province fit that criteria? How many homes - you're picking 105 homes, how many homes - would fit this criteria, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000?

MR. DOOKS: That's a hard number because the way that they determine how many homes is through the program of the Department of Housing. Conserve Nova Scotia is doing a pilot project. We do not have the resources to fix everyone's problems today but I think you should commend us for at least a program that's going in the right direction. Now, I believe that that program is a good program and we carefully made sure that we picked a certain amount of houses equally across the province. As I said, if this program is measured as a successful one, we'll be putting more money in that funding. So to give you a number of how many homes, that's hard for me to answer that question.

MR. CORBETT: So the answer is you don't know?

MR. DOOKS: The answer is not that, the answer is I would be guessing on a figure.

MR. CORBETT: So you don't know? It's not a shame not to know, minister.

MR. DOOKS: Well, I don't know if - we're not going to start going down that road. We intend to be very pleasant with you and answer your questions but it's not that I don't know. The point is there's no mechanism to measure how many people will be putting in for housing grants next year.

MR. CORBETT: Well, minister, the exercise we're here for in the time that's allotted is not to relate pleasantries to one another but to try to get answers. It's no shame if you don't

[Page 410]

know the answer. That's all I'm asking. If you don't know, that's fine. I just want to know, you had a program, you say 105. You throw a number out there and it can be a mug's game if I don't ask that question. It would be remiss of me not to find out. It's that percentage game. If you say a certain percentage, what's that percentage - 10 per cent of 100 is one thing, 10 per cent of 1 million is another. That's what I'll ask, you didn't have it, that's fine, I'm not offended by that, but it's 105 homes and if we knew what was out there, that would be fine. You didn't have that answer and I can live with that.

Now, in the media the other day, it was interesting, the Minister of Finance said the new agreement struck with the federal government around the Atlantic Accord, he said in one year in particular we will hit the cap and then there will be a clawback. The clawback will take effect. Do you know what year that will be and how much the clawback?

MR. DOOKS: I don't know.

MR. CORBETT: Why, thank you. That's a good answer.

MR. DOOKS: Thank you, I thought I'd try it. It worked all right then.

MR. CORBETT: Yes, it worked great. We're mere mortals in this building. I'm not ashamed to admit it. About the offshore wells this summer, are you expecting any to be drilled?

MR. DOOKS: Here's one of these answers coming. As of this time, I have not been alerted by industry that they plan to do any drilling on our offshore. But the nature of the business is such that through the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board and through our office with our work to provide information to develop techniques to encourage people and to promote our offshore, to be quite honest with the member, a telephone call could come tonight and say we want to meet with the minister and we have good news for you.

I meet with industry often, I think you know that, you've been on some of our trips, you know the complexity of the business, you know the secrecy of the business. Our responsibility is to set a climate for industry and to promote our offshore and to tell the world that we're open for business and we are getting some great comments back now from industry because of the streamlined regulatory system that we're putting in place.

I can make reference to the OSEA for EnCana. When I go to Houston and other places, we're commended on the speed in which we can pull environmental assessments, reviews, development plans and all this stuff together. So, I'm hoping that tonight I will have to return to the city to meet with industry to tell me that they're going to do some offshore drilling this summer, which in return brings so much benefit to our people.

[Page 411]

MR. CORBETT: Thank you Mr. Minister. I hope in later hours I'll come back and speak more on the offshore.

An area I really want to get into for a few moments - we have about 19 or 20 minutes left - I want to talk about standard offer contracts. They have security that's necessary for these individuals that get into the small wind generations and renewables. Are you going to be looking at the needs of rural Nova Scotia and introduce SOCs or feed-in tariffs to ensure that rural communities can invest in renewable energy like they've done in P.E.I. and other areas?

MR. DOOKS: Are you talking about, am I promoting standard offer contracts? Is that your specific question or are you just talking about renewables in rural areas?

MR. CORBETT: Well, SOCs in general.

MR. DOOKS: When I became minister, over a year ago now, standard offer contracts were certainly a major topic of concern within the renewable industry. I hope you ask me some more questions about the advancement that we have made in regard to renewables.

I had a lot of conversation with staff and a number of people from the renewable community approached me on standard offer contracts and to be quite honest, I am not a promoter of standard offer contracts. I want the market to determine the cost that people get for their renewable energy and I believe that we should not dictate the price of that kilowatt hour pricing unit but then again in saying that, I would like to talk about all the other good things we did to advance renewables.

MR. CORBETT: With that said, the reality is that you speak in terms if that was an open market and you say that . . .

MR. DOOKS: Well . . .

MR. CORBETT: No, no, no. I would tend to agree with you if the market was open and there wasn't the major player out there with a virtual monopoly but there is so you are at their behest. So it's not really a competitive market, I would say, Mr. Minister. That's not an accurate portrayal, I believe. I would see, in some ways, SOCs as being a tool to allow smaller people to get in the market and to sustain themselves until they become profitable, whether it's the municipalities or the smaller generators, you don't see that as being protective and allowing them to grow?

MR. DOOKS: Well, I did say an open market. You know and you know I know and I know you know and I know the stakeholders know we do not have an open market per se. What I would like to say is that we are moving toward more independence of the market,

[Page 412]

moving carefully toward independent power producers at the end of the day to be allowed a lot of freedom in who they sell to and how they sell and eventually the price they receive.

[11:30 a.m.]

First off, as I said a year ago, to be quite honest, there was a lot of work to be done in regard to the electricity bill. In this room, I think, it doesn't matter but there was an announcement that I had made mandatory for Nova Scotia Power Inc. to put 20 per cent of renewables in the mix and in saying that, that is not a decision that I made lightly. It is one that I had to do a lot of research with staff and with other people. Quite easily said, a minister can say all these good things but once again, you talk about measurement, how can we be guaranteed? I actually attached a $500,000 a day penalty if Nova Scotia Power Inc. wasn't able to produce that 20 per cent of renewables in the mix. Why did I do that? I did that because I wanted to make sure that there wouldn't be an excuse in 2013 why they weren't able to do that.

So they, and I'm not going to get into Nova Scotia Power's business but I would assume, even though they had claimed at that particular time that that wasn't a real issue to them, that they were planning to do that anyway. I remember the media coverage but once again, I read the media's comments the next day from their PR person and I was quite surprised that they were already willing to do that, moving well in that direction. So the $500,000 penalty didn't become an issue then because they don't have to pay it because they are going to be there in 2013.

Why did they do it? Well, we want to cut greenhouse gas emissions. I think that is everyone's dream and we are moving toward that. I did that to make sure that Nova Scotia Power would have to work with the renewable community. Now sometimes when we talk about the renewable community we think of just wind turbines, but as you're aware, being the Energy Critic, I know you're up on things as all different types of renewables coming that we're doing research in. Maybe we can talk about that a little bit because they're good things to talk about. The renewables community did applaud that.

The second thing that I did to help the renewable community was I made it possible for the municipal utilities - and we have a number of them in our province - to purchase renewable energy. Moved on to make sure there was a mechanism in place in which the renewable community could use the grid because what's the point of buying renewables if you can't transfer them. That's a little complicated, but that mechanism is there. Then went further just recently through regulations - and I don't think it's going to the Utility and Review Board in regard to top-up and spill - before too long there will be a mechanism in there to allow the renewable community to be able to have the benefit of the Utility and Review Board making Nova Scotia Power enter into agreements to top-up and spill.

[Page 413]

We have moved aggressively ahead on this file. Member, if you're listening to me, I tell you that all of the renewable community today may not be very pleased with where I am just now. Some are very pleased with where I am just now and some are not - I know and I've heard that message. I am not finished with this file yet, but recently I had to make a decision about no energy, the credits, and all of these things that are attached with our renewable community. To be quite honest and to get back to "it's all right to answer a question minister" well here I am going to give you the answer. I did not feel comfortable at this particular time to go further with this file without more information gathered on the file. It would be possibly damning for a minister to move forward if he or she did not have the facts that they felt comfortable in making a decision to remove our utilities responsibility simply by putting the bill in the House and being the right thing to do for the day and have it passed could possibly be dangerous to our ratepayers. As much as it would advance some renewables it may not protect all the renewable community.

In saying that, I am not finished with the file. I reviewed in length the Cary Report with the recommendations - those who are listening today - A, B, and C. I want to make it clear that I did not move forward with the file. It was my decision and no one else's decision. It was a decision that I made the same as I made the decision to make it 20 per cent mix with the renewables from Nova Scotia Power, open up the grid and the municipal unit. So the point is I've been working with the file, I've been gathering information on the file. I felt a bit uncomfortable at this particular time not knowing the federal government's position on the formula, what they would use to calculate the benefit of a credit, whether that was going to be an issue nationally or internationally. There's so much involved before I went to the next step.

Some of the renewable community is calling upon me right now to open up the Act and to deregulate totally Nova Scotia Power. I'm saying that I believe in renewables. I believe in moving ahead with renewables. I believe in protecting the renewable community and not moving in such a direction that all of this could start tumbling down when all of a sudden proper mechanisms for top-up and spill are not there. The price of electricity gets very expensive because we sold all of our credits outside of our province, outside of our country.

How could I make a decision not even knowing how much a credit is worth? Then, on the other hand, how can I make a decision on keeping the credits within our boundaries in which one or two players would be interested in a credit and not everyone else. The point is, I hope to be minister of the portfolio for some time, I'm still gathering information from consultants on more information surrounding the renewable communities.

