Industry and Technology Committee on May 4th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Minister, I'm going to ask you to wrap it up in about 20 seconds.

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Ahuntsic-Cartierville, QC]

What we're doing with them is trying to attract more investments. We want the Germans to invest, we want the Koreans to invest and we want the Chinese to invest, but when they do so, the rules must be clear. They need to respect labour standards in Canada, they need to support our localized supply chains—basically, auto parts—and they need to buy them from here. Finally, they need to have secure software. That is what we're doing in the country.

Meanwhile, I'm working with the EU right now to align our industrial policies to create a common market to ultimately defend our auto workers together and to export more cars to the EU.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, that brings us to the end of the first hour.

Thank you very much to the assistant deputy minister and the minister for being here. I believe we're going to see you again at this committee in a couple of weeks' time to have a broader conversation about the estimates.

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Ahuntsic-Cartierville, QC]

It will be my great pleasure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Colleagues, I'm going to gavel us back in right at 4:45, which is in about six minutes, because we have four witnesses in the next panel. It's going to take us a bit of time.

The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

We're resuming our meeting.

This is the last discussion we're going to have in relation to the EV study that we have been engaged in for a few months now. There are four witnesses joining us today—three joining us virtually and one here in the room.

Witnesses, I typically allow a bit of latitude on introductory remarks, but I'm going to have to be a bit tighter on time today because our first panel ran a fair bit over. At five minutes, I'm not going to cut you off entirely, but I'm certainly going to tell you that we're close to that window.

Here in the room, we have someone joining us whom we've heard from on several occasions. Welcome back to you, Brian Kingston. He is the president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association.

Joining us virtually, from Dunsky Energy and Climate Advisors, we have Jeff Turner, who's the director of mobility; from Electro-Federation Canada, we have Cherith Sinasac, who's the director of government affairs; and from the Global Network for Strategic Effects, we have Michael Kovrig, who is the founder.

Welcome to all of you. Thank you for being here today.

Mr. Kovrig, I will start with you, sir. You'll have up to five minutes for your introductory remarks.

I'd like to confirm that the sound tests were completed successfully.

Go ahead, Mr. Kovrig.

[Michael Kovrig, Founder, Global Network for Strategic Effects]

Thank you for the opportunity to advise the committee.

Let's be clear: This is not the approach Canada wanted. The government was forced into it by American and Chinese trade barriers, and the challenge now is to make the best of a difficult situation regarding China's exports of electric vehicles to Canada.

In that context, I broadly support the government's defence, economic, industrial and trade-diversification strategies. The intentions behind the Prime Minister's January arrangement in Beijing appear legitimate, but importing PRC electric vehicles will at best complicate and at worst endanger those strategies.

My remarks today will focus on the implications of importing electric vehicles under a quota and will build on my testimonies to the Standing Committee on International Trade and the Standing Committee on Science and Research.

China's Communist Party has decided that manufacturing is the key to doubling economic output by 2035, deepening a second China shock that's already displacing industry in other countries. Its 15th five-year plan prioritizes building a modern industrial system, with new energy vehicles being a designated emerging industry. The PRC would rather upgrade overcapacity than eliminate it, but it also depends on exports to grow, which gives Canada leverage.

Further exposing Canada to China's distorted industrial gravity risks warping what remains of our advanced manufacturing. There is a trifecta of risks. First, structural dependence disrupts or co-opts key sectors such as automotive. Second, unfair competition erodes industrial capacity, technology and employment. Third, systemic pressure compels Canada's government to respond with major industrial and protectionist policies.

Batteries and electric vehicles are the thin end of the wedge. The 49,000 vehicles allowed in are less than 3% of the Canadian light vehicle market, that's true, but they're 40% of 2025 battery electric vehicle sales. State-supported Chinese electric vehicle companies sacrifice profit for market share, and squeeze suppliers with price cuts and delayed payments.

In Mexico, Chinese battery electric vehicles went from a quarter of the BEV market to nearly 90% in two years. Mexico ran the experiment, then reversed in January with a 50% tariff. Canada should not repeat that mistake. Once Chinese electric vehicles arrive, networks form around them: dealers, servicing, financing, software and data. What begins as a capped quota becomes a ratchet that only expands.

Concentrated sectoral economic dependence also constricts federal policy-making autonomy. The PRC weaponizes technology, supply chains and market access to coerce acquiescence to its geopolitical agenda. China's ambassador just demonstrated this when he pressed Canada to weaken the long-standing policy on Taiwan. Importing Chinese EVs means importing predatory monopolistic behaviour that our companies can't survive, labour conditions that our workers won't tolerate and infringements of sovereignty that our nation shouldn't accept.

