Environment Committee on Oct. 20th, 2025

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

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Wallace, you've emphasized the need for realistic, evidence-based energy policy. I'm curious about your thoughts about this. If there's no credible path to achieving the proposed Liberal emissions cap without major economic disruption, shouldn't that policy be withdrawn or fundamentally rethought?

[Ron Wallace]

Thank you, Member Anstey, I appreciate that.

I would say that Canada needs to carefully reconsider climate policies because it's encountering a sea change in dealing with policies, not just in the United States but in Europe itself. Britain and Germany have been very committed to these types of climate policies, and their results are very significant negative economic impacts to their economies. The recent change in the endangerment finding in the United States—to repeal it—is going to have a significant effect on climate and economic policies around the world. As Dr. McKitrick said, we need to understand the cost of some of these programs that have been put forward. Those costs are not being presented, in my view, to the Canadian public.

There's another comment that I would have too. It is that, at the end of the day, we have to recognize that private sector interests will ultimately determine any new investments in Canadian energy systems. I refer you to comments from CEO Greg Ebel of Enbridge. He said, “For us to be willing to seriously consider reinvesting in [projects in Canada], whether it's east to west or just west, we need to see real changes on numerous fronts”. A lot of coordinated federal and pan-provincial legislative and regulatory action will be required before we think investors, management teams or customers would be willing to green-light such major investments.

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

I have another question.

If our largest trading partner is ramping up production and prioritizing energy affordability, does it serve Canada's national interest to impose an emissions cap that chokes off growth and undermines our competitiveness?

[Ron Wallace]

I think there's a very straightforward answer to that. Let me just talk about LNG exports. Canada has finally entered the international game, and we have also now entered the international oil export game in the Pacific with the Trans Mountain pipeline. All of the previous predictions for the export of that oil were wrong. There's much more of that oil than was predicted going to Asia. It's up to 50% now, which is more than what was originally projected. Of course, we're very far behind the United States in our LNG system. The Americans have redoubled their investments in LNG, and that has now become a major export to the European Union.

Without answering your question with a yes or a no, I would say that, given the realities of the economics of what is happening with regard to the existing export of LNG and oil and gas, I think the answer is being given by the international marketplace.

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

I'm going to cede the rest of my time to my colleague Mr. Leslie.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Ms. Anstey.

Mr. Chair, I would like to move the motion that was circulated on Friday with regard to the global carbon tax that Canada has quietly supported, despite claiming it doesn't.

For those of us who weren't here last year, the former minister of the environment Steven Guilbeault appeared at this committee last year. I asked him about being “very supportive”, as per a news article, regarding the global carbon tax. He went on to say that the Liberal government would not support a new carbon tax on international shipping, and he followed up with a tweet saying that it “has not supported any such...levy”.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Can I ask that we suspend to discuss this matter, please?

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

We will suspend.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

I gather that this will take a little while, so I will excuse the witnesses.

Thank you very much for being here today. You're excused.

Mr. Leslie, the floor is yours.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As I was saying, I would like to move the motion that was circulated last week regarding the global carbon tax that Canada has quietly supported despite claiming that they do not.

For those who weren't here last year, as then minister of environment, Steven Guilbeault appeared at this very committee and I asked him about a quote that was in the media immediately prior to the meeting, where he was quoted as saying he was “very supportive” of the global carbon levy. He went on to claim that it was simply not true and dispute that he had said anything of such nature. He went on to tweet further that they were not supporting “any such international levy.” Then lo and behold, we found out that this was simply not true. In April, while he was still the minister of environment, the Liberal government went on to support and vote in favour of the regulations at a session of the International Maritime Organization on April 11 of this year.

Just this past week, the UN's International Maritime Organization met again to consider the adoption of the IMO net-zero framework. Make no mistake, this will lead to a massive carbon tax on international shipping that will raise absolutely the price of every good that we bring into and that leaves this country.

Not only did Minister Guilbeault tell this committee something that was simply not true at the time, but at no point has the Liberal government ever said anything about hoisting this new carbon tax on Canadians. As such, I would move this motion. I will not read it in its entirety into the record, but it involves inviting Minister Guilbeault, as well as the current transportation minister, the Honourable Steven MacKinnon, to appear to provide clarity on the government's actual position regarding the global tax on shipping.

I will pause there, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you, Mr. Leslie.

Is there any debate?

Ms. Miedema.

[Shannon Miedema, Liberal, Halifax, NS]

I'm wondering if the committee would find it useful if we were to ask for a study. Instead of asking for a couple of presentations, maybe we alternatively say that given the International Maritime Organization is hosting an extraordinary session from October 14 to 17, 2025, the committee undertake a study relating to maritime sector decarbonization, which would give more of a fulsome analysis on this particular issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Monsieur Bonin.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I agree that it is a very interesting and important topic, but I think it's premature to start talking studies. In my view, discussing the matter would help us figure out whether we actually needed to dig deeper. Above all, we would be able to get clarity on where the government stands. The decision to carry out a study should come later.

I'd like to propose a few amendments to Mr. Leslie's motion, amendments I think we could get consensus on, which would make things easier for the purposes of our discussion. I sent them to the clerk, but I don't know whether I'm allowed to propose them now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

You may go ahead.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Basically, I would remove the first part, from “Given that” to “on shipping”. It would be replaced by this: “Given that the Honorable Steven Guilbeault, M.P., then Minister of Environment and Climate Change, allegedly made statements that could be considered contradictory regarding the government's position on the implementation of a global carbon tax on maritime transport”.

The motion would go on to say that the committee invite the Honourable Julie Dabrusin, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, to appear for one hour, and invite the Hon. Steven McKinnon, Minister of Transport and Government House Leader, to appear for one hour to provide clarity on the government’s position, etc.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

You're getting into a second amendment. You have to propose one at a time.

We are discussing the first amendment.

Do you have a comment on the first amendment?

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Go ahead.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I don't know if we need a study until we get some clarity from the government. I think that's something we can look into at some point in the future.

In the meantime, I'd be willing to accept a friendly amendment to alter the motion to bring in the current minister, despite the claims of the previous minister. I think it's relevant to have the current minister here as well.

I will be supporting both of the amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you, Mr. Leslie.

Go ahead, Mr. St‑Pierre.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I'd like a copy of the amendment, because it seems to have changed. I would like my fellow member to provide a copy of his amendment, so that I can review it and make a decision.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Mr. Bonin, can you provide the amendment in writing?

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yes.

I just want to clarify something for Mr. St‑Pierre. I believe his colleagues got copies, but he may not have gotten one. I sent it a few minutes ago.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Honourable members, the clerk is telling me that he is sending it out by email, so please check your inboxes.

We will suspend briefly while we wait for the email to come in.