Environment Committee on Dec. 1st, 2009

[Gordon Lloyd]

I think on the issue of long-term targets, to have them as aspirational or objective is one thing, but to have them where the law demands that you have to meet them is another thing completely, and that's what this bill does. If we can't meet them through technological improvements and investment in new plants, it would require us to buy them from abroad, and that's the fundamental problem with this bill.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Boucher and Mr. Watkins, you work in different sectors and you are asking that we respect various sectors when the time comes to set the overall volumes of greenhouse gas reduction targets. However, when we were told earlier that the most important sectors in Canada were represented here, I thought that we had forgotten to invite the forestry sector, which is also very important.

Why not consider horizontal reductions rather than vertical ones? In other words, your respective materials are used in the same places. In one case, they are used to make roadways and sidewalks and the like, and in the other case, they are used to build buildings and bridges. Rather than saying that the cement sector and the steel sector should reduce their emissions, why not consider the “building” or “bridge” sectors? You could then specialize, because obviously cement will never equal steel and steel will never equal wood.

[Pierre Boucher]

In fact, it is necessary that we advocate the use of the best material for the right application. Certainly the life cycle as a whole is important in the choice of materials. For instance, where cement is concerned we know that if there were more roads made of cement we would be reducing greenhouse gases and so we would improve air quality. If we use more cement in buildings, especially multi-residential buildings, we know that over the life cycle of the building...

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

What you are saying has not been proven. I'm sorry, but you are talking to an expert here. I do not agree, I don't accept that as the truth.

[Pierre Boucher]

The Government of Canada carried out that study.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I don't agree on the longevity aspect.

[Pierre Boucher]

So, the longevity and durability of all cement structures are already recognized. This is a very durable material which has fundamental and important environmental qualities.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

So you would not agree to considering horizontal reductions?

[Pierre Boucher]

I'm going to repeat this, each sector has its own particular characteristics. If we don't take them into consideration the result will be regulations that are poorly adapted to reality. What everyone wants in all countries of the world...

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

You defend your sector very well.

[Pierre Boucher]

In all the countries of the world this has already been recognized. We are examining the situation sector by sector because people recognize that there are differences. I tried to express them a bit.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Watkins, I have a short question. When you were talking about China earlier, did your figure of 50% include the steel from Taiwan?

[Ron Watkins]

No, it's just the number for China.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

That is all I wanted to know, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Calkins, the floor is yours.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate an opportunity to ask some questions.

Just to set it into context, we in this committee have been studying Bill C-311 for what feels like forever, but it has been a couple of months. So far we've heard from countless environmental non-government organizations. We've heard from those influences representing the European Union and other countries, the United States of America, which would obviously give their two cents on how Canada should run its own domestic internal affairs, but which I look at through the eyes of a bit of a skeptic. And we've had the forestry sector and the electricity sector before us. Other than that, this is, finally, the first opportunity to ask real questions of Canadians who actually represent industries, who represent real people who have jobs and are accountable to society.

[An hon. member]

Hear, hear! Well said.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I am going to ask you, Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Boag, Mr. Watkins, and Mr. Boucher--

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible--Editor]

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

I thought I had the floor, Mr. Chair. I certainly maintain my composure when I'm listening to other questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

You have the floor.

Order.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Boag, Mr. Watkins, and Mr. Boucher, how many people work for the various member companies in your organizations? Can you give us a number, whether that is in direct jobs or in indirect jobs?

[Gordon Lloyd]

Our sector is a lot more capital intensive than it is labour intensive. I'll get back to you with my numbers on this, but I don't have a good sense of how many folks work in the chemical sector. It is probably about 600,000, but that could be off base.

[Peter Boag]

In the refining sector directly, there are about 16,000 employees from coast to coast. We operate refineries from Newfoundland all the way to B.C.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Do you have any idea about indirect jobs?