Environment Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Collins.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Of my last two questions, the first one goes to Mr. DiCaro.

You mentioned the importance of environmental and labour standards in terms of the parts that are coming into Canada, and I was wondering if you could flesh that out a little. I'm going to cut you off at about a minute so that I can get my second question in.

[Angelo DiCaro]

I would say that there's a globalized nature to how the industry works. Everyone knows this. One of the advances that we've been making within trade policy, especially under the USMCA, is looking at how labour standards and stronger environmental standards can play a role. Part of developing a national auto strategy is that we are going to have to rethink some of these trade policies that we have in place, including labour, as well as policies that restrict our ability to localize content rules when it comes to fleet purchases and things of that nature.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

With regard to that—specifically, trying to incentivize made in Canada vehicles—what do you see as the barriers?

[Angelo DiCaro]

I think some trade agreements become the barriers, trade agreements like the Canada-European Union trade agreement, which tries to put in place roadblocks for provinces, municipalities and the federal government to establish local content requirements for all types of vehicles: rolling stock vehicles, anything through public procurement. In some cases—

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you so much, Mr. DiCaro.

My last question is for Mr. Smith.

We know that Canada's coming out with its net-zero accountability legislation. Canada has missed every single target that it's set. It is on track to miss its targets for zero-emission vehicles sales. Could you maybe end off with how important it is that we reduce our emissions through transportation and meet our climate targets through the sector?

[Cedric Smith]

First of all, with respect to that legislation, we're really encouraged to see this being put into law—the net-zero by 2050 target. I want to re-emphasize how ambitious that target is. Recent projections from the International Energy Agency state that about 50% of passenger car sales would have to be electric by 2030 in order for us to meet that target. The reason they say that is because we need to front-load these electric vehicles because if we do front-load them, then that increases the benefit as those vehicles go through the stock. It also increases the emissions benefits from the grid, the reduction in emissions from electricity. It is so important—

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Smith, just out of curiosity—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Be very brief, please.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The net-zero legislation is missing a 2025 milestone target. Given the importance of front-loading this, would you want to see something like a 2025 milestone target in there?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Give kind of a yes-or-no answer.

[Cedric Smith]

It's always good to be aggressive when it comes to climate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That would be a yes, I guess.

Mr. Albas, you have [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Smith, when it comes to some of these incentives—obviously, Mr. Jeneroux raised the issue of Tesla—is the Pembina Institute concerned that different companies may utilize technology protection measures that artificially limit the capacity of an electric vehicle?

[Cedric Smith]

Could you expand on that?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

To my understanding, you can purchase a model and receive the government subsidy, but a technological protection measure stops it from having the full range unless you pay more for it. Basically, you have an engine and a battery that can take you x kilometres, but it's artificially limited in order to sell you the engine.

I'm just asking if you think this practice should be examined by the Government of Canada, or if you think this public subsidy should go to cars where these measures can be put in place.

[Cedric Smith]

I would say that if there are any restrictions that reduce the potential for electric vehicles to contribute to greenhouse gas reductions and reduce the ability of an average family that's looking to do their part to move Canada to net zero, and the restrictions on those are artificial, then we would hope that, as much as possible, those could be cleared out over time.

One thing I would note in terms of the iZEV program is that it does offer higher purchase incentives for longer-range vehicles than for shorter-range ones, specifically within that plug-in hybrid segment.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Okay.

To my understanding, many different car manufacturers will now be coming out with their own versions of particular vehicles, trucks and perhaps jeeps and other kinds, but obviously these will require more batteries, etc. You mentioned that perhaps there should be some sort of subsidy for industry-type vehicles, but jeeps and those other kinds of vehicles are already very expensive compared with small cars.

Do you think the government should maintain the current amount that's given in terms of subsidy?

[Cedric Smith]

That's a great question. I think one thing to keep in mind is that the subsidy amount is not very flexible. If you're purchasing a zero-emission vehicle that's battery electric or hydrogen fuel cell electric, you're getting $5,000. As far as I'm aware, it doesn't matter if it's a jeep or a smaller car.

I think at that point, it would be up to the consumer on whether or not they want to pitch in that additional amount of extra dollars on top of that. I think if they're willing to do that, and they're willing to add to the GHG emission reductions by doing so, personally, at this point in time, I don't see any reason why we should be limiting their ability to do so.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Okay.

I have a quick question before I switch to Mr. Kazi. Let me set the context here. You mentioned that one-third of Canadians live in multi-family residential-type arrangements, such as apartment buildings and condo blocks. In British Columbia, for example, many of these are called “strata”. I know that many people can't get basic insurance because the cost has gone up so astronomically.

Where individuals want to get these electric vehicles or charging stations, how do you suggest we deal with some of these issues?

[Cedric Smith]

That's a great question. I'll try to be quick on this.

I think it comes to two main ways of doing it. The first is making it easier to install these electric-vehicle charging stations within the MURBs or within the garage or within areas. The second is an increased amount of publicly available charging infrastructure, specifically in the areas around where a lot of these garages for a lot of these apartments and condominiums exist. That would include on-street charging and publicly available charging infrastructure.

In terms of making it easier within the buildings, one thing we note is that a lot of these incentive programs offer higher incentive levels for the MURB charging infrastructure than for single-family homes. That's something that we think is definitely important as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We have one more questioner.

Mr. Baker, are you interested in asking some questions?

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Absolutely.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. Smith, the representative of the Pembina Institute.

Today, General Motors announced that it will manufacture only zero-emission vehicles and that it will invest approximately $7 billion by 2025 in these types of vehicles. This suggests that the company believes that it can make a profit in this market.

Last week, the Quebec government announced that it will suspend the sale of gas-powered cars in 2035. What do you think of this announcement? Should other provinces or countries follow suit?

[Cedric Smith]

The Quebec ban on gasoline-powered vehicles is essentially not equivalent, but it's comparable to a zero-emission vehicle standard that requires 100% of vehicles to be either low emitting or zero emission. Depending on how the ban is structured, I'm not sure the extent to which it takes hybrid electric vehicles into consideration. At Pembina we're always encouraged by aggressive climate action and, again, I would note the figure that, by 2030, 50% of passenger car sales would have to be zero emission in order for us to meet that target.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Is this something that the other Canadian provinces should explore?