I hope I haven't been too lengthy on that one. There's so much, I mean, as you said to me, this is important and I believe it is. I want to make you feel comfortable in believing in me, you may not agree with my direction, but at least understanding why I have taken this approach on helping the renewable communities to move quickly ahead, but at some point

[Page 414]

did not believe in standard offer contracts. That's what this is all about. It's about explaining the market as I see it and trying to make informed decisions to benefit the renewable communities, yet at the same time, hoping that I'm protecting the ratepayers of Nova Scotia, but on the other hand, protecting our environment, so there are a lot of different things in the mix.

MR. CORBETT: The idea of protecting the folks that help produce our renewables and sell them, why is it then that NSPI is getting the carbon credits?

MR. DOOKS: There's no decision at this time that Nova Scotia Power is getting the carbon credits.

MR. CORBETT: Certainly the suggestion is there.

MR. DOOKS: Yes, well, you can suggest as you will, I guess. The point is, I'm saying that I'm not finished on this file.

Let's just kind of talk about that carbon thing. In the Cary Report, the recommendation that was made is to keep the carbon credits within the province. You and I know the only person that would really be interested in that would be Nova Scotia Power and they could dictate - strong word - the price which they were to pay for it. I would want the renewable communities to get a fair price.

There's a mechanism in which the Utility and Review Board can set the price of renewable credits, but I want to say clearly, I have not made the decision at this time to say that those credits were to stay solely in our border and to be bought by Nova Scotia Power. What I am saying is at this particular time, I'm gathering more information - as a matter of fact, there's a lobby, and I say that respectfully, for me to meet with groups, to listen to groups and to move on with this file.

As I said, there are groups that are somewhat upset, but no one has said, stop minister. They said we like where you're going, it's unfortunate you have stopped and not finished the file in the way we wanted you to finish it. But the point is, I think I really made a lot of advancement in less than a year. I think that time is the appropriate measure here to collect more information, to listen to more stakeholders and to wait to see how the federal government is going to calculate the mechanism which we can decide what a credit basically is and how much it is going to be worth. It's all about the reduction of emissions. It's what are the targets on that. Is a credit going to be worth $50, is it going to be worth $1? Will they dictate if it's sold out or in? We're just playing a waiting game.

It would be awful, member, if I had made a decision without all the appropriate information and that was to backfire because next year when I was sitting at estimates, I think you, as holding the government accountable in this process, which I believe in and I think

[Page 415]

you believe that, you would be saying, minister, you made that decision without the proper information. You failed, minister. So what I'm trying to say is, hopefully next year you can say, minister, you've made the appropriate decision and I applaud you because I remember our conversation a year ago.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I just want to advise the member you've got about five minutes or so left.

MR. CORBETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Where's your deputy?

MR. DOOKS: Where's my deputy?

MR. CORBETT: Yes.

MR. DOOKS: I would possibly think at the office, I hope so.

MR. CORBETT: The energy bill you promised the industry, is that coming forward this session?

MR. DOOKS: This is what I'm speaking of. I had said to the industry that I would move forward when it was appropriate and hopefully present this bill to the House this Spring. In saying that, I've made a couple of demands to the industry in which way I would move, and I can remember, member, one thing I said clearly, that this bill is an important bill to all Nova Scotians. This bill is an important bill to the renewable community but at the end of the day before I present the bill, I must have all of the renewable community agreeing on which manner I move forward. I had, even at that time, said I hope that I would have the Opposition and Third Party's endorsement on this bill before I would present it because this bill is so sensitive in the things that surround it, it would be dangerous to put a bill in the House that wouldn't be passed. It would certainly hurt the spirit of what we're doing.

[11:45 a.m.]

So I made a press release. I had the decency and the respect of the renewable energy and the stakeholders of Nova Scotia saying that I didn't feel comfortable at this particular time to move forward with the energy bill and the reason why is because of all the comments I just made previously because I wasn't ready to move forward; even though, Mr. Chairman, through you to the member, under great pressure I showed leadership and showed respect and explained why, rather than to walk away from it and make a lame excuse or, hey, I'm afraid to do something, I said I am not doing it at this time. This is my reason I'm not doing it but I did say clearly, member, that I wasn't finished with the bill and it is rumoured - and we don't pay attention, but it's rumoured - that I've backed away from this bill, but that's not true. At the appropriate time I will move forward, when I feel comfortable to get the endorsement of both your Party, member, and the Third Party and the stakeholders on this

[Page 416]

bill. I hope you respect that. You will have input and you will be briefed and listened to when that bill comes forth for your comment.

MR. CORBETT: We look forward to getting our input listened to and we're only a phone call away. You say that there are things out there, yet you haven't called on us for input. You say that you've got all these things out there to consider and which, to a degree, I appreciate that it's not something you want to - you have the EMGC report that's coming on to four years old around energy issues and yet, that's a jumping-off platform, if you will, that could certainly be constructed. I remember, some years ago, when your predecessor brought some recommendations forward, that was in the Spring of one year and we were told that that Fall there would be a comprehensive bill coming forward by that minister and it hasn't happened. I believe in consultation, as you do, Mr. Minister, but it seems to be taking an inordinately long period of time to rectify this. This all ties in to whether it is Conserve Nova Scotia, it's all about energy and energy conservation. It's all there and it seems to be, as you said, we are a phone call away. If you want to consult with us, let us know. We are there for you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Your hour of questioning has expired. I thank the honourable member for his questions and maybe look forward to seeing him at another hour.

The honourable Leader of the Liberal Party.

MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Chairman, I want to start this morning with a few questions on offshore royalties and forfeiture revenue. The fiscal year 2004-05, it was estimated that the province would only receive $30 million in offshore royalties. By the end of the year that number had grown by $100 million to $128 million. For the fiscal year 2006-07, the government received roughly $280 million for offshore royalties and that's more than double what was received from the previous year. For this current fiscal year, you are projecting that the government will receive $420 million from offshore royalties. Needless to say, this is a substantive increase. Therefore, my question is, can the minister indicate what the projections are for our offshore royalties in the coming years?

MR. DOOKS: I think you are aware of the formula that has been set and a number of factors at play with the increase in our royalties. As a matter of fact, member, I think you are and we are all very pleased with the amount that is projected for this year. The volume of gas that has been pumped has increased. The price has been fairly good and the formula that is laid out is part of the increase in royalty revenues and we are in what you call - it's sort of a slang thing - the spike. Over the next few years we expect for the trend of royalties on the Sable project to be substantial and then eventually, as time goes on, the peak will start deteriorating and lesser amounts will be brought in for royalties for the coffers.

MR. SAMSON: Your projection this year of $420 million, do you actually have a projection for next year?

[Page 417]

MR. DOOKS: Yes, I can't give you the exact figures, Bruce, maybe you could help me, but we think it is around about $400 million and member, you have enough knowledge of the business to understand that that can change within a few million either way. Hopefully it changes on the high side.

MR. SAMSON: I asked that because in 2006-07, you received $280 million. This year you are predicting $420 million which is not exactly a doubling but a significant increase, well over 50 per cent increase. I'm curious as to why we are not seeing that again for your projection next year.

MR. DOOKS: The mechanism that is put in place is also a part of the equation here. That formula is in place and the percentages are calculated off that along with the increase in the volume. Member, that is our projection by the people in the department who calculate that.

MR. SAMSON: When they do the projection, is it safe for me to conclude that they project on the low end and on the safe side?

MR. DOOKS: That's a question maybe better answered by an economist but I do have a little bit of experience in that. I would say that with the professionalism that's attached, they would report appropriately and I don't think they would say, we'll project low so we won't get in trouble. I would say with their training, their teaching, their support, that they would give an estimate that would best suit their experience. I wouldn't want anybody to put out a figure that wasn't accurate to the best of their knowledge. I would frown on someone who gave out a figure on the safe side, I would want them to give me the figure they thought and could support.

MR. SAMSON: I say that because, I guess, with all due respect, if you look at your projections in the past, you haven't been within a country mile of what the final figure was. If that's an intentional projection on your department's behalf, then that would explain why you're off by so much, that you're staying on the low side.

But if you're saying they're actually not doing that, I guess your statement would just be it's a good amount of luck on your side that we're seeing your figures being that much off from what the projected amounts were going to be.

MR. DOOKS: I will just listen, Mr. Chairman, to that comment rather than making a response. Yes, I'd like to think it's good luck, but, that's not quite it. It's nice to be here in that portfolio and the good luck is happening - but it's a little bit different than good luck.

MR. SAMSON: I've told the Ministers of Finance, both current and past, that I felt the economic success of your government had more to do with good luck than good planning, but anyway, I won't conclude that for your department just yet.

[Page 418]

Over the years our province has received a significant amount of revenue from offshore forfeitures. In fact, the previous Ministers of Finance have helped balance their books with the misery in our offshore, which was always quite ironic to me. Two years ago we received $43 million and the year before was $61 million. This year we've only received $3.5 million. Could you indicate whether that revenue goes directly into surplus and therefore on to the debt of the province?

MR. DOOKS: It's a consolidated fund. In return, you've made some reasonable comments. As minister, I certainly don't want foreclosure - I'm here to sell the offshore and saying that I want exploration, I want gas because we still have a dependency on the carbon fuels.

