Environment Committee on April 16th, 2026

[Benoit Tessier]

Yes, absolutely.

I think I'll focus my answer on the economic perspective because that's the mandate of the department I work in.

Essentially, you're quite right to point to the fact that, despite the fact that the Americans or the American administration have passed some policies that are limiting the transition to electric and the EV sector, the rest of the world is clearly going in the opposite direction. It's certainly true in Europe. They're growing the number of EVs that they're selling in Europe, and it's true in other markets as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Simard, you now have the floor for six minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Cauchi, I'd like to follow up on the request I made earlier and perhaps clarify the context a bit.

Under the old standard, under Minister Guilbeault, the target was 100% electric vehicles by 2035. Under the new standard, it's 75% electric vehicles by 2035. I'd like your department to tell us: What was the projected reduction in greenhouse gas emissions under the old standard? You could even include the health impacts in your response. Then, what is the reduction in GHG emissions under the new standard targeting 75% electric vehicles by 2035, and what are the health impacts?

Are you able to provide that to the committee?

[Mark Cauchi]

Thank you for the question.

I don't think it's available right now. It's being finalized, developed or modelled, if you will, to be published in the Canada Gazette in the next—

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Okay.

In your opening remarks here in November, you highlighted the successes in Norway of the standard that promotes the use of more electric vehicles. I'm wondering what prompted the shift from 100%, which was Mr. Guilbeault's previous standard, to 75%. What's the reason behind that?

[Mark Cauchi]

Several factors were considered after the national assessment of the electric vehicle availability standard.

First, pricing was an issue. That was a very important factor. In addition, at that time, vehicle price parity was another consideration. There was a reassessment of standards and mandates not only at the federal level, but also at the provincial level—such as in Quebec or British Columbia—which resulted in reductions in emissions.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

So that's essentially what we were saying at the beginning: In the end, the standards were changed because it was necessary to support the automotive sector in a difficult context. It's merely a rhetorical question.

[Mark Cauchi]

It was a very important factor. At the time, following the imposition of the tariffs, there was an overall increase in vehicle prices for consumers, not just for electric vehicles. The price of all vehicles was affected, not only electric vehicles. This posed a significant challenge, not only for automakers, but also for consumers.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

Ms. van der Kamp, I'd like to come back to the zero emission vehicle infrastructure program, or ZEVIP.

However, I have something I'd like to share with my Conservative colleagues first. Earlier, a Conservative colleague told you that changing an electrical panel is very expensive when you want to install a charging station. Technology is evolving very quickly. I paid $45 for a little gadget, and a friend who's an electrician came over to hook it up at our house. When my dryer is running, my car doesn't charge, and when the dryer isn't running, my car charges. I don't even have to manage it. It cost $45 and dinner for my friend. So it's quite affordable, and I could refer you to my friend if you'd like.

Now let's go back to ZEVIP.

Is there currently still funding in this program? I ask because I would like to see the alignment between the ZEVIP program that existed at the Department of Natural Resources and the announcement that the Prime Minister made about the $1.5 billion and additional $1 billion that would be managed by the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

From what I've read, it seems that the Canada Infrastructure Bank would be willing to provide funding for projects costing at least $20 million. Does that mean that projects under $20 million won't be eligible for funding through the Canada Infrastructure Bank? Will those projects still go through ZEVIP? Will ZEVIP be bailed out by the government?

I'd appreciate it if you could shed some light on this.

[Anna van der Kamp]

Thank you for the question.

Yes, the CIB, so far, is funding very large projects.

We have a memorandum of understanding between our program and their program to talk about projects that are of interest to both organizations. So far, we have funded those that are less than $20 million. We are talking.

I can say that the zero emission vehicle infrastructure program has funding that we are still giving out until the end of this fiscal year.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

So it's until the end of this year.

[Anna van der Kamp]

Yes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

However, going forward, do you know if the projects will be referred to the Canada Infrastructure Bank or if ZEVIP will still exist?