Our submission to Global Affairs Canada's consultation on the import quota recommends making it temporary, non-automatic and reversible. The quota is a tool to safeguard economic security, not a scheme for cheaper cars. It should function as a ceiling to be maintained, not a target to be met, and expand only if it builds Canadian capacity and reduces Canadian vulnerability. Balance it with faster access for EVs from trusted partners.

We propose six essential measures to manage the quota.

First, publish a threshold and exit strategy before further allocation. Define acceptable exposure, what triggers suspension and what happens if promised investment fails.

Second, tighten eligibility. Before allocating quota share, screen for ownership, subsidies, forced labour, supply chain traceability, connected vehicle security and risk of circumvention.

Third, reward verified Canadian capability, not announcements, sales offices or arrangements like the Stellantis-Leapmotor proposal at Brampton, where Chinese kits would be assembled with little domestic content.

Fourth, have annual allocations in quarterly tranches, with no automatic increases. Count vehicles assembled from complete knock-down kits or in Chinese-controlled, third-country factories toward the quota.

Fifth, align with the United States on connected vehicle security.

Sixth, snap back. If Beijing renews coercion, the quota suspends automatically. That's risk management, not retaliation.

In conclusion, arguments touting short-term consumer and environmental benefits are understandable, but the benefits of Chinese EVs are negated by broader harm to Canadian industry, employment, values and independence. The real question is not “Don't we want cheaper EVs?” It's whether Canada wants to be a producer in the future auto economy or merely a consumer market for vehicles produced by China's industrial system. The decision window is now.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thanks very much, Mr. Kovrig.

Ms. Sinasac, we'll turn to you now for up to five minutes.

[Cherith Sinasac, Director, Government Affairs, Electro-Federation Canada]

Thank you.

My name is Cherith Sinasac. I'm the director of government affairs at Electro-Federation Canada. EFC is a not-for-profit industry association representing the full electrical supply chain.

Canada needs a strong, long-term EV charging infrastructure strategy that invests in public charging infrastructure and charging for multi-unit residential buildings. This strategy must also go beyond deployment and ensure that residential chargers, vehicles and electrical grids all work together seamlessly.

First, let's discuss the need for public charging. Programs like the zero emission vehicle infrastructure program have helped build early momentum for public charging infrastructure, but the momentum must continue. Capitalizing ZEVIP to sustain private investment is essential. At the same time, expanding the clean technology investment tax credit to include on-road EV charging would unlock faster deployment of public and fleet infrastructure.

Second, we need to ensure that EV readiness is included in our building codes. Installing EV infrastructure during construction is three to four times more cost-effective than retrofitting later. For those living in multi-unit residential buildings, this is the biggest barrier.

The cost of retrofitting is preventing access to home charging. The federal government needs to act on two fronts. It needs to develop a national strategy, supported by targeted incentives, to retrofit multi-unit residential buildings and needs to stop the problem from getting worse by ensuring that all multi-unit residentials are constructed to be EV-ready.

Third, a national strategy must go beyond residential deployment targets. It must have consistent technical specifications to ensure that chargers, vehicles and the grid are all working together. EVs are seen as a source of electricity consumption, but I want you to rethink EVs as being national battery storage infrastructure. EVs and their battery storage have the potential to be a national energy asset for our grid.

A recent report by CSA Group called “Charging Ahead: Unlocking Vehicle-Grid Integration in Canada” outlines the scope of this opportunity. With vehicle-to-building communications, EV batteries can power critical equipment in your home during a blackout, which could include medical equipment. EVs could reduce strain on the grid or dependency during high-cost times of use, saving Canadians money. With vehicle-to-grid integration, EVs could reduce demand on the grid during peak times, or return power to the grid or to your home, reducing system reliance on costly peaker plants. At scale, even small contributions from millions of batteries and vehicles can stabilize the grid to help prevent an outage. However, without alignment, chargers may not communicate with vehicles, vehicles may not integrate with buildings or the grid, and residential EVs and charging investments risk becoming fragmented and, frankly, underutilized.

Canada needs dedicated resources to convene industry, utilities, regulators and provincial stakeholders to develop and detail a technical framework, specifications and the regulatory constructs to make vehicle-to-grid work at scale. This group needs to identify code amendments in the national energy code and national building code. Canada currently lacks a nationally coordinated forum for this work. This work is urgent. From a manufacturer's perspective, we need certainty, we need direction and then we need time.

