Evidence of meeting #15 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was parks.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
Yes, and we can discuss it.
For now, I would simply like to come back to—
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I have very little time left.
I simply want to come back to what you said.
You said that there could be low-carbon oil. That is strange, since all the experts I have spoken to have told me that carbon sequestration and capture in the oil and gas industry was a deception. It can apply to some heavy industrial sectors but in the oil and gas industry, it is a deception. Using it is essentially an attempt at greenwashing.
You began your presentation by saying that we needed to listen to science. However, I get the impression that how you listen to science often varies.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Your time is up. Mr. Simard, you went over the six minutes that you were allotted.
Minister, you can address Mr. Simard's two comments when responding to another member. You can also provide clarification on the IPCC quote.
I will now give the floor to Ms. Collins.
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to pick up on some of the questions from Mr. Simard.
We've heard a lot of expert witnesses during our study on fossil fuel subsidies telling us that the CCUS tax credit is a fossil fuel subsidy. It is a financial contribution by a government that confers a benefit on a company or a sector. That clearly meets the WTO's definition. We've heard that not only is it a subsidy, but it's also handing over billions of dollars to profitable oil and gas companies. It's a technology that hasn't been proven at scale. Oil and gas companies have been using it as an excuse to increase their production. This is absolutely the wrong direction.
I'm curious to know why your government isn't listening to these 400 academics, experts, climate scientists and economists. Why wouldn't you or Minister Wilkinson even meet with these signatories? Why are you not listening to them when they're urging you not to continue to subsidize big oil?
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Thank you for the question, MP Collins.
I don't know if you read the last report of the IPCC. I'm trying to find the exact page for you, but—
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I did. I'm actually specifically asking you about why you didn't listen to those experts and why you didn't meet them.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
May 3rd, 2022 / 12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
As I was saying, the IPCC, which is considered by many, perhaps not you, as an authoritative figure when it comes to climate change, in its last report refers to carbon capture and storage as a critical technology for the world to reach—
12:10 p.m.
NDP
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
—net zero in 2050.
Maybe you don't believe in the IPCC, and—
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I believe 100% in the IPCC report. Your government, it's documented, lobbied the IPCC drafters to include more carbon capture in the language. This is very problematic.
Your colleague Minister Wilkinson dismissed the 400 experts who wrote to you urging you not to go forward with this subsidy, saying that they were “not experts”. I think that is really dismissive. I'm curious to know if you agree with your colleague when he's labelled these economists, environmentalists and climate experts as “not experts” and that you're not willing to meet them.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
I haven't seen this comment from Minister Wilkinson. Therefore, I can't comment on something I haven't seen.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
I meet, and I continue to meet, experts and scientists—
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Ms. Collins, perhaps you could let the minister answer. You've raised many points here, and I'm kind of interested to hear the—
12:10 p.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
[Technical difficulty—Editor] said he can't comment on the thing that I raised.
Your government seems happy to meet with oil and gas lobbyists. They have been asking for this tax credit. Last week the CEO of Cenovus said the tax credit is not high enough, which is incredible, given that the company is reporting billions in profits and tripling their dividends to shareholders. The oil sands pathway alliance is lobbying for funds from the net-zero accelerator. There's also the new Canada growth fund. The mandate of the Canada Infrastructure Bank was just expanded to include carbon capture, utilization and storage. The EDC just created a new transition bond framework aimed at CCUS.
How many billions can Canadians expect to shell out and just how much is your government prepared to hand over to profitable oil and gas companies?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Specifically on the comment from the CEO of Cenovus, I did put out a publication on Twitter. It reads as follows:
Building a sustainable future for Canadians and workers means taking action to cut pollution.
Our [government] has stepped up with a real plan.
With record profits, oil and gas companies have the money to do their part. The time is now.
In the transition to a low-carbon economy and society, I think we all have a role to play. The private sector has a role to play. Civil society has a role to play. Investors have a role to play, and government has a role to play. We've said that as part of a fair transition, we would work with every sector of our economy and every region of the economy to ensure that the transition to this low-carbon economy is done in a fair and respectable manner for everyone. That's exactly what we're doing.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you.
When we're talking about profitable oil and gas companies, it would make sense for them to be paying for this. Last week we had EDC, Export Development Canada, join us for our committee study on fossil fuel subsidies. EDC claims that its financial support to the oil and gas industry is “not a subsidy”. Despite providing over $5 billion to the Canadian oil and gas sector last year, EDC's president and CEO claimed she's unaware of any well-established “international definitions” of a subsidy. That is a bit shocking to me.
We've heard from numerous witnesses, including some at that very same meeting, that the World Trade Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme have long defined a subsidy as a financial contribution by a government or any public body that confers a benefit to a company or sector.
Canada gives out more public financing than any other G20 country. Does it concern you that the head of Canada's export development credit agency doesn't understand what a fossil fuel subsidy is and isn't familiar with internationally agreed-upon definitions?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Steven Guilbeault Liberal Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
You might have seen, as part of the tax credit for carbon capture and storage the Minister of Finance has unveiled in the budget, that we are making a very significant difference between providing support for the oil and gas sector to decarbonize, as we are providing for every other sector of the economy, and providing incentives to enable the oil and gas sector to increase their production. We've been asked and we have resisted and we have refused to include, for example, the use of carbon capture and storage under the tax credit for enhanced oil recovery, because it would directly—
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Ms. Collins, I'm going to give the minister a little extra time.