Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, committee members, for the opportunity to speak to you today.
The Government of Canada once described its 2030 emissions reduction plan as presenting “an ambitious and achievable roadmap”. It was half right. The plan was ambitious, but it will not be achieved. It is hampering the Canadian economy just the same.
The previous Liberal government made achieving climate targets the centrepiece of its policy agenda. The economy and national security took a back seat. That policy preference has had far-reaching implications, and Canada has gotten poorer and weaker.
The government has now committed to meeting higher NATO spending targets, becoming an energy superpower and becoming the fastest-growing economy in the G7. None of these goals are compatible with the 2030 emissions reduction plan.
In polling from Abacus this past weekend, when asked what the top issues facing Canada are, climate change and the environment had fallen to ninth. The cost of living, the economy, housing affordability and unemployment preoccupy Canadians' thoughts.
I still want to believe a clean environment and strong economy can go hand in hand, but I'm certain a strong economy and the emissions reduction plan cannot. Rather, the emissions reduction plan has unleashed what I call the four horsemen of the Canadian economy.
First, the clean electricity regulations have driven up electricity costs to record levels. They have also made it harder to build adequate power generation in Canada at a time when AI demand is skyrocketing. Not only are we missing out on a generational outlay of private capital in the hundreds of billions of dollars, but we are rendering ourselves more and more dependent on the United States for what is clearly a strategic capability.
Second, the EV mandate is pushing against the tide of consumer preference and is totally detached from market realities. Even before the auto industry faced uncertainty and disruption from American tariffs, the EV mandate was adding pressure and costs and impeding its competitiveness. Now, with the tariffs in place, the mandate is an existential threat.
Third, the emissions cap, while still in draft form, has added tremendous uncertainty to the Canadian oil and gas sector and impeded the attraction of capital. Industry has repeatedly said that it cannot meet the cap without shutting in production. Our LNG and oil will not be globally competitive with the cap in place, and capital will flow to places with lower environmental and ethical standards.
Finally, while the government suspended the consumer carbon tax in the spring due to its unpopularity, there seems to be an idea that the industrial carbon tax will pick up the slack in Canada's emissions targets. The carbon market works only if heavy emitters are willing to purchase credits. The higher the industrial carbon price goes, the less viable Canadian operations are. At some point, that capital simply leaves for carbon-agnostic jurisdictions. At a certain price, the industrial carbon tax will mostly be effective at pushing heavy industry to places with lower environmental and ethical standards. Global emissions will not be affected.
I believe that GHG emissions drive climate change, and I think it is in our interest to come up with strategies to address it. I don't think it's enough to just point out where the current plan has failed. We should all seek to offer alternative policies in good faith, but those policies must aim to make Canada's energy-intensive and heavy-emitting sectors better, not smaller. It is woefully obvious that the 2030 emissions reduction plan has had a devastating impact on the Canadian economy.
In general, climate policies adopted by western nations since the Paris Agreement have shifted industrial production to less environmentally friendly jurisdictions, made our economies less competitive and made our industrial supply chains dependent on our adversaries. As a consequence, we are seeing retreats from climate ideology across Europe and the United States.
Canada must not be left behind. Economic decline will not lead us to the innovation, investments and infrastructure needed for a better future.
To finish, I would like to quote Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel, who remarked in a speech last week that we are in this situation due to “a decade where political vanity ran roughshod over economic utility.”
Canadians want, more than anything else, a strong economy and a sense of hope for their future. The emissions reduction plan stands in the way. Please don't allow political vanity to prevent us from finding a way to build and grow again.
Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to questions.