To conclude, Canada needs a strong, long-term EV charging infrastructure strategy that invests in public charging infrastructure and access to charging in multi-unit residential buildings. A national EV strategy must ensure that chargers, vehicles and the electrical grid are working together seamlessly to unlock an integrated energy future that all Canadians will benefit from.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much, Ms. Sinasac.

Mr. Turner, we'll turn to you for five minutes.

[Jeff Turner, Director, Mobility, Dunsky Energy and Climate Advisors]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Jeff Turner. I’m the director of mobility at Dunsky Energy and Climate Advisors. I’ll begin by providing a bit of background on my own professional experience, followed by an overview of the type of work that Dunsky does in the EV space and some specific findings from recent projects as they relate to federal EV policies.

My career has been focused on transportation electrification for almost 20 years. I have degrees in mechanical engineering from McGill University, where my research involved designing prototype hybrid and electric vehicles and modelling battery performance in cold climates. I’ve worked for two different hybrid and electric vehicle manufacturers, and I spent four years at BC Hydro’s Powertech Labs, where I focused on technologies that help integrate EVs into the grid and on deploying public charging infrastructure.

In 2017, I joined Dunsky, which is a Canadian firm with over 70 professionals who are focused on analysis and strategy development to support the energy transition. Since then, we’ve conducted projects with governments, utilities and corporations in all 10 provinces, helping them to understand and design policies to overcome barriers to the adoption of EVs, anticipate the pace of adoption and associated demand on the grid, and develop policies for effective deployment of charging infrastructure.

We’ve developed load forecasts for 15 Canadian electric utilities across eight provinces, as well as EV analysis and strategies for 22 Canadian cities, from Halifax to Victoria, Toronto and Calgary, and many in between. That's not to mention our work with provincial governments of all stripes, including B.C., Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, P.E.I. and Nova Scotia.

Through these projects, we've gained a deep understanding of how EVs work in these regions, what specific barriers are holding consumers back and how these barriers are evolving over time. This has given us the chance to continually refine our analysis and in particular our EV adoption forecasting model, which we first launched in 2018.

Last year, we had the opportunity to put this model to use in developing forecasts for EV adoption in each province and territory as part of the Powering Up project with Electric Mobility Canada. We forecasted EV adoption under a range of policy scenarios and quantified the associated electrical load growth in each region. This analysis found that EVs can bring significant benefits to Canadians, including almost $2,000 per year in fuel savings per household and reductions of GHG emissions and other emissions that have significant health impacts for Canadians.

The technology progress we’re seeing with EVs is global in nature, so our forecasts predict a significant trend toward EVs across all scenarios, but the right policy mix can bring these benefits to more Canadians sooner.

This February, the federal government announced a new automotive strategy that included tailpipe emissions standards, reduced tariffs on imported EVs and a temporary return of purchase rebates, with a clear plan for a gradual phase-out over the next five years. We've since had the chance to support our clients in updating our forecasts in response to these announcements. Our initial findings suggest that Canada’s EV market is about to see a significant rebound.

We’ve seen a lot of discussion and headlines over the past year fixated on the significant drop in EV sales in 2025. Our modelling saw this as a very predictable outcome of the pause in federal rebates and ensuing uncertainty. With the launch of the EV affordability program, including a gradual reduction in rebate levels over time as EV purchase prices continue to decline, we see a clear path toward the Prime Minister's stated target of 75% market share by 2035.

That said, we know there’s still important work to do to support this transition. The build-out of public charging infrastructure will require ongoing investment for years to come as more EVs hit the road. We need to scale up our efforts to enable more Canadians to access charging at home, including retrofits of multi-unit residential buildings. Updating codes and standards will ensure that new buildings are built with EVs in mind and will avoid the cost of retrofits in the future. Electric utilities need to continue planning for load growth from EVs while ramping up policies and programs that can turn EVs into valuable flexibility assets for the grid through vehicle-grid integration.

The federal government can play an important role in coordinating and supporting these efforts across the country, while providing policy certainty that can help mobilize investments from other levels of government, utilities and the private sector.

I look forward to your questions. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Turner.

Mr. Kingston, the floor is yours for up to five minutes.

[Brian Kingston, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. I appreciate the invite.

The Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association is the industry association that represents Canada’s leading manufacturers of light and heavy-duty motor vehicles. The membership includes Ford, General Motors and Stellantis.

CVMA members have been operating in Canada for over 100 years. They are responsible for most auto production, having built over 100 million vehicles since 1945. Today, they are the largest employers, investors and innovators in Canada.

