Evidence of meeting #34 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was energy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:30 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Climate Change and Air Issues, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
I think we're roughly a third of the total industrial emissions--
11:30 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Climate Change and Air Issues, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
In terms of GDP dollars, the price goes up and down monthly, so I don't know, but last I looked it was in the order of $100 billion of revenue and lots more in spinoffs.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
So you represent $100 billion in economic activity.
Mr. Turk, you represent multi-billion dollars of activity.
And neither of your trade associations, your members, have access to a defined plan. Is that right?
11:30 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Climate Change and Air Issues, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
Well, it's a work-in-progress, Mr. McGuinty.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
I don't know all the rules of procedure, but it seems like a clearly misleading question. The witnesses just said they had a copy of the “Turning the Corner” plan. Mr. McGuinty in his question is now suggesting that they said something else.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
This is Mr. McGuinty's time. As long as he isn't breaking order according to the rules--and he isn't--he can ask the questions that he feels are appropriate. As long as he's treating the witnesses with respect, he has the floor to use the time as he sees fit.
You have four and a half minutes left.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Have either of you seen any costing? Because there is no plan, this is a redundant question, but I'm going to assert that there's no costing for a plan that doesn't exist.
Have you seen any government analysis on the costs of inaction in 46 months?
11:30 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Climate Change and Air Issues, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
I haven't. I don't know that it isn't there; that's not what I've been focusing on, and--
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
11:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations, Canadian Electricity Association
The answer, of course, is that I've seen some of the international estimates and I've seen some of the projections and so forth.
11:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations, Canadian Electricity Association
I can't say I've seen specific data from the federal government, no.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Okay.
The second round of questions for you, or the theme is, gentlemen, the government now has changed its message around climate change to assert there's a North American greenhouse gas target.
In both cases, your CAPP equivalent, Mr. Hyndman, in the United States, and Mr. Turk, your CEA equivalent in the United States, have you heard any talk or reference with your colleagues, your sister organizations, whatever they're called, in Washington? Are legislators and the Democratic government, to your knowledge, speaking about a North American greenhouse gas target?
11:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations, Canadian Electricity Association
I'll speak to that.
We've been in close contact with our counterparts in the U.S., and there is definitely a view, industry association to industry association, that it's important--the U.S. is our largest trading partner--to have a comprehensive North American approach. I know they've said that the current government is engaged in a clean energy dialogue in terms of looking at cross-border cooperation to try to address those issues, so I think there's definitely been some movement in terms of trying to look at a North American strategy.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
So there's movement and talk about the need for one, but can you tell me what the target is right now in real terms from 1990 levels from whatever it is the government is saying, from whatever we can divine, depending on the day?
11:35 a.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations, Canadian Electricity Association
In terms of a North American target?
11:35 a.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations, Canadian Electricity Association
I'm not sure we've talked about a specific North American target. I think there's been talk about a North American approach and the need to probably have a North American target.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Okay.
Do we know what the Obama administration is seeking to achieve as a target, either in the two legislative instruments or the EPA instrument that the President is threatening to use? What target are they using, with 1990, say, as the baseline year?
11:35 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Climate Change and Air Issues, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
I don't keep the 1990 numbers in my head, Mr. McGuinty, but I know that in the Waxman-Markey bill and then the Kerry-Boxer bill, they went from 20% to 17%, and back up to 20% below 2005, I believe it is, in the States. We have a number that looks the same in Canada, which is 20% below 2006 that the government's been laying out. That's now widely recognized as far more onerous than a comparable number in the States because of these different circumstances I was talking about.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Okay.
So there is no talk that I've heard at all from your counterpart organizations about a North American greenhouse gas target. They're not asserting in Washington, to your knowledge, what this regime is asserting up here, that it's all one seamless North American target, are they?