In the past, we have, unfortunately, reaped financial gain off the misfortune of the offshore. Last year, as you said, very little. This year, I think it's important for me to tell you that no one - I have to be very careful because I can't discuss the business of certain companies - but no one has approached with any intent to foreclose. But, the good news is, some folks have been in conversation with me for extensions and other ways to work leases. We're doing a lot of study and research and work to say, how can we best help industry? Rather than have them foreclose and move away, we will take a whole different attitude.

I think the good news answer to your question is that I don't expect any foreclosures in this season.

MR. SAMSON: I guess it's good news for us, probably bad news for the Minister of Finance, when he'll be looking to balance his budget and we'll have lost that significant amount of funds that were there in years gone by. I guess it's good for our province.

I'm curious, have there been any efforts on your part as minister and your department's part to work with the government to take portions of that forfeiture money and reinvest it to help spawn growth in our offshore industry?

MR. DOOKS: Well, that's a good question. Yes, of course. We do, unfortunately, I guess, as the minister I'm not doing a good enough job selling what we do in the department to you or to other Nova Scotians.

As you know, being a Cabinet Minister in the past, you have a certain responsibility that's designated to you and it's a responsibility that, as a representative of many, many people, you cannot take lightly and you should not. As Minister of Energy, of the offshore, I take a responsibility to promote that.

You talk about luck, I would be very pleased if I could stand up in the House and read a resolution about a number of rigs coming to our offshore to do some exploration - that's

[Page 419]

what they would have to do now, exploration or to start producing some commercial wells - because of the benefit it brings to our economy.

There's a mechanism in place called the OSEA, that's a new streamlined regulatory system and all of these things are enhancing our opportunities. But to get back to your question, we have put monies in research. Technology is playing a big part in the advancement of offshore in other countries. We have reached out and we're doing some gathering of information from consultants and looking at other countries where the offshore had sort of dwindled away; we're looking at how you revive the offshore. So we're spending a tremendous amount of money in research, seismic information being made available to people. We have put millions of dollars in the core lab, so that people can come and quickly look at the geology of our offshore.

Things are changing in the offshore as they're changing in our life. Technology is starting to aid people in making decisions, so I am a constant lobbyist for the administration to give us money to advance the offshore. To be honest with you, they are giving us money to advance the offshore. So initiative studies, advancements, promotion, are a number of ways that we're doing this - workshops, conferences, we promote. Just recently, as you're aware, I've travelled, probably not a lot but from time to time I do take opportunities to go to other countries where their offshore frontier is exploding and so I go and speak with the government officials there to talk about their regimes. I talk to industry there about how they're doing. That all comes at a cost. We take staff with us, we take sometimes people from the Opposition with us.

[12:00 Noon]

So to answer your question, yes, we are promoting the offshore and we're getting monies from the coffers of the Province of Nova Scotia to revitalize, to encourage the development and enhancement of the offshore.

I think it is only right to do that. The numbers that you've mentioned about revenues projected this year and next year is a significant amount and we know good things come from royalties of the offshore - health care and education and all the things that we talk about as government representatives from time to time. We must have royalties of the offshore and to let it slip away from us would be the wrong approach and I don't think that's the approach of this government, it's certainly not the approach of this minister and the people in the Department of Energy who have a desire to advance the offshore and we're getting money to do it.

MR. SAMSON: Could you indicate to us exactly what level of exploration is currently taking place off the shores of Nova Scotia?

[Page 420]

MR. DOOKS: It's going to be a short answer. There are no exploration wells, there is no activity in exploration of the offshore, as far as physical drilling taking place. There's research but I think you meant is there someone coming to do drilling of the offshore.

I'm going to - I said it was going to be a short answer but for some reason I can't do it. The point is, I just said to the member from the NDP when we were talking about renewables, as you're aware, member, I deal a lot with the presidents, executives or representatives of large oil companies or leaseholders constantly, daily - not daily but regularly. We have a number of those people who actually have physical offices here in Halifax; some we have conversations with over the phone and some I actually visit in their cities.

A telephone call could possibly come at any time stating that they are going to be doing some exploration. What I believe is deterring exploration off the coast right now has nothing to do with the resource that's there, I don't believe it has to do with any particular government, whether it be federal or provincial. There's a shortage of offshore rigs and when I speak to different companies - and please don't ask me who because I won't be able to answer - but they say you know, we're really interested, we'll be doing some work there but the availability of rigs is to such a degree that we can't find rigs.

Also remember that offshore Nova Scotia is not the only place that has gas potential or the resource. There are other areas in the world that also supply gas, or as a resource. So if we were the only place, I think we'd be quite busy but there's only such a demand and there's a lot of places producing gas but here we are this day with the shortage of rigs. But I've never heard anyone - it probably wouldn't be professional - but I haven't heard anyone ever speak negatively of our offshore. They believe that we do have a stable government, they believe in the regulatory regime that we have here, the stability of that. They believe that once you enter into a deal with the Province of Nova Scotia, that you can count on that.

MR. SAMSON: When is the last time we had an offshore rig drilling wells off the shores of Nova Scotia?

MR. DOOKS: Last winter.

MR. SAMSON: And what company was doing that?

MR. DOOKS: EnCana. As you're aware, we didn't discuss some information about EnCana, where they are now. We have a great belief that EnCana will be successful. They've put their development plan in and as early as this summer we believe that the decision from the owners of EnCana will be that information provided to them is that it will be a viable well to start producing gas in just a few years.

[Page 421]

MR. SAMSON: Can you indicate, other than the Goldboro site, where the Sable offshore gas is coming ashore, do we have any other projects under the purview of your department taking place in this province, producing right now?

MR. DOOKS: I'm sorry, would you ask that question again - other than?

MR. SAMSON: Other than the Goldboro facility, where the Sable gas is coming ashore, can you indicate whether there are any other existing projects in production right now in Nova Scotia?

MR. DOOKS: No, but I must say that the next possible good news and project that I've been spending a lot of time with is Stealth Ventures. They're doing onshore exploration for coal bed methane and they filed their development plan a month ago - it has been five weeks ago now - with the department and that is somewhat different than the offshore resources. This is an onshore resource which Nova Scotia will have domain over, clearly. There'll be no arguing of agreement. Nova Scotia owns the resource, some of the land. So coal bed methane is the next good news story, I believe, for Nova Scotians.

As I said, a company which has spent - which is public knowledge - $10 million in exploration onshore, has now filed the development papers, so they must feel that the resource there is enough to make this commercially viable.

MR. SAMSON: As far as natural gas in our offshore, can you indicate where production is actually taking place in our province?

MR. DOOKS: The only offshore production at this particular time is the Sable project which comes through Goldboro. So that answers your question - that's the only gas that's being brought in from offshore that's commercially viable that I know of.

MR. SAMSON: So there's the Goldboro facility and, as you're well aware, there's the fractionation plant that's in my riding of Point Tupper . . .

MR. DOOKS: Yes. Been there, yes.

MR. SAMSON: So you're in agreement that really the only activity that's in our offshore industry right now is taking place in both Guysborough County and Richmond County - is that correct? Could you tell me how many of your staff in the Department of Energy are located in either of those counties?

MR. DOOKS: I would say that I did not have any office set up in either of those counties.

MR. SAMSON: Sorry, I didn't hear that.

[Page 422]

MR. DOOKS: None.

MR. SAMSON: None. So that takes me to where I'm sure my colleague, the member for Guysborough and the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, would share my concerns that we're the only place where there's any activity taking place, yet we have absolutely no representation from your department in our counties. If I understand correctly, with the EnCana project they are looking at bringing gas ashore in Guysborough County as well. So once again, if that project comes on line, we'll be the only area that has any activity.

I've raised this issue with all of your predecessors, I raised it with you last year and I raise it with you again - how, in good conscience, can you continue to have absolutely no representation from your department in the Strait area when we're the only game in town in this province when it comes to energy development from our offshore?

MR. DOOKS: If I was in your position I would ask the Minister of Energy the same question, you know I would, but it's a little different than that. The ExxonMobil people and our good friends from Keltic - these companies have actual offices here in Halifax and . . .

MR. SAMSON: If I could just stop you there for a minute, what I've been told by those companies is that their offices are in Halifax because the Department of Energy offices are in Halifax, so if they want to deal with the government they have to go to Halifax, and why would they locate in Richmond or Guysborough when they have to go Halifax to meet with the department. With all due respect, you are saying it is because of the companies you are here and the companies are saying they're here because you're here, so there's a flip side to your argument which I'm sure the minister will appreciate. So I'd caution him to use that argument because I have one just the opposite to make on that as well.

MR. DOOKS: Okay, this is your answer. I'll certainly be speaking with both representatives of ExxonMobil and we'll say Keltic and share your information that you provided to me with them to say we appreciate the resource of your company, what is your need? I'll say to you this: I'll have communication, I'll have dialogue with them on your very topic. There's no reason why I would not want to put the necessary tools in someone's hand to advance or better your community or mine. You know that I have rural roots and there's certainly no reason why I would not want to enhance an opportunity for you to better your people. I'll speak to the appropriate people on that. I don't have an answer. I remember the question last year, we went back to business, and I have a very good relationship, I believe, with these company people and I respect them and I will have a conversation with them.