[Anna van der Kamp]

It is a question right now as to the funding for that program going forward. There is no commitment right now.

The Infrastructure Bank's funding really is focused on those that are appropriate for concessional financing. That is of a certain type. Our program has a different focus. I can say right now that the national charging infrastructure strategy is looking at the tools that are available.

I would also note that there are a few other tools that we have, like the clean fuel regulations. As a compliance to the clean fuel regulations, companies could generate funds for investments in charging.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much.

I will now pass it over to Mr. Ross for five minutes, please.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

It always jumps out at me that it's always urbanites telling everybody in rural Canada that it's okay and suitable for rural Canada to use EVs, but that's not what my constituents tell me. It's not really practical, or affordable for that matter. It's not even safe in some cases. We have to drive long distances just to get services. On the 40-kilometre rule in terms of range anxiety, I agree, but not when you have to drive 1,000 kilometres where there are no charging stations. It's not practical.

Mr. Cauchi, you've answered this already with some of my colleagues' questions. What about Canadians in rural, remote and northern communities, like those in my riding of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, who don't have the option of switching to an EV? How does this new auto strategy ensure the affordability and availability of internal combustion engines for people in regions such as mine, who don't have practical access to EVs?

[Mark Cauchi]

I am happy to give a reply to your question.

The current approach will allow internal combustion engine vehicles and conventional hybrids to still be sold, albeit it's expected they'll be sold in lesser amounts, but they will be available for purchase.

Oftentimes, we see a fixation in some communities about the assumption that only battery electric vehicles will be the future. That is not the case. The regulation will allow for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, for example, to be used. These are dual-engine vehicles that would allow rural Canadians to use their gas engine when they need to, for long distances.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

In the case of my constituents in rural Canada, we're concerned about the price of combustion vehicles, where the price of the combustion vehicles is pushed so high that my constituents have no choice but to buy a second-hand combustion vehicle. We still have that market.

The range anxiety is real. To visit one of my communities, I have to drive 1,000 kilometres into the Yukon and then drive back down into the community. I've heard of people who, for some reason, have had their battery give out. In the wintertime, in the north, with -30° and -40° weather on an isolated highway, this becomes a safety risk. It is not just the affordability.

How can I go back and tell my constituents that they'll be okay in terms of affordability, availability and safety, when we're talking about this new vehicle policy coming out of the federal government?

[Mark Cauchi]

I think it's pretty clear right now that ICE vehicles are roughly 70% of sales in Canada today. We see increasing numbers of conventional hybrid vehicles. I think 17% is the latest number. There is a very high uptake of conventional hybrids. We also see plug-in hybrids. Those vehicles will be in place.

To speculate what the vehicle market will look like in 2045 when we know the rest of the world is moving to EVs, we'll probably see a lot more EVs that will be long-range—

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Well, 2045 is way beyond.... My issue is affordability, safety and availability. That was my question.

Madam Chair, I'd like to turn my remaining time over to my colleague.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Thank you.

I'd like to pick up where he left off, because the dynamics of my riding in Newfoundland and Labrador are extremely similar to what he's describing, but more with respect to the charging infrastructure.

You talked about 50 to 60 kilometres as being the average that a rural resident would drive, but that's way below what we see my constituents driving in the northern parts of my riding.

How does this policy address the people who travel outside of those average distances, in terms of charging infrastructure?

[Anna van der Kamp]

I thought I said 60 to 70 kilometres, but in your riding that may be low.

It's a combination of the ranges getting better all the time and the fact that public charging is getting better on these long distances. In your area of the woods, right now you can go from Corner Brook to St. John's with fairly good service across. You can even get up to Gros Morne, but after that, it's getting tricky.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

That's exactly the area of my riding that I consistently go back to. That's where I get a lot of feedback.

To pick up on something else, there's a lot of talk around plug-in hybrids as the great option for people who are living in rural and remote areas. Why then did you only offer a $2,500 rebate for plug-in hybrids, as opposed to the $5,000 that is offered for EVs?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Make it a quick answer, please.