Government Operations Committee on March 27th, 2024

[Scott Moe]

No. We have many companies here that not only trade and are traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange—we have commodities in Chicago—but also trade and are traded globally. Many countries that are investing in Saskatchewan are on global stock exchanges as well. That is a way for them to access capital, and we all know precisely what stock exchanges do.

When it comes to the heavy-emitter carbon space, we have a provincial plan in place for that. In fact, in many ways, we worked with Alberta and led the nation alongside Alberta on the formation of a technology fund. We're working with our industries on what's achievable and when it's achievable, and ensuring that they are making the adequate investments to achieve lower emissions over time and that we are not putting forward unachievable targets.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Premier.

I have one last question for you.

You don't want a carbon market. You don't want a carbon tax. You're investing in technological advancements.

What solutions do you have for Saskatchewan to meet overall greenhouse gas reduction targets?

[Scott Moe]

Significant—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I apologize. We're past our time. If you're able to give one, I'll ask you to offer up a brief response.

[Scott Moe]

There are significant solutions in the nuclear space when it comes to our electricity grid, significant solutions in trading through commerce, innovation in our agriculture industry—which I said is the most sustainable in the world; the same goes for oil and potash—and opportunities through internationally traded mitigation outcomes to capitalize on trading carbon credits back and forth globally through that system.

We have the provincial tech fund. We have a fund set up that our industries can access to invest in reducing their carbon footprint. I would say they are doing so anyway on their own. We continue to set targets with them through the output-based emitter program that we have here, which was put forward provincially, and they're doing a very good job when we compare them to their global competitors.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Boulerice, please, for two and a half minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Premier, the arguments you're presenting are ones we've heard a lot. By that logic, when polluters make an effort to reduce pollution by unit of production, Canada stacks up well in relation to Russia, Venezuela and other such countries.

For the most part, that's a sham. Let's say you reduce pollution per unit of production by 15%, but you increase production by more than 15%, you just increased overall emissions, emissions that cause climate change and forest fires, emissions that threaten your communities. Reducing pollution density by unit of production does nothing when you increase production.

It's pretty clear from your comments that you no longer want citizens and consumers to bear the burden of the carbon tax, but what is your plan for carbon pricing when it comes to industry?

[Scott Moe]

We have that solution in place with our output-based, heavy-emitter fund. They pay into a tech fund and then they're able to access those dollars for investments in innovation. Like I said, they're going far above accessing just that fund for investments and innovation. They're making their own.

I haven't put forward any arguments. I've put forward facts. When it comes to buying something globally, you'll have an ingredients list on the side of the box and you'll have a price tag on it. I would say to put a carbon content piece on that box as well.

When you are purchasing oil that might be made in Saskatchewan from your fuel pump, you should know that, since 2015, we've reduced the emissions by 65%. That's very real. If the rest of the world did that, global emissions would be down 25% overnight. If you're producing a granola bar, a wheat product or a canola oil product, there's 64% less carbon in a Saskatchewan-produced product versus somewhere else in the world. By buying that product, you are making the environmentally sustainable decision of buying a lower-carbon product.

The same is true when you buy potash fertilizer made in Saskatchewan. I would not only say that it is very arguably more ethical than other places in the world, but that it's half the carbon content per tonne. You are doing right by providing that fertilizer for your farmers. You are doing right because it's cost competitive and it's a high-grade quality, but it's the most sustainable product that you can buy in the world.

If you truly care about the environment, you should buy your products from Saskatchewan. I would say, equally, you should buy them from Canada as well, because we are doing the right thing. Whether it be in industries, whether it be in families or whether it be in communities, we are making every effort to reduce our footprint, and we're doing it and can do it without a federally imposed carbon tax.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Premier Moe.

We'll go to Mr. Barlow and then Ms. Atwin to finish.

Mr. Barlow.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Premier, for being here.

First, I want to say congratulations on the economic output of your agriculture sector in Saskatchewan. I see it exceeded $2 billion in exports again last year.

The numbers are quite staggering, as you mentioned, in terms of the production from Saskatchewan and the impact it has not only on the Saskatchewan economy but on Canada's. Saskatchewan exported 91% of Canada's chickpeas, 88% of Canada's lentils, 80% of Canada's durum wheat and 67% of Canada's dry peas. More than 50% of Canadian production of canola, barley, oats and canola oil comes from Saskatchewan.

When you see that kind of output, what impact does Saskatchewan's agriculture sector have, not only on Saskatchewan's economy but on Canada's economy?

[Scott Moe]

You said $2 billion in exports. It's $20 billion in ag exports, and $50 billion in total exports from Saskatchewan, to answer Mr. Boulerice's question earlier. That makes us the highest per capita exporter in the nation, and we are exporting the most sustainable products you can find on earth.

The carbon tax has an impact on each of these industries. It's a very real impact. I'd say there's an impact on the families and people who work in these very industries as well, as we've discussed over the last period of time.