MR. SAMSON: The person you should have a conversation with as well is the fellow you see every morning when you look in the mirror, and have a talk with him and point out to him that he should be providing some of his staff, not the entire staff, and we're very reasonable people in the Strait Area, but you should have a permanent presence in that area. Not only do you have Goldboro and the fractionation plant, you have the Keltic

[Page 423]

Petrochemicals project which is Guysborough County, you have the Anadarko project with the LNG that was Richmond County, you have another proposal project for a possible refinery in the Strait Area which is again Richmond County and yet, with all due respect sir, you have absolutely no representation on a permanent basis in those communities to work with the chambers of commerce, to work with the mayors, to work with the communities and yet our area has been open and has encouraged the development of, for example, I look at LNG, which many communities throughout the coastal United States have rejected, our communities have welcomed and yet your department doesn't even have a full-time staff member there to work with our municipalities and work with our communities to do the encouragement, the promotion, and the necessary education that goes along with these kinds of projects.

I don't know what more it is going to take, when you look at the projects I have just rhymed off, to convince you, as minister, and your government that you should have a permanent presence in the Strait area in light of the fact that, as I said before, we are the only game in town and all indications are that any future games are going to be in our town as well.

MR. DOOKS: Are you waiting for a response?

MR. SAMSON: Sure. All you have to do is say yes and then we are all set. That's an easy response for you.

MR. DOOKS: As a minister of government I have to be careful because I want to do the appropriate thing. I think, member, I said respectfully to you, you make a good point. You make a point that I would clearly state to be a valid one. I will have communication and dialogue with the companies and also I will look at that fellow tomorrow morning in the mirror and make the appropriate decision. Not only am I saying that to please you, I will be in conversation with you on that.

MR. SAMSON: I hope it doesn't take a year of conversation with the gentleman you see in the mirror as to getting this done. Keep in mind, you started the line of questioning by saying you are a promoter, and as minister you are here to promote.

MR. DOOKS: Yes, I am.

MR. SAMSON: Now part of promotion is education.

MR. DOOKS: Yes.

MR. SAMSON: It's awareness, and with all due respect you have basically left us all by ourselves in the Strait area, on our own, and the companies on their own, to do the awareness, to do the education and to be a constant presence, to be there to answer questions

[Page 424]

and to be there to answer concerns. It's only by the grace of God that we didn't have the Strait area object to an LNG facility. The mayors and wardens got together and I can tell you that it was an education element as well on my part, and yes I did participate with one of the conferences down in Houston and one of the things we went to see, myself and Mr. Corbett, the member for Cape Breton Centre, was the LNG facility in Lake Charlotte. It allowed me to be able to come back and tell my constituents that they have nothing to fear, we have more dangerous ships going through our harbour right now in the Strait of Canso than LNG ever will be.

But that is something your department should have been doing. You should have had someone there going to the schools, going to the municipalities, going to the Strait Area Chamber of Commerce, going to these interest groups and being there to say I am here to answer your questions on behalf of the Department of Energy - we are here to assure you that you should be supporting this and that it provides great benefits. Unfortunately, that is an example where having a permanent presence in the Strait area would have allowed you to do that. You would have had a person on hand ready to answer questions. Again, I think the Department of Energy was created in 2000 I believe, if I'm not mistaken, and it has been now seven years that I have been raising this concern and we have yet to have one full staff member located in the Strait area.

[12:15 p.m.]

Hopefully, at some point this is not going to fall on deaf ears, but you are going to understand that we are not asking for the whole department, we are simply asking for one staff to be there to do the exact promotion that you have talked about earlier and I would certainly hope that the minister would be able to make a commitment that is going to be looked into and that action is going to be taken in that regard.

MR. DOOKS: Mr. Chairman, through you to the member, as I said, you are quite right. I do consider myself a promoter of the offshore. I work very hard in my portfolio. There has been good news since I've been in the portfolio - whether it be under my supervision or direction, or just good luck, it doesn't matter - the point is that the revenues are gaining for the province. There is new and exciting news to come, hopefully.

To answer your question, sir, I am listening to what you said. Part of this process is for me to be accountable, and I believe in that process. I'm listening to you and, as I said earlier, I will visit your request and will respond to you in a timely fashion.

MR. SAMSON: Could you indicate what the status is of the Anadarko project and what your staff have been doing in that regard?

MR. DOOKS: Yes, I certainly can. That project is under Economic Development, Nova Scotia Business Inc. I don't have a lot of information other than the fact that Nova

[Page 425]

Scotia Business Inc. still believes in the site, as we do in the Department of Energy, and they are taking every opportunity to work with owners to promote that facility so it will be a successful site. We believe in the site, but there's not a lot of activity surrounding that site right now.

MR. SAMSON: And that's one of the challenges when we're dealing with the Department of Energy is because while you are the promoter, in this case NSBI is the lead agency dealing with what's clearly an energy project, on the flip side you have the Minister of Environment and Labour making announcements around green energy and everything which clearly one would think would fall under your department. So there are some lines here that obviously make it a bit difficult to clearly see what your mandate is. I guess the question right now - we know that Anadarko is not proceeding with further construction of that facility - is it NSBI that bears responsibility for going out and seeking new proponents, or is it your department, or is it a combination of both?

MR. DOOKS: To answer that question, if someone was to approach the department or myself we would evaluate the request, and if it's in regard to an opportunity we would send that request and support Nova Scotia Business Inc. to deal with the file. So Nova Scotia Business Inc. is the lead agency in regard to finding people who would want to purchase and/or lease that site as an LNG site. So it's their file, our role would be to provide support in regard to energy-related issues there. Simply, it's a Nova Scotia Business Inc. file.

MR. SAMSON: Has your department been working or watching closely the situation of what has been developing with the Irving-Saint John proposal, and do we have any information as to whether they will have more success at actually getting supply of LNG, or is your department expecting they may encounter the same difficulties that Anadarko experienced in the Strait area?

MR. DOOKS: You know the Department of Energy has a responsibility to do the appropriate thing to defend Nova Scotians or Nova Scotia ratepayers, and also to make sure that there are appropriate resources to meet our needs. You know that there is a process and a hearing - the National Energy Board, we had interveners here. That was a hot item for all of us, including yourself, with the comments and concerns of not just Nova Scotians but opportunities that may be possibly affected negatively or positively in the Strait area, the mayors and business communities were all involved. We have acted responsibly on the file and we've been hoping that the National Energy Board will rule in our favour, but to be quite honest we're waiting for the decision and that's where we are now with that.

So, you know, we're concerned in regard to the results if they should come back in a negative way, but that's not a project that's taking place in our province, but it is a project that may result in a negative or positive effect of resource, and/or the cost of a resource in our province.

[Page 426]

MR. SAMSON: Now that you mention that - it wasn't really an answer to my question, but you do raise an interesting point. At the time of Nova Scotia's objection over the proposed bullet line by Emera, there were some public comments attributed to your deputy minister on that issue, and there was reference as well made to notes taken from that meeting. I believe you indicated that you reviewed those notes and you were satisfied that the media story was not an accurate reflection of your deputy's comments. I'm just curious, would you have those notes that you can provide to us regarding that proposed teleconference that took place?

MR. DOOKS: Respectfully to you, I don't recall stating that I reviewed the notes. To my understanding there are no notes. It's my understanding that there was a conversation that possibly could have been misunderstood or exaggerated to a point that it caused a negative reflection upon the deputy and on this department. I believe that that has been clarified by Nova Scotia Business Inc. - Stephen Lund providing a letter stating that the alleged statements made by the deputy were incorrect. So I've made no reference to reviewing the notes, because I believe there are no minutes to be reviewed.

MR. SAMSON: You mentioned a letter from Mr. Lund - did you ever ask the deputy specifically regarding the comments that were attributed to her?

MR. DOOKS: I thought it was responsible of me to ask the deputy, a deputy who has a long history of doing good things for this province, but once again, member, there is a separation between a minister and a deputy minister - I had thought it would be responsible for me to be direct and ask her specifically had she made any negative comments with regard to the issue we speak of and she told me that she did not. I believe and trust in her, knowing her for some time.

MR. SAMSON: Is it the belief of your department that the bullet line that will be coming back to Nova Scotia would actually provide the possibility of natural gas here to Nova Scotia markets as well?

MR. DOOKS: I'm not a major supporter of the bullet line - I think you know that, but in the reality of life, one of the things we fought for is, if needed, a supply of gas to return and come back from the pipeline, yes. I have to be realistic here and if our industries and/or economy is based on the sale of natural gas, there has to be a mechanism that somewhere down the road, if we need it, it would be available.

MR. SAMSON: So in essence that bullet line, from your position, could actually benefit our province?

MR. DOOKS: I hope that we never have to call into the bullet line to benefit our province; I hope there's more offshore commercial projects - two, three, four - that we'd be

[Page 427]

able to supply our own resource to both gain revenue and supply natural gas to Nova Scotians.

MR. SAMSON: My original question was has your department been following the Irving proposal for the LNG in Saint John in order to see what they are doing that we could learn from that didn't work with the Anadarko project, have you been following that at all?

MR. DOOKS: I think it's a little different. The Anadarko people I don't think ever had a source; I believe the bullet pipeline owners do have a source. We are reviewing some contractual agreements that are made available to us and we're doing some, a limited amount of review of what's available for us.