Ford, General Motors and Stellantis are at the forefront of the transformation to electrification. General Motors and Ford are the top sellers of electric vehicles, while Stellantis is the only manufacturer that is building plug-in hybrids and EVs right here in Canada today.

Given the leading role that CVMA members play in electrification, their success in Canada is fundamental to the government’s EV ambitions. Addressing the immediate challenges facing auto manufacturers will ensure that Canada has a role in the emerging North American EV supply chain.

With that, I’m going to recommend the following actions to support EV adoption and to secure Canada’s role in the automotive supply chain.

Number one is to bolster demand for EVs and EV adoption. We welcome the federal government’s renewal of EV purchase incentives and the commitment to developing a robust charging infrastructure network. CVMA members are well positioned to support the shift to electrification through their diverse product offerings. That said, as we just heard from the previous witness, there’s much work to do on the infrastructure side.

The charging gap in Canada continues to grow. There are 39,000 charging ports in Canada as of yesterday—those are public charging ports—of a required 450,000. To meet the government’s 75% EV sales target, we need a credible charging strategy.

Number two, we need to secure access to the U.S. market. With over 90% of Canadian production destined for the U.S., there is no industry without U.S. access and North American integration. Diversification is not an option. Markets in Europe and Asia are better served by assembly plants in those regions. Our market alone is too small to justify large-scale manufacturing.

The future of our industry and our ability to play a role in electrification depend on securing our trade relationship with the United States. That means the removal of section 232 tariffs and the renewal of CUSMA.

Number three, we need to eliminate the Canada-China strategic partnership. The agreement negotiated with China to allow 49,000 EVs into Canada, equivalent to about one-third of the total number of EVs sold in this country, will undermine the auto sector and presents risk to the North American auto supply chain. China does not adhere to the rules-based trade and investment principles that have been fundamental to the success of the auto industry and the broader Canadian economy. There are also no guardrails in this agreement to ensure a level playing field for manufacturers that have invested in Canada or to protect Canadians from cybersecurity risks.

Number four, we need to make Canada more competitive. Canadian auto manufacturers are currently navigating an unprecedented period of volatility. Tariff costs through 2025 reached approximately $5 billion, eroding the competitiveness of domestic production and making Canada an increasingly difficult environment for investment.

We should strive to make Canada one of the most competitive jurisdictions in the world for automotive investment. This means reducing the regulatory burden on companies and lowering the cost of investing in plants, machinery and R and D. For example, the costly and redundant EV mandate remains in place today, three months after the Prime Minister announced it would be repealed.

While urgency is required to remove the EV mandate, the opposite holds true for the development of Canada’s sovereign GHG regulations. Rushing the development of Canada-unique regulations creates serious risks for Canada. It will create market distortions and will produce a fundamentally flawed policy. CVMA members are ready to work collaboratively with government to develop thoughtful, well-designed regulations that reflect market realities while advancing Canada’s climate objectives.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much, Mr. Kingston.

Colleagues, we'll enter our first round of questions.

Mr. Guglielmin, the floor is yours for six minutes, sir.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for your opening testimony.

Mr. Kingston, welcome back to the industry committee. I'm going to start with you because you just said that the EV mandate has not been repealed.

In the previous hour, we heard from the Minister of Industry, who informed us that the EV mandate has actually been repealed. What's the disconnect?

[Brian Kingston]

The mandate is still in force today, and it continues to create financial and legal compliance burdens for companies.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Kovrig, thank you for being here. I want to acknowledge at the onset that you spent 1,019 days detained by the People's Republic of China, so you understand the threat of the PRC first-hand. I believe truly that Canadians owe you a debt of gratitude for the clarity you've brought to this issue since then.

You've testified at other committees and in interviews. You've written publicly that deepening economic entanglement with China is “not a long-term route”; it's a “dead end”. I think it's critical that Canadians understand what workers and the Canadian auto supply chain are facing right now.

I know you've looked closely at Europe in the past and their experience of letting BYD and other Chinese EV makers into the market. In the previous hour, we heard from the Minister of Industry that many Europeans are letting Chinese EVs into their market and that, in fact, it's a good thing. You've said it's led to “long-term structural industrial decline.”

Canada has roughly 125,000 auto jobs, many of them concentrated in Ontario. If the government doesn't get Chinse EV policy right, what does the European example tell us could potentially happen to our workers and our plants in our communities in the long run?

[Michael Kovrig]

Thank you very much, first of all, for your very kind remarks. I deeply appreciate them.

