Environment Committee on March 24th, 2026

[Charles Séguin]

That's sort of the point of carbon pricing. The idea is to give companies incentives so they allocate resources to the development of new technologies. In any case, they are in the best position to do that.

It's often difficult for governments to pick winners and losers, to know which technologies to support and which not to support. So let's take advantage of the industry's expertise, give it the incentives in the form of credits it could generate in the system, and let it invest its own funds.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Do you think the transparency of the current carbon pricing system should be improved?

[Charles Séguin]

Transparency could indeed be improved. There are a lot of challenges relating to the confidentiality of certain data concerning the various credits given by certain issuers.

I do understand though that it's a question of competitiveness. There are nonetheless ways to share this data confidentially so that independent researchers can look at the effectiveness of the system, for example through Statistics Canada and a pan-Canadian network of data research centres.

In my opinion, we could have higher accountability requirements for companies, which could provide that confidential data to the research community.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Can you tell us about the effect of credits in the bank and tell us how positive or negative that can be, depending on the system in place?

[Charles Séguin]

When the system goes through periods of low rigour where companies can accumulate a lot of credits, those credits may be of questionable quality—for example, if they come from the tree-planting sector. That creates downward pressure on credit prices in the future.

There are ways to reduce the impact of this credit bank, and that is already being considered right now. However, I encourage the government to move forward on this issue. The idea is to implement a somewhat dynamic system that changes the performance points set in each industry or reduces the number of credits distributed in the system dynamically based on supply and demand in order to maintain a price.

There is another solution, which would be simpler, or at least could be complementary. It would be to clearly announce that the system will be extended beyond 2030. Extending the system encourages businesses to keep part of their credit bank for subsequent years. That way, the current bank of accumulated credits would not flood the market in 2030, since it would be gradually distributed over a longer time frame—for example, through 2045. The annual impact of the credit bank would therefore be much lower.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Do you recommend that taxpayer money not be used to fund new oil or gas pipelines or to fund expansions of existing oil and gas pipelines?

[Charles Séguin]

Government money should be used where there are market failures. In the pipeline construction sector, what market failures are we trying to correct? It's not clear. If the market wants to finance pipelines, there's a regulatory process. We understand that the government is trying to streamline it.

Should money be invested, as has been done in the past, when companies are signalling that it's not a good investment? It's hard for the government to find reasons to justify such an investment from the standpoint of all taxpayers.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Do you think a carbon border tax, like the one imposed in Europe, could be a good complement to the industrial carbon pricing?

[Charles Séguin]

That could be a good complement. It might create some problems in terms of fairness among the provinces. Indeed, it would have to be decided which price, among the various prices set in the provinces, would be used to measure the contribution paid for products entering Canada.

Careful thought should be given to this, however, because the six sectors where this has been implemented in the European Union are mainly sectors where the European Union is an importer, whereas in a number of these sectors, including the aluminum sector, Canada is an exporter. So things should be done a little differently from what is being done in the European Union.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you, Mr. Bonin.

I'm expecting the bells to ring any minute for our vote. I'd like to ask the members if we have unanimous consent to continue until 5:30 and then adjourn the meeting at 5:30 to go to the vote. Does it seem like a good idea? No. You do not want to.

Would you like to move adjournment?

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I move that we adjourn.

(Motion negatived)

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

On a point of clarification, what is the procedure when the bells ring?

[The Clerk]

Would you like me to speak to that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Yes, please.

[The Clerk]

Pursuant to Standing Order 115, when bells ring to alert members that there's an upcoming vote in the chamber, the committee is required to suspend the meeting, unless there is unanimous consent to continue to sit.

However, historically, if members do not give their unanimous consent to continue to sit, a member will often propose adjournment of the committee if members do not intend to come back to the meeting.

In this case, the vote will conclude long after the scheduled hour of adjournment for this meeting.

Does that answer your question, sir?

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Yes, I appreciate that.

[The Clerk]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Mr. Grant.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

For clarification, will we have services at the time we come back?

[The Clerk]

Ordinarily, services are available for two full hours of proceedings. That excludes suspension time and also includes a 15-minute grace period.

The committee was suspended for approximately 10 minutes, plus 15 minutes. The committee could proceed until approximately 5:25 p.m. without requesting additional services.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

That buys us five minutes.

[The Clerk]

Well, it's 25 extra minutes, so that would take the committee to—I beg your pardon—5:55.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

We won't be back.

If I may, I think we should be considerate of our witnesses' time as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Mr. Bonin, you have the floor.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

As I understand it, when the bells ring, unanimous consent of the committee is required to continue the meeting, which doesn't seem to be the case. We should stick to the Standing Orders. I move to adjourn.