See, it's a different province, they are private sector companies, so to answer your question we're doing some monitoring, but not a substantial amount because we don't have the connection maybe to do a thorough forensic overview of what's taking place there.

MR. SAMSON: I guess the question is, has the department learned anything about what went wrong with the Anadarko proposal, other than your statement that you didn't think they had a source to start off with - is there anything else that you've learned from this?

MR. DOOKS: I believe in the Anadarko site; I hope and believe that there's opportunity there. I visited the site - I think you're aware of that - to see the massive amounts of money that have been spent and also to realize the economic benefit to your area and to Nova Scotia.

I think we're talking about two different locations; I think we're talking about different markets; I believe we're talking about different owners. We will collect all the information and assess the information, evaluate it, and make comment on that at that time. I don't have a lot of information from the bullet - well we'll call it the New Brunswick LNG site - to make a comparison at this time. Hopefully, we will.

As you said, the split between Energy and Nova Scotia Business Inc. - Nova Scotia Business Inc. has the charge to solicit or to approach people to buy or lease this site and to make that deal but, on the other hand, when it comes to support in the energy sector it's up to the department to supply the necessary permission.

MR. SAMSON: You are the department that is responsible for promotion of energy in the offshore in this province - why would NSBI be doing this work?

MR. DOOKS: Nova Scotia Business Inc. is a group of people who work for the government, that have resource and professionals to go on the world stage to sell economic opportunities. This is one of their files in which they take great interest and work very hard

[Page 428]

on, and for us to be able to do that we would have to have a real estate division attached to Energy.

The point is - and I think here's a point we should note - whether it be Nova Scotia Business Inc. or whether it be the Department of Energy, we're all in the position to promote and do a good job for Nova Scotians. I think what we need is someone to move ahead with the Anadarko site and bring that resource here, and whether Nova Scotia Business Inc. or the Department of Energy does it, it doesn't really matter - what does matter is a successful outcome.

MR. SAMSON: Could you indicate to us when is the last time you received a briefing from NSBI with regard to their efforts to find a new operator for the Anadarko site?

MR. DOOKS: I haven't been briefed, it has been a number of months since I have had conversation - I'll be very clear on it, to tell you how many months, I can't say that, but it has been a number of months.

MR. SAMSON: Does the minister understand why that would cause me grave concern to hear that you haven't been briefed for many months on such an important project for the potential production of a source of new energy here in this province?

MR. DOOKS: Yes, but we have to understand how this works. You asked me when I was briefed - we have a department that works with Nova Scotia Business Inc., and these people are going out lobbying for possible people who would want to advance and move this project ahead. I constantly check with our departmental people, have conversations with departmental people on the Anadarko site because I find special interest in that. At this time, I believe that the mechanism put in place for the, so to speak, real estate portion of this advancement is in place and in line, and it's moving as it should.

[12:30 p.m.]

MR. SAMSON: Now, when you said it's moving as it should - you haven't been briefed in a number of months, I think it's safe . . .

MR. DOOKS: On the Anadarko site.

MR. SAMSON: That's right, and that's what I'm talking about. Right now, as far as LNG coming ashore, Anadarko is the one ready to go, or the closest one ready to actually operate. Keltic has approvals, but there's certainly no construction that has even been started there - Anadarko is well advanced in that regard.

The big concern for us, first of all the Strait area bought into the project, the community supported it, there was little to absolutely no opposition, the government brought

[Page 429]

in the project with full support and we only find out at the end that they never had a supply in place to start off with, there were no agreements or anything in place.

I'm sure you're very familiar with the history of the Strait area and some of the many projects that have been promised and talked about and dreamt about and yet, when we had this one with the full support of the community, once again the community is left with the impression that this was never going to be reality in the first place, and once again the government seemed to have endorsed a project that didn't have any hopes of being able to go forward.

Because of that, I would think that your government would be extra sensitive to the Anadarko file and doing everything it possibly can to find a new promoter to go in there, because what would be even more embarrassing for our province is if the Irving project goes ahead and it's a success. That will prove that the Irvings did something that we weren't able to do as a province, and that would be unfortunate because that, at the end of the day, will confirm we could have gotten it right and we didn't get it right.

If the Irving project doesn't go forward, then we can say it didn't work for them either and we accept that it was a difficult file. That's the challenge we're facing, and for you, as Minister of Energy, you're right - you are the promoter and for you this project not going forward doesn't help in your promotion. It's a black mark for your department; it's a black mark for our province.

I don't know how I can encourage you as minister to take a more active role in this and in what NSBI is doing. As far as we see on the ground in the Strait area absolutely nothing's being done. We're told of meetings, we're told of efforts, but here's another example that if we actually had a member of your staff in the Strait area maybe we could be updated more often as to what exactly is being done. That's not happening and that's unfortunate. So that's it with the Anadarko file - I do hope you'll pay more close attention to that.

What I wanted to ask the minister about as well is what activity or what actions have you taken in regard to the proposed oil refinery being constructed in the Strait area?

MR. DOOKS: Member, once again I have had meetings. I have to be careful as a minister of government that I don't divulge information that wouldn't be appropriate. You have a good question, I'm supportive of locating that refinery in that particular area. They also are in talks - as I understand and have been keeping an eye on because it's energy related - with the Departments of Natural Resources and Economic Development. We hope that this is a reality for the people in the area and would see great benefit to our economy as well. So we have departmental staff meetings with other departments to try to answer the questions of the proponent.

[Page 430]

MR. SAMSON: If I was a proponent coming in and I told you, Minister of Energy, I want to build a refinery and I want to put it in the Strait area because of all the benefits there are, I don't care where in the Strait area, but I want you to find me 200 acres of land or 2,000 acres of land - who would you contact, or who would you expect in government should be able to give the go-ahead or start the process for finding that kind of land?

MR. DOOKS: Protocol would, number one, encourage me to speak to Nova Scotia Business Inc., and Nova Scotia Business Inc. would access the file and if it's within their mandate they would move forward. If it's not in their mandate, then I would contact the Department of Natural Resources to assist me in obtaining land for a possible project and then take it from there.

MR. SAMSON: Are you excited by the prospect of a possible refinery, and the jobs it brings, being constructed here in this province?

MR. DOOKS: I am always excited about opportunities appropriate for the people of Nova Scotia.

MR. SAMSON: If I were to tell you today that the company in question - and I understand you don't want to divulge too much information, and that's fine, I met with them and it's pretty public now who they are, but that's fine if you are concerned about that - if I were to tell you today that your government has failed up to this point to even identify a piece of land for them, would you agree with me?

MR. DOOKS: I would say that, as far as I understand, the government is working in concert with them to answer the questions in regard to possible land purchase, and/or lease, and/or whatever agreement they would reach - I do not believe that we have acted negligently on that file.

MR. SAMSON: Well I can tell you, Mr. Minister - and if this hasn't been brought to your attention that's unfortunate because it certainly should have been - the impression so far has been that dealing with your government has been an absolute nightmare for this company. Economic Development says it's Natural Resources; Natural Resources says it's NSBI; NSBI says it's Energy; Energy says it's Natural Resources - it has been that kind of game. I have to tell you when I hear those kinds of stories it brings nothing but embarrassment that in 2007, when you've got this type of project being proposed, our government can't seem to get it straight to even find them a piece of Crown land in an area that's designated for this type of project. I'm curious - are you aware that there are significant problems in identifying even a piece of land for this proposed refinery to be constructed on, or is this news to you?

MR. DOOKS: No. I'll tell you my understanding of the file is that I've met with these people, I believe they have a possible project. On the other hand, I find it very hard to believe

[Page 431]

that they consider us as a failure. That information to me today is certainly surprising. I would ask those people that we speak of to get in contact with my department to discuss this further, because that's a pretty strong comment for someone to make. We'll just have to look into that to see if that comment is true.

MR. SAMSON: But I guess here comes the problem. NSBI apparently is handling the file, now you're telling me they should be contacting the Department of Energy if you're having trouble with finding a piece of land because NSBI and Natural Resources and whoever else can't seem to get their act together in doing this. I'm curious - should I be contacting them and saying, call the Minister of Energy, he's going to take care of this for you? Is that what I should tell them?

MR. DOOKS: Maybe you misunderstood me. I was answering your question when you said you were embarrassed and that this company had said to someone or to you that our government - the Government of Nova Scotia - was not doing anything to help them and that they were failing in moving this project ahead.

My answer to you at that time was, I find that hard to digest that those company people would say that and if they believed that, for them to contact me. I didn't, at any time, say that I was going to take over the file or anything. I would like to have a personal conversation and have them say to me what you've said. I think that is a responsible thing to do, for me to hear them say that this government wasn't working to advance opportunities. That's a simple - that is my explanation of what I said.

MR. SAMSON: Well, let me save you waiting for a phone call. Let me tell you now - as the MLA for Richmond and as a Nova Scotian - this company is encountering serious problems dealing with your government. As a Minister of the Crown, I hope you will undertake to talk to NSBI and to talk to Natural Resources and find out what the hell's going on that they've been taking months and months of identifying industrial lands set aside for this kind of development. It's not like we were asking to take private land and expropriating it and turning it into industrial land - it's there already.

