You're very helpful.
Evidence of meeting #119 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was alberta.
Evidence of meeting #119 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was alberta.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Breton, what needs are there when it comes to electric vehicle charging stations?
11:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Electric Mobility Canada
A report on ZEVIP, the Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Program, was released last week. It says in the report that Canada will achieve its targets for 2026 in relation to charging and refuelling stations for electric and hydrogen-powered vehicles and in relation to fast chargers and level 2 chargers. Beyond that, we have to make sure that funding continues.
For those who are not aware, this year is the 110th anniversary of subsidies by the United States to its oil companies. This means that those companies have received a lot of money, for decades, to install oil and gas infrastructure in North America. The United States therefore has a 110‑year head start when it comes to electrification of transportation.
We think the program has to continue because it allows for predictability in terms of the market and ensures that there are facilities for everyone. One of the gaps mentioned in the report by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada dealt with the supply of charging and hydrogen refuelling stations in rural and remote regions, including in the Canadian prairies. Once you get off the highway or outside the big cities, charging stations are a definite challenge. In Quebec, the challenge is different, because the Hydro-Québec electrical network brought about an incredible change when it comes to the supply of charging stations.
We published a survey a few weeks ago that revealed that in Quebec, 97% of people who own an electric vehicle want to purchase another one. In Ontario, where there are fewer and lower quality facilities, it is 83%. That means there is a 14 percentage point difference between Ontario and Quebec, when those provinces are located side by side.
Charging stations are doing to be extremely important. The program has to continue, but it needs to be improved. For now, funding is being granted for charging stations, but some networks are not reliable. There are very high performing charging networks, like the electrical and other networks, but there are others that are not reliable. What we are proposing is to attach infrastructure reliability parameters to the funding.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Right.
You suggest that a green scrappage program be put in place. What is that, exactly?
11:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Electric Mobility Canada
In fact, we are suggesting that after a certain number of years, more precisely when a vehicle is to be scrapped, people could be given an incentive to buy a green vehicle, an electric vehicle, or to buy a public transit pass or an electric bike. Electric cars are not the only solution; they are one solution among others.
I will be frank: for people who live in urban areas, having one or two cars is more of a hassle than an advantage. Personally, I live in the country, so it is impossible for me to take a train, a streetcar or a bus, because those modes of transportation do not exist in my region. So we have to adapt to the various regions of Quebec and Canada. Urban reality, suburban reality and reality away from cities and towns are three very different realities.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Bruce, one of the things we've heard around this table often—we heard it about electric vehicles and we heard it about the aerospace industry just today—is how important it is to have an industrial strategy in order to be able to attract investment and to give investors confidence that, over time, the investment environment in Canada is going to be relatively stable.
We heard a little bit about how electric car rebates, in the absence of a regulatory framework, may be nice, but it doesn't really allow for the kind of movement we need to see in order to have success. I wonder if the ITCs are a little bit like an electric car rebate in the absence of an industrial strategy for the development of hydrogen. What do you think the industry needs in terms of a policy framework in order to establish Canada as a leader in hydrogen?
11:50 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Edmonton Global
I'll back up the bus, first, as I do want to just echo some of Daniel's earlier comments around the supply chain as an important part of it. The industrial strategy is something that's going to enable all those things to happen.
Canada has a hydrogen strategy. It was produced almost three years ago. Alberta has a road map on hydrogen. There's lots of policy out there that says this is where we want to go. In Canada's strategy, we want to be a top three provider of hydrogen to the globe. The challenge is that the subsequent work to deliver on that is where the problem sets are. What are the enabling frameworks that need to occur?
For example, we have no bulk liquid facilities on the west coast. They're all full. That means we can't move ammonia or hydrogen to Japan, Korea, California, China or Taiwan, who all want our products. When I said that these projects are what we hope to complete, that's because we have a policy framework that says we want to do this, but our actions to try to deliver on the infrastructure to be able to move that product to market are not being enabled.
A classic example is the length of time it takes to get to regulatory approval. There's one bulk liquid facility on the coast that we're trying to build now. It took three extra years to get the regulatory approval. It's now costing an extra $300 million to build. Then you layer on no new incentives for fossil fuels. In the old school, it would have been approved. There was the national corridor fund. We would have gotten that first part built and the rest built, but today we can't because of no new fossil fuels. The company starts with one set of rules, and halfway through the game it changes.
All I'm saying is that we need to get certainty back into our international investors. They do not have it right now, because they can't seem to get that certainty in a project. We need industrial policy and execution that provide certainty across the value chain.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
What do you think is that next step in execution? What does the federal government have to do in order to be able to execute the goals they've set out in the strategy? What are the missing technical pieces? What are the things that are in the way?
