Evidence of meeting #116 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
But this doesn't include sports infrastructures. So you can't use them for that purpose.
11:50 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Mayor of Mascouche, Union des municipalités du Québec
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Okay. Now I understand. Thank you.
Mr. Viau, what you said about the impact of climate change on rising insurance premiums was very interesting.
For cars, you were saying that the manufacturers had decided to raise prices. You said that the average price of a car had gone from $34,000 to $60,000. Is that right?
11:50 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
From 2019 to 2023 the average cost of a new vehicle in Quebec increased from $34,000 to $64,000. That's a market reality.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
What I've been hearing on the ground, and even from the media, is that the pandemic is partly to blame. During the pandemic, there were vehicle shortages. Manufacturers raised prices and realized that people were willing to pay. Once everything got going again after the pandemic, they decided to restrict the availability of vehicles because they could then increase prices. That contributed to inflation, but it has nothing to do with the carbon tax.
11:50 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
No, not really. That's what I said in my presentation. These decisions were made by the auto industry. One of the factors you raised is, I think, part of the explanation. And the size of vehicles is another aspect. The vehicles being sold are bigger, more expensive to produce, and equipped with more technological gadgets. All of which also makes them more expensive. It's no longer a matter of selling a means of transportation, but rather gadgets and size.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Mr. Viau, do you believe there is a difference between a system of carbon offsets and a system that puts a price on pollution?
11:50 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
Yes, there are differences in how they are applied. The basic principle is to put a price on carbon and pollution as a way of sending a signal to the market that the desired direction is towards something other than hydrocarbons, meaning renewable resources. In both instances, it's a market mechanism.
That said, there are significant differences between carbon offsets and a carbon tax…
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Yes, but I'd like to stop you there.
At some point, the provinces are going to have to decide between the two. Can you tell us why Ontario, for example, withdrew from carbon offsets and decided to put a tax on pollution? Was it for technological or political reasons?
11:55 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
I'm going to reiterate the views of my colleagues at the Union des municipalités du Québec, who said they were in a good position to understand what they ought to do. I think the provinces are well placed to understand what they should do, and to choose the mechanism they prefer.
When all is said and done, I would argue that these choices are more political than technical. Nevertheless, the federal government is also accountable. This was established by the Supreme Court. The federal government is responsible for ensuring that Canadians have a degree of protection. It must protect vulnerable communities. If therefore has to strike a balance somehow. The federal government establishes a floor and the provinces choose the means of achieving their ambitions. Quebec made a choice and Ontario chose to withdraw. There has to be a floor, but we agree with the idea that ultimately, the provinces must choose the system they wish to adopt.
Ideally, each province establishes its own system.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Thank you, Mr. Viau.
Thanks also to Ms. Shanahan and Mr. Scarpaleggia.
I'm just looking at the time. As we did in our first panel, we are going to provide up to two minutes for each party to ask their final questions of this second panel.
We're starting with MP Lawrence.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Thank you very much.
As the chair knows, I make it a practice of getting out of my echo chamber, as they say, to ask a question of a panellist who perhaps traditionally wouldn't get questions from a Conservative.
Mr. Viau, this is a question for you.
I'm going to give you a bit of personal information about me. Before I got on my flight, I was feverishly working to repair my washing machine, and I did it because—I'll be honest with you—I'm cheap. I replaced the drainage pump on it.
I'm a bit skeptical of a government organization, because with the government comes costs and there are inspectors and stuff like that. Would you be open to the idea of an industry-led repair index?
11:55 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
Well done, and I hope your washing machine is working properly again.
That would be ideal. That's how they do it in France, with industry handling it.
We are suggesting that the federal government should set it in motion, and rapidly at that. It could establish a fund and give it a boost, just as it did for electric vehicles, but then we think it should withdraw afterwards, allowing the market to administer the system and to manage the repair fund.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Thank you, MP Lawrence. It's good to know that you have those repair abilities.
Now we are going to MP Shanahan, please.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for Mr. Simard.
I was truly impressed by your approach and your enthusiasm for everything currently happening in your industry.
Earlier on, we discussed the difference between carbon offsets and a carbon pollution tax. In your industry, was there really a difference between the two systems? Did it limit profitability and expansion?
11:55 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Aluminium Association of Canada
The fact is that 90% of Canadian production is in Quebec, where there are carbon offsets, and 10% of production is in British Columbia, where there is a carbon tax. So both systems are in use.
The important thing for us is predictability, which is the word that has been used from the outset. The dynamics of carbon in economies around the world will become increasingly important. Investments will be required to maintain our activities and play a larger role in a market that is growing in the United States. The only way to accomplish this is to have predictability. And it's always billions of dollars we're talking about, because it's a huge and highly complex industry.
It's absolutely essential for us to understand where the carbon market will be in the coming years, because it is structured.
Noon
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
That's interesting.
Could the other provinces have decided to work with carbon offsets?
Noon
President and Chief Executive Officer, Aluminium Association of Canada
Yes, but that choice has to be made on sociopolitical and economic grounds, along with everything else involved from the decision-making standpoint.
It's essential for us to remove any political uncertainty and have a predictable carbon pricing structure. We won't be able to progress otherwise.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Thank you, Mr. Simard and Ms. Shanahan.
Now we'll go to MP Desbiens. You will be the final questioner for our session here today.
Noon
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to ask the Union des municipalités du Québec representative a more general question. Shoreline erosion was discussed earlier. I'd like to point out that in my region, more specifically at Cap‑à‑l'Aigle, problems have arisen in connection with a communications tower. The municipality is caught between pressure from residents on the one hand and the federal government's slow response on the other. That's also the case for fisheries. Fishers are seriously worried because they keep waiting for measures and funds that are just not coming.
Generally speaking, how do you see this playing out? Can the federal role be improved—I'm talking about the federal government because Quebec is, for the time being, not yet a country—in your various spheres of activity?
Noon
Senior Vice-President, Mayor of Mascouche, Union des municipalités du Québec
My view is that we have to stop looking for across-the-board solutions and spend more time collaborating.
As for the Union des municipalités du Québec, which I am representing, I think we have to keep abreast of what's happening. We're talking about predictability today, and I would agree that we do indeed need more if we are to structure our organizations appropriately.
People wanted an airport in our region, but there was a problem in dealing with an archaic federal statute. I believe we need to review how things are done, as was the case for telecommunications towers. Things like that can no longer be imposed in 2023. That era is over. What's really needed is working together with the community and the people who live there.
November 13th, 2023 / noon
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
That covers a lot of ground.
I'm going to return to the housing issue. I believe we need integrated planning, with contributions from the three levels of government. Discussions are needed, but without the politicization and polarization that so often make decisions impossible. On the housing issue, everyone wants to speed things up, but there may be questions about whether there are wetlands or water in areas where construction is being planned, or whether densification might be better located elsewhere. Questions like these all need to be dealt with. And the municipalities and provinces are most knowledgeable about issues like these.
Mutual respect is essential.
Noon
President and Chief Executive Officer, Aluminium Association of Canada
Timelines need to be as short as possible, without of course ignoring important consultations and scientific data. Predictability is a key factor, like location in the real estate sector.
As for harmonization among the various levels of government, what's most important is reaching decisions so that work can begin. If one particular level of government is in the best position to get something done, it should be allowed to do so.
Lastly, it's essential to have predictable and useful regulation that takes the desired end into consideration. The regulatory framework has to be predictable.