Yet, somehow, it has been a disaster dealing with your government to date and these are the types of projects that need to be able to move forward because if not, then they will look for somewhere else to locate. I do hope you won't wait for that call. As soon as you have an opportunity, you will ask NSBI for a briefing and Natural Resources, and find out exactly where this is. More importantly, if you can come back to me and tell me that I was mistaken and that land has been identified and all is well, I look forward to hearing from you on that issue as well.

I only have a few minutes left in this round - I'll be back after - but let me briefly find out what your position is. About a month ago, you stood in this very room and you made a number of announcements regarding renewable energy here in this province. One of the

[Page 432]

major announcements that you failed to make was regarding Recommendation 51 of the Electricity Marketplace Governance Report, which would allow renewable energy producers to sell directly to Nova Scotian consumers. My question to you is, four years after you received this report, why do you continue to refuse to allow renewable energy producers to sell directly to Nova Scotia customers?

MR. DOOKS: Thank you for the question, it gives me a chance once again to talk in length about my position and the advancements of renewable energy in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotians certainly can or will be able to buy renewable energy. I've worked and advanced this file to a place at this particular time where it's comfortable. I believe the decisions I've made have been very responsible decisions.

I just want to give you a little touch on what I've achieved before I answer the final question. As Minister of Energy, I had to respect and make sure that there were opportunities for our renewable community. In doing that, along with the reduction of greenhouse gases, we've made it possible that the renewable community had a sale for their renewable energy by making it mandatory for Nova Scotia Power to put 20 per cent by 2013 in their mix of renewable energy.

I am no stranger to politics. I've been in this business a long time. Sometimes good intentions are respected but sometimes people don't really maybe achieve what they should, so I attached a $500,000-a-day penalty on Nova Scotia Power in case they didn't do as government has directed them. At this particular time, that would encourage them to go out to our renewable community and to buy kilowatts of renewable energy. I think that was a thing that was very positive and one that was applauded, to my understanding, by the renewable community.

After that, once again, I made it possible for municipal utilities to buy renewable energy from the renewable community. That was a major step forward so there are a number of utilities able to do that. That was applauded also by the renewable community. I then, through the regulations in regard to using the grid - what's the point of selling it if you don't have a way to ship it? So those things are in place and the Utility and Review Board has set a cost for independent renewable energy producers to sell their green energy on our grid at a certain cost. Then the big issue, which everyone's concerned about - what about top-up and spill? Through regulation, there's a letter being sent to the Utility and Review Board requiring Nova Scotia Power to be involved to top up its spill.

At this point I'm just going to pause for a minute and say can Nova Scotians buy green power from independent power producers? Yes, they can. Can all Nova Scotians buy green power from independent power producers? No, they cannot. Is it my intent to move ahead with this file? Yes, it is. At this particular time, I had stopped the process to continue so I could gather more information in regard to this electricity file. I have studied and been briefed and talked to stakeholders, municipalities, and independent producers on this topic

[Page 433]

for a number of months. One thing I know that you would respect and know you're understanding of being in the House longer than me - the success of the bill would be actually getting one passed through the Legislature.

[12:45 p.m.]

I had made it very clear and there would be a few, but not a lot of people, who would remember what I had said. I said I believed in the electricity file, I believe in green energy. I do not agree with the rising cost of the energy in the province; power rate increases just seem to be crippling our people. I don't think my position could be any clearer on the cost that Nova Scotia Power charges ratepayers. I think I've handled all and answered those questions.

I do have some concern though. If I go further with the file, it comes down to this, the credits that are associated with green power. I pause to find more information to decide, through the legislation that I would present to the House, should I recommend that the credits associated with the kilowatt hours of renewable energy only be able to be sold in our province or should they be able to be sold in the market outside? Now the credit is a tremendous financial advantage to our renewable energy. They would get paid so much a kilowatt per hour of electricity generated, but also there would be a kilowatt mechanism put in place to determine how much credits are worth. The federal government is the level of government that will put a formula in place that will determine the cost of a credit associated with a kilowatt hour of green power in relation to the reduction of gas emissions from a carbon fuel.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time has elapsed.

MR. DOOKS: Member, I'm sure you're going to be back, I just want you to remind me where I was because in a few more minutes and I would have been on my way, but I'll take on the answer to that question in the next round.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Queens. The time is 12:47 p.m.

MR. DOOKS: Would you mind if I just had an opportunity to make a phone call, Mr. Chairman? Just a recess for five minutes?

MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll reset the time and have a five minute recess.

[12:47 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

[12:50 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

[Page 434]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We'll call this meeting back to order. The time is now 12:50 p.m. and the member for Queens has the floor.

MS. VICKI CONRAD: I want to thank the minister and his department for giving me an opportunity to ask some questions.

What I'd like to start with is reviewing a little bit of history of where we were back in the 1970s and where we are today, 30-some odd years later. I'm sure the minister has reviewed the history of our power - you wouldn't be Minister of Energy if you didn't review some of our history at some point.

A few years back, when I got interested in energy issues, I was quite amazed actually at the beginning of our power here in Nova Scotia and all of the little companies that were developed in many municipalities around the province and how we got to where we are today.

I want to start with the OPEC crisis back in the 1970s. We know that back then there was that oil crisis because of the emerging demand for more electricity around the globe. That really started a whole series of events that saw not only that crisis happen, but a move forward to how do we meet that demand.

At the time, we were actually importing a lot of our oil for some of our power plants and after, I think it was Hurricane Blanche that swept through the province in the 1970s, Nova Scotia actually had to look at different ways of delivering power and so there was the move towards coal. At that time, Nova Scotia Power Corporation was actually in place and so, to combat the rising oil prices, there was the move to coal because we had it here, it was available, we could mine it, we could fire it up and turn it out to meet our own power needs. We were very much geared to that increased price demand during that crisis.

During the 1970s, too, it was quite interesting because the Nova Scotia Power Corporation at the time, which was publicly owned, also saw the need for energy efficiency and wise consumption of energy. There was actually a new division created called the Customer Services Division, which encouraged the effective use of electricity and there was also a how-to and a why for customers to decrease their energy needs.

At that time, it was that futuristic vision. We could see the need that, although our demand for electricity was increasing, we also recognized back then that we also had to reduce our energy usage and become more efficient. Nova Scotia Power Corporation, also in the 1970s had recognized the importance of looking at some renewables - that being wind, solar and tidal. In 1978, there was a hydro project in Wreck Cove that was developed, there was a 280 kilowatt wind power pump storage unit installed in 1981, and the first tidal plant in North America was built in the Annapolis Valley.

[Page 435]

I'm just going to quote L. F. Kirkpatrick, who was chairman and president of Nova Scotia Power Corp during that time. He said, "I do not feel that Nova Scotia's energy problem will be solved by windmills, solar power, wood or waste materials, at least not in this century." What a sad comment to make during that time when there was actually some vision happening in the move to reduce energy use and the move towards renewable energy.

The way we're moving in this province in developing renewable energy, his comments may actually come true. We have not seen the aggressiveness that we need in developing renewable energy. Of course, then we saw the fall of oil prices across the globe, oil prices sunk and here we were in Nova Scotia tied to coal, burning fossil fuel as a source for our power.

It was like we reacted at the time to that energy crisis, that rising oil price crisis and we reacted by jumping into burning coal for our fuel needs or our electricity needs. Here we are today now trying to get that under control and now we're trying to react again. I'm not sure if the Department of Energy or the minister, Nova Scotia Power and we, as consumers, actually understand that how we're reacting now could actually not benefit us in the future if we continue to lag behind other communities, provinces, countries in the world who really get the need to move forward aggressively.

Of course, too, in the 1980s and 1990s, we also recognized at that time that CO₂ emissions and nitrogen oxides were a direct cause of acid rain, which at that time was just coming to be a growing concern across North America and certainly here in this province in our lakes, streams, and rivers. We identified it as a growing problem to keeping those waterways pollution free. We directly related those emissions to what was happening here in Nova Scotia - not just here in Nova Scotia but in other jurisdictions as well - those energy companies that were producing these emissions through the burning of fossil fuels. Of course, we've seen the turnover from Nova Scotia Power Corporation, a public entity, to becoming privatized back in the 1990s.

The same year that Nova Scotia Power had taken ownership of our energy delivery in the province, they also introduced Power Smart, a new energy efficiency program. So here we are 20 years down the road, we now went from a public corporation that had a vision back in the 1970s, to a private corporation 20 years later that kind of saw the vision as well and recognized, well, you know, we need to put out there the need for energy efficiency strategies. Of course, Power Smart encouraged consumers to switch to higher efficiency motors, lightbulbs and Christmas lights, but then the Power Smart rebates that were also included at the program were deferred for about three years due to some of the hearings that were going on at the time around demand site management.

Unfortunately, too, even though this Power Smart Program was put in place and they kind of - not put in place because the rebate programs were deferred - by 2001, our greenhouse gases here in the province have actually risen to a degree that was actually

[Page 436]

startling and to this day we are still struggling to get those greenhouse gas emissions under control. In fact, I can point to, if I may, the Corporate Knights publication of just last month still shows that out of 50 companies across Canada, four of those companies are here in Nova Scotia that are the largest emitters by facility in 2005 - that being the Lingan generating station, the Trenton generating station, Point Aconi and Tufts Cove. Out of 50 companies across this country, here in Nova Scotia we have four of them that still are the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the country.