However, I would say there's a larger problem looming when it comes to the investment attraction. Our goal is to continue to expand these industries to produce more of the sustainable goods that we produce and make them available to the world. We need to attract investment to do that.

When you look, for example, at primary agriculture production, you listed what we produce here, and it's the spinal cord of the Saskatchewan economy. Every community in this province is dependent on it in some way, directly or indirectly. When you look at the fertilizer cap that was being bandied about a while ago, that would reduce our production in this province by 20% to 30%.

Why would we reduce production in a world that needs food security and is looking for food security? Why would we reduce the production of the most sustainable food you can find on earth and not look for ways to enhance that production and make it more available to Canadians?

We could displace some of the other food that's produced in other areas or, better yet, take some of the innovation that we have in Saskatchewan and sell it through commerce, utilizing our international trade mitigation outputs to capture those carbon credits back to Canada, Saskatchewan and the agriculture industry so that we can reinvest in even more innovative opportunities. We'll make sure that not only are we doing better when it comes to reducing our carbon footprint in food production, but we're sharing that technology and that innovation with the world.

We're doing this in India right now, and our exports to India have been up in the last while. The second-last time I was in India, I stood on an air drill in a farmer's field just outside of Chandigarh that was built in built in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. They had sold a thousand of those air drills.

The latest technology in zero-till air drill technology that you can find on earth is now being transferred through commerce to India. That's a good thing for the environment, and it's a good thing for the sustainability of food production in India.

[John Barlow, Conservative, Foothills, AB]

Thanks, Premier.

I find this discussion we're having quite incredible when you talk about the environmental sustainability and successes that Saskatchewan farmers have put up, yet you continue to be punished with carbon taxes—and higher carbon taxes—rather than be applauded for some of the accomplishments and innovation in precision agriculture in Saskatchewan.

We know the numbers. Saskatchewan farmers paid $12 million last year in direct carbon taxes alone. When that carbon tax goes up 23% on Monday, Saskatchewan farmers will be paying $15 million in direct carbon taxes to heat and cool their barns and dry their grain. That doesn't include the carbon tax they'll be paying on transportation, which will be another $36 million just on the carbon tax from transporting commodities through rail.

Premier, what is the economic impact on the sustainability of your farm families in Saskatchewan if they continue to absorb these higher carbon taxes?

[Scott Moe]

Well, it will come home to roost in years when margins are thin. We had certain areas of the province, as was noted earlier, that did experience drought, not just this year but last year, and we had some areas of the province that had record production.

I would just say that the successes we're having are.... We feel somewhat unrecognized, and I would say that the industry feels a bit unrecognized. We would ask all federal MPs or federal government members on all sides to recognize not only what we're doing in Saskatchewan agriculture and Saskatchewan industries but to also recognize what Canadians collaboratively are doing in the various industries across the board.

This cost is not helping. It isn't driving innovation. It most certainly isn't driving the investment in environment that is needed to ultimately drive the innovation that is going to make our industries more productive. In fact, the Bank of Canada said just this past week that we actually have a productivity crisis.

I would say that we need to have another look, a very high-level look, at how we are going to create that investment in environment, because with that investment comes innovation, and with that innovation come industries, with Canadians working in them all across this nation, whether it's manufacturing in Ontario or Quebec or natural resource production in the prairie provinces and into British Columbia as well, or all of the good things that happen in Atlantic Canada.

We need to attract that investment, drive that innovation and then look at how we can share that innovation with the world through commerce, yes, and that is ultimately the recipe for success for the manufacturing industry in Ontario and Quebec. They are selling their cars and vehicles not only to Canadians but to other people around the world, and some of them have the latest technology available.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Premier Moe.

Ms. Atwin, you have five minutes.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Premier Moe, for being with us today.

I'm going to begin by quoting the Supreme Court of Canada in their ruling around carbon pricing, when they said that climate change “is a threat of the highest order to the country, and indeed to the world.” They said, “The undisputed existence of a threat to the future of humanity cannot be ignored...” and that “a provincial failure to act directly threatens Canada as a whole.”

Premier, you mentioned that you do believe we need to lower our carbon emissions. Is that correct?

[Scott Moe]

Yes, that is correct.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

You took part in the COP discussions. Do you support the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?

[Scott Moe]

We supported the work that was done with respect to tripling the nuclear footprint, with Canada signing on to that agreement. We think that will go a long way in reducing global emissions. We did not support the 75% methane reduction announcement that came out of COP28 from our federal minister of the environment. Those were about the only two discussions we had alongside the federal government.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Is that why you sent a delegation of 60 members?

[Scott Moe]

No. What we did was go and tell the story that unfortunately Canada didn't, and that was exactly what we're doing and how we're producing the products in Saskatchewan. I mentioned potash. I mentioned the agricultural products—

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you.

I'm just going to focus it back on Canada. I'm sorry to interrupt you, sir.

[Scott Moe]

You asked—

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I'm looking nationally.

[Scott Moe]

This is why I went. We went to tell the Saskatchewan story. We have a office in the Emirates—

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I'm sorry, sir. Thank you. I need to—