11:50 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Edmonton Global
First, when a company commits to a process—as you know, these things take five, 10 or 15 years to do—the challenge is that if the process changes halfway through, it means the business case has to be reshaped. I would strongly recommend that you grandfather projects that have started under the system they have. Investors will then know that system.
Second, make sure that the incentive programs enabling it, such as the strategic innovation fund, the Canada growth fund and all of these funds, have clear criteria so that companies understand what the strategic investment fund will do for them. Air Products, for example, got $300 million out of the strategic investment fund, plus $161 million out of the Alberta equivalent. That gave them $461 million out of a $1.6-billion deal. That's what incentivized them to come and build here.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Thank you, Chair.
My first few questions will be for Mr. Bewick once again.
In keeping with the theme of the carbon tax, we saw that the carbon tax was sold under the pretense that it would somehow fix the environment and put more back into Canadians' pockets than what they would have to pay into it with these phony rebates. We know that both those things are not true now. The public budgeting officer, the Liberals' own budget watchdog, said that many Canadians, and more Canadians, will have to pay more into it than what they get back.
We've seen that the Liberals have missed every single climate target they set for themselves. We've seen a massive flip-flop on the carbon tax. Just recently the courts have ruled that parts of Bill C-69, the anti-pipeline bill, were unconstitutional. It was a big win for Alberta and a big win for the energy sector.
What does it say to you about these policies?
11:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Fairness Alberta
I think there needs to be a little more recognition that precisely those approval processes that take so long and add so much red tape are exactly what are being expected from the energy sector, both the electricity and the oil and gas sector. The only way you can cut your emissions that much is with massive new investments in technology and infrastructure. If the federal government doesn't have a regulatory process in place to meet the goals they're demanding, then something needs to give.
If a reduction in carbon emissions is the biggest priority, the number one thing Canada can do is get more LNG to the Pacific to replace Chinese coal. Canada has 1.5% of the global emissions. Nothing we do will make any difference compared with what we could do by getting China a steady supply of LNG so that they aren't building coal plants. Last I checked, they were planning to build 150 megatonnes of new coal. The entire oil sands is half that. If we can cut coal in half by replacing it with LNG, we've replaced the entire oil sands with something that actually brings money into Canada instead of dumping a bunch of money into things like battery plants.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Recently when Japan and Germany came here looking for our LNG, the Prime Minister said there was no business case. There were, I believe, 18 LNG projects on his desk, and not one has been completed.
You're right. It seems as though there are more dollars going to dictators because of the regulatory burden, the red tape and these anti-energy bills that this government has put up.
What does it say, what does it signal, when this Liberal government has not been able to meet its own emissions targets but is putting a stranglehold on provinces to make them meet what it wants them to?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Fairness Alberta
As I said, the environment commissioner has been very clear that the government isn't meeting its targets, yet it's not willing to budge one inch when it comes to what it's demanding of the Prairies. That's the sign of a double standard.
When you look at the top 15 global producers of oil and gas, the only two that are democracies, other than Canada, are Brazil and the U.S., when it comes to oil, and Brazil and Australia, when it comes to natural gas. The other 12 are dictatorships.
If Canada isn't producing these products that the world is hungry for, then dictators are going to be licking their chops and warming their hands at the thought of that.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
What needs to be done right now in order for us to be a world leader once again?
November 16th, 2023 / 11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Fairness Alberta
We can be a leader in carbon emissions reductions, but we have to be sensible about it and look around at what the competitors are doing and be the best in class, not drive off an economic cliff instead of leading a parade.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Is that the direction we're going right now?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Fairness Alberta
Yes. Right now we are forcing our products to stay in the ground and burying our heads in the sand instead of being global players.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Fair enough.
Going back to Bill C-234, I didn't get a chance to properly ask you about this, but how important is this bill? I know that all opposition parties are in agreement with this and with getting it passed immediately. How big an impact would this bill make?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Fairness Alberta
Is this the one for farm production?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Fairness Alberta
Fertilizer was put on the table as something the federal government wanted to go after and severely restrict.
Again, we have an affordability crisis facing many Canadians. We also have a productivity crisis in Canada. The idea that you can keep subsidizing jobs until the end of the world will just drive us into national bankruptcy. We need things that actually produce dollars and that can produce products that we can sell to the world. It should never be underestimated how important oil and gas and the agriculture industry are to Canada's ability to maintain its fiscal books and finances. Targeting these industries for these kinds of programs—because people in big cities don't care about them or don't think doing that is going to hurt them—is naive thinking and will further drive up the affordability crisis.
