Environment Committee on Jan. 28th, 2008

[Christopher Henderson]

Respectfully, we had a certain amount of time to do it in. Let's look at that in the future.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So you didn't meet with them.

[Christopher Henderson]

We didn't meet with them, no, but as I said, I'm quite happy to look at that.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Yes, okay.

You put three things before the members of the committee, in terms of the work of Parliament. One of them is the short- and long-term mindset about where we should go. Does that imply we should look at a more directed economy in Canada--that it's probably the only way we're going to achieve the massive infrastructure changes we require and the ability to make the right choices early on?

All of these parties here today are talking about reducing greenhouse gases by at least 50% by 2050. In order to accomplish that, we have to stop investing in the wrong infrastructure today. Is that not correct?

[Christopher Henderson]

Absolutely, and that's the point we made. More specifically, we say we need regulatory clarity and consistency--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

You mean a directed economy, a planning process that would yield the kinds of results we're looking for.

[Christopher Henderson]

I don't think I said that. What I said is we need regulatory clarity and consistency--and we do have regulations for all manner of things, including all manner of environmental things--and we absolutely need that for greenhouse gases.

One can classify that as direction--I'll leave that to you--but that's what we're asking for.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay.

[Christopher Henderson]

As a recognition of what that does, it creates a demand for carbon reduction and carbon offsets. It creates the drive or demand to move in terms of how capital stock investment in technology is deployed. The sooner we do that, the better.

It's going to be a moving target and we're going to have to get there, but let's start. It's been a long time. Our company's first climate change project was in 1988, when we helped Swiss Reisurance in Munich reassess climate change risk. Man, I'm getting old at this, and so is John and so all of us here. Let's just go.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I had an opportunity to meet with the Danish minister of energy last spring when he visited here. He said quite clearly to me that they had a successful energy policy, they had a successful direction. He said you have to take the politics out of it because it's a course that has to be supported by everybody in the country in order for it to be effective. The intrinsic nature of the targets, the requirements for investment, the commitment that all parties have to have means you need that multi-party agreement in Parliament.

Right now we haven't been able to bring forward a national strategy on energy, which is of course the dominating reality of greenhouse gas emissions. Mostly, I think it's because we've adopted a continental energy policy and we're working quite actively with the United States in its directions to secure its energy supply.

How do you feel we're going to be able to move from that position--of an acquiescence to the requirements of the United States for a continental energy supply and energy security--to a Canadian clean energy future, without a very directed message to our economy?

[Christopher Henderson]

You'll remember that a number of these organizations have been very clear that, first of all, I don't think we have a continental energy plan. It's a supply issue, as you mentioned, that's really at work.

Commenting on that, groups like the Conference Board and the council of CEOs have said, look, that's part of the reality of energy that we face. But part of it is how do we deal with the environmental obligations along the way, including greenhouse gas emissions. You can't decouple these issues; they have to be coupled together.

Business recognizes that. Frankly, we'd prefer to have one regulatory mechanism across the continent because of the nature of the trading regimes that we have. Almost half of the assets of EXCEL companies are in the United States, so having one regulatory approach makes sense. That's why I said in my opening remarks that we think the push to get the United States into the protocol in a more formal way is desirable. What we don't need is a lot of fragmentation.

I think you're absolutely right to link the energy and climate change issues together. I don't think you can decouple them.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Mr. Drexhage, I wonder if you would want to comment on that as well.

[John Drexhage]

I'm certainly in agreement with Chris in terms of the need to integrate the two. At our institute we're going to be holding a conference at the beginning of March looking at post-2012 scenarios for Canada. I find that within the context of what the different options are, the scenarios out there from a Canadian short-term economic perspective are daunting. There are some daunting challenges ahead of us.

What you mentioned in terms of a continental energy supply really has to be taken into account. Where do all of the energy exports go from the oil sands? Vehicular transportation in the United States.... It's a matter of we have to close off both ends; we have to address both ends of the issue. Until we can begin to address the vehicular demands that happen across North America, to that extent will we ease the pressure in terms of the development of the oil sands?

There is, of course, also carbon capture and storage, and those kinds of technologies also need to be more seriously looked at.

There is no one magic bullet, I totally agree with you. In fact, we have called for it in a number of articles that I've done consistently, for beginning a discussion with premiers and the Prime Minister, in fact initiating a conference on a clean energy strategy.

We keep calling ourselves a clean energy superpower. We have to figure out how to make that transition. I've never seen provinces more onside with this idea than ever, and now is the time to strike. I would love to see it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Thank you, Mr. Bevington.

Mr. Drexhage, you might let us know about that conference and send the clerk any details so that all members know about it. Possibly we will be able to attend.

[John Drexhage]

Yes, absolutely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Thank you.

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses, Mr. Henderson and Mr. Drexhage, for your return to our committee, and welcome to Monsieur Lavoie.

I'll be the first to give you the only shameless plug. I am told you're a contestant on CBC's Next Great Prime Minister. This is probably valuable experience.

Mr. Lavoie, maybe I will start with you. There has been such a proliferation of environmental groups, networks, coalitions, and for Canadians listening, they probably need a bit of a handbook to understand who's who with respect to the ENGO presence at Bali.

You were a part of the Canadian youth delegation, and it was part of the official delegation of the Climate Action Network of Canada. Is that correct?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

Yes, we were accredited by the Climate Action Network.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Would you describe the Climate Action Network as an ENGO or a group of ENGOs? How would you describe it?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

I'm not an expert on this. I'm much more familiar with the CYD proper and the parent organization, the CYCC.

We were accredited by the Climate Action Network. I would describe it as an ENGO.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Completely non-partisan as well?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

Yes, I would say so.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

You've described the Canadian youth delegation this morning in your press conference, in a transcript, as 32 Canadian youths from across the country, from different backgrounds, having different interests, and united this year to go and be representated at the conference. You've talked about their being between the ages of 18 and 26 in your opening statement. Obviously this is a delegation, so it is not an ENGO per se--you wouldn't describe it as that. It's non-partisan as well. Is that how you would describe the delegation?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

Yes.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Very good.

You are testifying here today as an individual, and I'm going to presume non-partisan as well. Your presentation is before us.