[1:00 p.m.]

So where did we go wrong? I mean, you know, obviously we started to get it right back in the 1970s. We recognized, okay, we have to take care of our own electricity needs, how are we going to do that, and we made the bad choice of getting into coal and not moving forward at that time with that visionary look to the future to wind, biomass, solar and tidal power. We're attempting to get there, you know, but we're still lagging behind.

Now, I want to take you to a series of events that led up to the Electricity Marketplace Governance Committee. That committee, after a lot of talk in the province and in the country about the need to get our house in order in terms of our energy emissions, our greenhouse gas emissions, of course Kyoto discussions - there was an opportunity created for the Department of Energy to seriously look at the renewable energy sector that was growing, starting to become more informed. How do we get into the market? How do we create ourselves to be viable? How do we deliver community energy to rural communities, or to communities in general? How do we develop really, you know, our renewable interests that we had started so many years ago?

So there were round table discussions at the time. Many people sat around the committee of the EMGC table. Nova Scotia Power was there, government was there, many stakeholders were there, independent power producers who were hoping to express their ideas to give the committee their input in how we could see renewables be part of our electricity component here - our electricity service delivery.

So two years later, after the start of that EMGC - and I could be a little off in my time frames here, but about two years later - the committee came up with a number of recommendations. Eighty-nine, I believe, total recommendations came out of that round table, and those recommendations were drafted and re-drafted to get to the final document. It was put before government and when you look back in 2003, when that report was presented to government who had a seat at the table, who had been there along with policy-makers, government had said in the House that they would recommend, implement, all 89 of those recommendations, including Recommendation 51, which would allow community wind fields to develop, especially in rural Nova Scotia.

[Page 437]

That was four years ago and I understand some of your comments that you had made earlier to other members at the table asking questions around Recommendation 51 and the other recommendations, and the reason I'm bringing it up again is because like our history, 20, 30 years ago, we are still lagging behind. We still don't get it; we're still not moving forward. That's a real concern when we look at the fact that there are still four facilities here in Nova Scotia that are the biggest polluters out of 50 in the country, that we're still not able to articulate what Standard Offer Contracts would look like, what community development would look like - we really are spinning our wheels.

Now part of that spinning wheels - now back 2003, in all fairness, in 2003, 2004 and, I believe, 2005, some of those recommendations were slowly moved forward. Of course the open access transmission tariff was discussed at length and finally agreed upon that that would be one recommendation that the government could move forward on, and now we see municipalities being able to purchase power from independent producers and then resell that power - buying it wholesale from independent producers - so there has been some little bit of movement, but certainly not enough when we look on a global scale and what is happening across this planet. Climate change and global warming is very real and the time for spinning wheels needs to stop - we need to put the car in forward and just start moving forward aggressively.

I think the Department of Energy and the minister really need to seriously sit at the table with community producers of renewable energy, whether we're talking about wind, whether we're talking solar, whether we're talking biomass, and let's figure it out and let's move on with it. We can't wait another two years; we can't wait another three years in this province. We are lagging so far behind P.E.I., behind Ontario, behind other jurisdictions who are moving forward with the regulations, they're moving forward with the contracts, they're moving forward with how it is going to work here.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that what we have in place now is a matter of just turning it on and saying okay, we're opening up the marketplace here. I'm not suggesting that it is going to be that easy, but there is certainly enough information with all of the stakeholders around the various tables, that they have enough information to provide the minister and his department with how to get it right. There are enough models across the country and across North America and across the globe that have gone through the growing pains of opening up the marketplace to competition, who have gone through those growing pains, so I would seriously suggest that the information is out there and it's up to the minister and his department to go after it in a manner that will see us moving aggressively forward.

Now on March 15^th the honourable minister put out a news release, and this is where you announced that you would work with the industry and the board and the system operator to determine how much renewable energy can be safety integrated into our grid across the province. You indicated in that release that this would be an independent study, so what I would like the minister to answer later, when I'm finished here, is if there was an RFP that

[Page 438]

has gone out to date for that independent study on this integrated system, or system integration study, and have the terms of reference been developed and, if that has been done, could we receive a copy of that RFP and the terms of reference?

I also want to ask, on top of that particular integration study that perhaps is going to move forward, I don't see where the budget cost has been mapped out for this particular study, so I'd be interested in knowing what the budget line is for that study, and I'd also like the minister, later as well, to explain in more detail what that system integration study looks like and what it will actually produce at the end of the day. I have a real fear, and I think a lot of people would have a real fear, that this is just another spinning of our wheels, another study that will eat up more time, when the time has now already been eaten up when we need to move forward. So I guess the question would be how long is this studying going to take place, when does it start and how long?

Again, I think sometimes we get bogged down in study after study, detail after detail, and not that that isn't important but, as I said earlier, I believe and I think a lot of people in the industry believe that there is enough information that has already been studied and churned out and stats put together and the writing is on the wall, and we just need to move forward and get aggressive about our renewable development. I believe, and you can correct me when I'm finished, it is 2020 when we will see, I believe, 20 per cent - 2013.

Looking back to the 1970s, when we were starting to move forward, we could have been there and we could be moving forward with more. So if you could just kind of talk about and answer what I've talked about so far, and then I'd like to move on to other points and questions. Thank you.

MR. DOOKS: Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the member, thank you for your comments. I enjoyed your history lesson and I certainly can identify with a lot of things you've said, and of course history is always important for us to understand so we can path out our future. Also, I lived those times and can remember the crisis. I believe I would be in school and that was the talk of our community and our province at that time - what are we going to do?

In saying that, we changed and put all of our eggs in the same basket and put coal on line and made a drastic mistake. I wonder how that mistake was made. I don't recall the minister of the day - I could find that out - was the minister pressured at that particular time, to make a decision, by coal producers or energy producers or by people who had maybe provided him or her with information on climate change? How was that decision made? I'll bet you it was made quickly and for all the wrong reasons. Did they understand about greenhouse gases then? Yes, a little bit. How much? Well, probably it would bother you someday, but not today.

[Page 439]

What I'm saying to you - and you said something that really triggered a response, and it was well, minister, we know you can't just go out and switch a switch on and deregulate Nova Scotia Power and it's all over tomorrow and we're getting all our energy provided by renewables, you just can't do that. I have a tremendous responsibility on my shoulders and within the department to make the right decisions for Nova Scotians first, then I make the decision for the renewable community in concert with the idea of cutting greenhouse gases because that's important to the Department of Energy. We always have to remember that - there's more to this than simply dollars and cents or talking about the economic set that may surround it.

It's first about protecting our people and, in saying that, to cut greenhouse gas, but when I say protecting our people it is that our people have the ability to pay for the energy they use. I've heard your caucus members stand and question me a number of times about the programs and what am I doing, or what are we doing for those who don't have the ability to pay, what is called "low income", and I never liked that term, I always liked "for those who do not have the ability to pay" - it seems to be a more gentle approach in public.

So in saying that, I appreciate your comment and I want you to believe that because I do not and will not, and make it very clear, Mr. Chairman, be pressured into making a decision that is not right or that I do not have the necessary information provided to carry on further. You heard me drag on here today about the advancements, and I take great pride because quite often, quite honestly, member, I say to you I have done quite a bit but may not be where you want me to be today, but you have to give me some benefit of the doubt, to say that at least you are moving with the file. I have made some accomplishments, I think that can be recognized, and it would be wrong to say it wouldn't.

I believe in renewable energy - I do. I talk about it a lot. We have a department that believes in renewable energy. I've had many conversations with my colleague, the Minister of Environment and Labour, and we want to do this right. I do not want to put all my eggs in the same basket; I do not want someone asking in 30 years time, did the minister of the day make the right decision? So I'm making myself very clear and I hope you respect this - I went to the renewable community, I have talked to certain stakeholders, I've talked to departmental people, gained the information, and I must say, and you've got to believe me, I had said earlier on that I would move ahead with legislation, I said that, and I decided not to move along with legislation this Spring because I wasn't comfortable.

[1:15 p.m.]

The Cary report, which I don't think you did mention, which we spent a considerable amount of money on to look at certain options for me, and through a process of stakeholders and whatever was presented, to pick the right options to move forward with our electricity bill in regard to renewables, outlining clearly solution A, B and C - and the people behind me, or in the community, understand what I'm talking about, and yourself, and it all started

[Page 440]

to become a financial thing rather than a right thing. Should we sell the credits inside of our borders or should we sell the credits outside because there's financial gains to that? It removed the idea of generating renewable power and cutting gas emissions and doing all the right things that I believed in.

I started to be lobbied about the financial gain of a credit - I'm very passionate about this and I know you would be - and I said, oh, my God, it's not about saving the environment now, it's not about creating a brand new technique in renewables, but it's becoming now a financial issue of credits in or out. I have a responsibility to the ratepayers of Nova Scotia first, and the good health of the people of Nova Scotia, then my responsibilities come after that to industry and whatever. I'm saying clearly here today that I have not finished on this file; I'm not finished. I'm gaining more information and your question about the RFP, and it's not finished yet, but I will tell you I expect the design of that RFP to be posted shortly. Bruce, maybe you could help me - in a month, two months, less than that? Sorry, member. (Interruption) When you asked me the question, I sent for the status report, I hope you appreciate that - but I am just saying from talking to the department, so don't quote me on how long, but it's not too far away. That information is going to come back. You asked me about the budget surrounding that - there will be appropriate funding to do a proper job. I can't give you that, but I hope to give you that as well.

