The so-called federal backstop is not as big a concern. I think we can get to the right place. The sectors like ours that had big exposure in Ontario will have to work very quickly after the change of policy in the government, and we're working very closely with officials. We wish they'd take a bit more time so we can get to the right place, but I'm confident that will be there.
But it's the realm of other policies.... Certainly the clean fuel standard is one that you've heard a little about, but I guarantee you're going to be hearing a lot more about in the months to come.
We've had formal submissions to the government from provinces such as Ontario and Alberta, saying they don't understand what you're doing. We need to take our time with this. There are a lot of concerns about that policy. We don't see a lot of engagement on that.
Again, provinces like British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario already regulate fuels. The federal government has a role too, but what is the correct balance of the role? They're uncertain, and that is a very problematic area.
Almost everything on the climate change file—and this was talked about also—is the volume and pace of work. So it's not just the regulation, the price on the emitter. Our individual member companies probably have seven different initiatives under way—emissions from cogeneration, federal and provincial; emissions on boilers, federal and provincial.
It's not just climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, it's also air quality emissions and what you're doing to produce emissions on greenhouse gases could drive up your air quality. Are these two groups of people talking to each other across government and governments? The answer is no.
Even within a department, are the air quality people talking to the climate change people? No. Are the federal people talking to the provincial people? No. That creates a lot of confusion and time.
The gentleman next to me spoke about the costs, paying fees, but when you get involved in processes like this, you're talking about very high costs to the companies involved as well.
Mr. Masse, just to share one example for you in our sector, which would be similar, we have a chemical distributor that has asked a very large client when it is going to bring those biocides to Canada. As we now have all these water-based paints you have to use a lot more biocides in them. We didn't have that problem with solvents.
One of the large companies in the U.S. has a new product; it's environmentally friendly, it's a better product for everybody. The company in question said they'd never bring that to Canada. Why? They said because it's going to take seven years and it's going to cost us way too much money. If they just blend it into the paints and coatings in the United States, where we're already allowed to do it, they'll just ship those paints and coatings into Canada with that product already in them.
All you've done is disadvantage the Canadian producers of paints and coatings, and you have not given any benefit or protection of the public or the environment.
Those are the examples. We're just saying take your time, think about the reality of what you're doing and listen to the good advice from the people who are really affected.