Let me give you some numbers. Looking at comparative markets, including Europe, from 2022 to 2025, Chinese-built battery electric vehicles went from near zero to a dominant share in Indonesia—93%. Mexico went from 28% to 90% in two years. Brazil went to 85%. Israel went to 81%. Australia went to 78%.

In Europe, we've likewise seen tariffs being inadequate in constraining that increase. We've seen huge increases just over the last year of electric vehicle sales. It's not merely electric vehicles produced by western brands at joint venture factories in China, such as Tesla, but Chinese brand EVs made in China that have secured a dominant position in major global markets. Because they can't enter the United States, they are being deflected in many respects to Europe, which is a major purchase market for them. That has huge ramifications for European production, which we could get into in more detail if you like.

The quota alone doesn't solve the dependency problem. It manages volume, but not the structural dependency created through Chinese-origin software, dealer networks, brand loyalty and political constituencies that resist future restrictions. Tariffs are the only tool that has reliably worked. The EU put definitive countervailing duties on BYD of 17%, on Geely of 18.8% and on SAIC of 35%, on top of the standard 10% MFN duty as of October 2024.

Even so, Chinese automakers now hold 5% to 6% of the total European car market, rising fast through electric vehicles. Rhodium Group, for example, estimates that duties of 40% to 50% would be required to materially shift the trajectory. Otherwise, what you're going to see is the hollowing out of Europe's industrial base.

The U.K. offers a cautionary tale on a model. It has no tariffs. BYD, I'm told—

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

I'm sorry to interrupt you.

Basically, they gain access to the market. They're able to increase their quotas over time, and then, as you mentioned in your opening remarks, what they tend to do is use their market access for geopolitical leverage.

You appeared recently on Power & Politics. You were talking in the context of forced labour and said that Canada has a commitment to block components of vehicles that are built by forced labour, but we've only blocked two shipments under the forced labour import ban since it came into force in 2020, compared to thousands blocked by the United States.

Witnesses have testified before this committee saying that many components of Chinese EVs contain aluminum that's processed by Uyghur forced labour in Xinjiang, a fact that the government itself acknowledged in 2024. It had a surtax order that cited “concerning labour practices”, including forced labour, as a driver of artificially low Chinese EV prices.

In your assessment, can Canada credibly assure that no Chinese EV vehicles are entering the country that have components produced by forced labour?

[Michael Kovrig]

Not currently, no.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Recently, China passed a national security regulation explicitly prohibiting any Chinese company from reporting information about their supply chains. We heard the minister say in the last hour that we're going to rely on CBSA for enforcement. If they're no longer reporting it, we have to rely on their word. I was wondering, in your opinion, if their word would be credible.

[Michael Kovrig]

Not even remotely.

Corporations sourcing anything from China need to be able to ensure that their supply chains are meeting their own due diligence and corporate social responsibility standards. Due diligence companies, including Mintz Group, for example, have had their Chinese staff arbitrarily detained. They've been put under severe pressure simply for suggesting that they might get involved in that kind of due diligence inspection in Xinjiang and other sensitive areas in China.

Forced labour is built directly into the EV supply chain. The evidence base is substantial. Sheffield Hallam University's report documents Uyghur labour transfers feeding automotive supply chains used by every major western and Chinese OEM. The U.S. Department of Labor has confirmed those findings and incorporated them into enforcement. Six UN special rapporteurs warned in 2023 that state-directed labour transfers in Tibet, where the lithium in BYD and CATL battery cells is predominantly sourced, may constitute forced labour. There are also recent examples from Brazil and Hungary of labour conditions that were described as analogous to slavery being used by contractors in those countries. That's just to give you a few examples.

Canada would not be maintaining our own labour standards if we were bringing these companies in. It would be importing supplier-based standards. That's the fundamental problem, unless you have a much more effective regime and prohibition on goods.

[Michael Guglielmin, Conservative, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Mr. Guglielmin.

Mr. Bardeesy, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Kovrig, I want to thank you for some of the specific advice you gave in your opening statement. I note that you mentioned Stellantis. I also note that Minister Joly rolled out the use of that plant for knock-down kits in Brampton. I think you also spoke to the larger set of policy objectives that an EV policy should have. I want to ask some of the witnesses about that in a bit more depth.

I'll start with you, Ms. Sinasac. Can you speak to the demand you're hearing for electric vehicle connectivity in urban areas, which is informing your very strong perspective on an electric vehicle charging infrastructure plan focused on multi-use residential buildings?