I believe in renewable energy. The other thing that we must remember, and you said it, renewable energy, simply not just wind turbines. You talked a little bit about the history. Well, I have actually been in Sheet Harbour where they have a small hydro plant down there and you should see that if you haven't. Call Nova Scotia Power and they will take you down for a tour. It's the most unique thing - I don't even know the capacity of it but they are the same generators and turbines that have been used since the 1800s, still producing hydro. What a wonderful way to produce renewable energy, in stream, via rivers, and there are a number of these small hydro generation plants all across Nova Scotia, owned by Nova Scotia Power unfortunately, but they don't get any credit in the type of energy they are creating. Apparently they are very low maintenance - one person does an inspection every so many months. It's a wonderful thing.

That was my first understanding of renewables as a young man when I used to visit that because there is a dam there to make sure that the water goes through the trough, and we used to swim there - so that's how it was triggered. We already have wind turbines. As a matter of fact, there are 30 wind turbines generating roughly 60 megawatts of electricity, 22 megawatts of biomass electricity cogeneration facilities, 230 megawatts of hydro that I spoke of, 20 megawatts of tidal station power - one of only three tidal power plants in the world and that's in Annapolis, it's very famous and gets a lot of attention.

So I'm still on your opening comments here because, as I said, I just want you to know and believe that the responsibility I have I take seriously. We have to understand that yes, years ago there was a move but it is sort of relaxed because of our dependency on

[Page 441]

carbons to generate electricity. Then, all of sudden - let's be honest - in these last couple of years everyone is talking green power, green energy because of the climate change issue. I believe that is what has promoted it. There has been some disagreement in regard to our federal government's position on Kyoto, the Liberal Government, the Conservative Government, their position. I believe, federally, that has been maybe a deterrent in a move forward - so yes, sometimes policy, philosophy, all of this affects our thing.

Let's take all of that away, come down to Nova Scotia and say what is the responsibility of the Minister of Energy and that responsibility is to move in a direction that he feels confident in and one that will bring success to the very thing you are talking about. How much are we able to entertain? Mr. Chairman, how much renewable energy are we able to entertain in the Province of Nova Scotia until we reach that level that it becomes a negative issue for us? What about top-up and spill?

I'm sure Nova Scotia Power has been shocked with some of the statements I've made as a minister, with some of the regulations I have put in place, with some of the suggestions I've made and, quite frankly, with probably some of the comments to the media. Nova Scotia Power has a responsibility to shareholders, and I have a responsibility to the ratepayers and to the constituents of this province - a responsibility I take seriously and I do not want to put all my eggs in the same basket and make decisions because I'm being lobbied about certain financial gains around credits.

At this particular time, I haven't opened up the market, as we would say, but I have made it possible for renewable people to sell their energy. They're not to a point yet where they want to be, but I hope to bring them to that point.

MS. CONRAD: Thank you. I'm a little bit confused because I don't want the minister to be confusing the need to advance renewable energy in the province and the carbon credits that may be possible. There's no question, the carbon credit trading is happening, that could potentially happen in a bigger way, obviously it will be the economic gain for some businesses, for some industries. But, in all seriousness, if we look at it realistically without looking at the economics of what carbon credit trading can do, if you look at it realistically we know that countries like China, India and other countries that are moving aggressively forward in development and are flipping on the switch daily, firing up plants, to encourage those countries to invest in renewable energy through a carbon credit trading system may make a little bit of sense even though the economics aren't completely worked out, the formulae, how it's actually going to work.

Our trade winds go all around this globe and what we burn here today or what somebody else burns over there tomorrow, it all comes back around. We're all affected by the emissions we produce and pump into the air. I don't want the minister to confuse the need to move forward with renewables and how it's going to work with carbon credit trading. That's a discussion that will move forward as renewables move forward.

[Page 442]

You had mentioned the ability to pay. I think there is a genuine concern from a lot of individuals - and obviously you expressed concern as well about the ability to pay - about how our rates will be affected if we aggressively move towards new renewables without knowing what that rate would be.

I think if we look realistically again, the Department of Energy now has Conserve Nova Scotia under its wing that will invest - hopefully aggressively invest - in energy efficiency, energy conservation and hopefully, energy incentives. I think it's about balance. Certainly, if our energy rates are going up, for whatever reason, because we've added renewables, maybe the price isn't quite stabilized yet until we get it all right, and it all kind of works out over a period of time.

I think on the other hand, that balance is about moving forward with Conserve Nova Scotia in an aggressive fashion to really get back to that first program that Nova Scotia Power Corporation had in the 1970s, that customer service that actually provided to customers ways in which to reduce their energy.

On the one hand, the rate may be a bit higher, but on the other hand if energy efficiency is applied aggressively and incentives are there for the consumers and especially for those consumers who - we currently see a large number of people living in our communities who are energy poor because energy rates now are too high. We need to invest in those aggressive programs that I'm hoping Conserve Nova Scotia will move forward with.

I want to talk a little bit more about community renewable energy and the potential for growth in rural Nova Scotia and the potential to see rural Nova Scotia kind of kick off a different type of economy. Community renewable energy projects are happening in other places across the world and I'm not talking about huge renewable energy companies. I'm talking about the smaller producer that perhaps could sell to communities, could sell to perhaps other municipalities, who in turn may - that energy producer could also sell to the local school, the local hospital, the local medical clinic, local surrounding communities; businesses such as Bowater, in my hometown, could certainly make an added addition. But there's one problem that community renewable energy, if it were to ever move forward, we have a real problem with feed-in right now. Any community producers currently don't have the benefit of feeding in to the grid.

Now, we know that through the RFP process Nova Scotia Power puts out, and they've been tendering for the last couple of years, proposals to larger producers. Some are investing in exploratory turbines, if we're talking wind, for example; some are moving forward more aggressively in developing larger wind projects. However, they're feeding into the transmission grid with no problem because they've gone through the RFP process. However, for small producers, they don't have the same ability to feed in, so they need that to be there, in order to move forward with renewable energy projects in communities, if they don't have the feed-in and if we don't move forward putting that all together.

[Page 443]

So what I'd like to ask the minister is, how long will renewable energy producers have to wait to see some feed-in to the grid? We also know that Nova Scotia Power hasn't been investing in that grid system and there are all kinds of issues around gaining access to the transmission grid for a large producer, for example. They really have to scope out their sites before setting up shop because they may be too far away from the grid and it's too costly to set up lines and poles and all of that, to get them to the point of entry, to the grid.

[1:30 p.m.]

For a small community producer, though, they would probably find access to the grid a little bit closer to home. Now, of course, there are different rules and regulations in some municipalities, and rightly so, around land use bylaws and distance, if we're talking wind, to homes. But I think some of those municipalities are advancing forward, in making sure that they have the correct bylaws in place and good land use planning for their communities, and Queens is a perfect example. I sat around the table in Queens for four years on their Planning Advisory Committee and one thing we did a couple of years ago is, we made sure that in our planning documents, we came up with a definition for wind development, in our county. We have come up with the distance that we feel would meet the needs of residents in the communities of Queens. We came up with the definition of how we see if the wind industry developed in Queens.

So municipalities are moving forward with figuring out land bylaws and planning for development. Now we just need the "move ahead" from the Department of Energy and the minister, to say, okay, all of the pieces are starting to come together, now we need to move forward. Do we need another study? Talking about a study, actually, on the South Shore, out of the Energy office that used to be in Shelburne and it could still be in Shelburne, I know one of the chaps who used to work in that office is now working elsewhere, but there was a wind study commissioned, partly funded, by the Department of Energy, out of that office, along with, I know, Queens certainly invested in part of that wind study. That was done a couple of years ago, and it was a very impressive study because what it actually showed was where potential wind resource could actually be had along the South Shore. Of course other details need to be worked out from that study - closeness to grid, where all the best access points are, and those sorts of things.

Getting back to some of my prior comments, we have a lot of information out there and now is the time to move forward. I think the Minister of Energy certainly has at his disposal a lot of that information and I would encourage also the minister and his department to continue meeting with the renewable energy community. I'm hoping that we - renewable energy community, I'm not sure if that is fitting. It's a renewable energy industry, the communities will benefit from renewable energy and certainly if development of renewable energy sources are done in rural Nova Scotia - and we certainly have to look at development happening here quicker in HRM - there could be a lot of potential for our rural communities.

[Page 444]

If you would just bear with me, I know you've tabulated or started marking some of the questions that you will have or want to respond to, if I can move quickly to tidal power and some comments around that because I think that renewable resource fits in nicely to the whole renewable discussion. Then I will close my comments and allow the minister to respond, if I could, in the interests of time.

Going back to that history, back in the 1970s where the province actually recognized there is some benefit in the Bay of Fundy to developing tidal power, we know that there could be great potential for energy generated out of the Bay of Fundy. We know that Nova Scotia Power, because now they are a private corporation, they continue to generate some power out of the Bay of Fundy. However, things are changing because technology is changing. We're talking about perhaps developing technology that would see turbines developed and put in the Bay of Fundy to create and take benefit of that possible huge potential for energy coming out of the bay.

I want to refer to a news release that the minister did put out, if I can find it here - maybe I don't have it