Industry Committee on May 6th, 2021

[Dan McTeague]

Thank you.

Technology is still eluding me, but not the ideas behind the green energy. It's a wonderful thought, but it has to take a second place, a second seat—and a back seat, I think—in regard to the costs at a time when Canadians are not able to make ends meet. As the MNP has quite readily pointed out, 53% of Canadians are now in a situation where they are less than $200 away from going bankrupt. I think these are very sobering numbers. We should take those into consideration first.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

According to the Ontario Auditor General, the Ontario Green Energy Act is going to lead to overpayments for electricity amounting to about $130 billion over three decades. That's enough to fund Ontario's health care system for almost two years.

That is the real consequence of these schemes and, of course, it is a monstrous wealth transfer from the working poor to the super-rich, who have gotten all of these sweetheart deals from the government.

Let's keep these facts in mind before we sign up to these massive new interventions that will, as always, favour the rich, punish the poor, and do little for the environment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much, MP Poilievre.

We will now go to MP Lambropoulos.

You have six minutes.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to thank all of our witnesses.

I'd like to give special thanks to Ms. Brouillette and Ms. Latour.

I found their speeches to be very much aligned with my thoughts.

I'd like to give Ms. Latour the opportunity to finish what she had to say in her testimony to ensure that her recommendations are heard.

[Lauren Latour]

I really appreciate that. Thank you so much. I was a moment away from finishing when I wrapped up.

What we wanted to add was referencing our friends and our member organization Unifor, which is one of the largest private sector unions across the country, representing millions of labourers in thousands of communities.

They published seven asks of the Canadian government for a just transition in Canada, and one of them really speaks to us and speaks to the main point that we're hoping to get across to the committee today. The point they advocate for is the promotion of green economy retraining and skills upgrading.

Why that's so pertinent to the committee today, I think, is that this recommendation really emphasizes the dire need for our nation to view investments in science and technology as investments in people and communities, and to understand that if we're going to be the leader in science, technology and innovation the way I know we all hope we will be going into this next integral decade in climate action, that means we really need to invest in skills upgrading and skills retraining for labourers in communities across the country.

Thanks again so much for that opportunity to finish that point.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

No problem. Thank you so much for being with us today and for giving us these recommendations.

My next question goes to Madam Shanks.

Ms. Shanks, you are a director at a company in Montreal. I must say that I really enjoyed your testimony.

It's very important that you talk about circular plastics and recycling plastics. It's a step in the right direction, and it's something that can be fixed. As we know, it also depends a great deal on people. The company can recycle to a certain extent, but it means nothing if people don't recycle in the right way.

How can the government make recycling a little easier for people and encourage them to recycle? Regulations could stop companies from using certain types of plastics, for example.

What are your recommendations on that?

[Cynthia Shanks]

I think a lot of companies like ours are willing to make this transition to more sustainable packaging and are anxious to make the right choices.

It's important to build a partnership between governments, municipalities and businesses to raise consumer awareness. We've done a lot on our end and we are still doing it.

I have specific examples. In British Columbia and Quebec, we have key partnerships, whether it's with Recycle BC or RECYC-QUÉBEC, where we have supported the launch of tools. One such tool that comes to mind is called “Ça va où?”. It was launched by RECYC-QUÉBEC a few years ago in conjunction with our launch of recyclable K-Cup pods.

We visited grocery stores to give hands-on demonstrations of the right things to do, the steps needed to be able to put the pod in the blue bin. We took the opportunity to invite consumers to download the RECYC-QUÉBEC app so they could really understand the steps in preparing our various containers and packaging for recycling.

More and more, companies need to follow suit in this way. On our end, it's been done through in-store presentations, but also through a lot of consumer outreach online, via videos that we post on social media, and via TV advertising. We've placed a lot of ads in various newspapers.

So the important thing is to have an all-out approach to communications. We've seen the best results in the country when we've worked hand-in-hand with organizations, such as RECYC-QUÉBEC and Éco Entreprises Québec, or Recycle BC and other organizations, such as the Recycling Council of Ontario.

To sum up, consumer awareness must become a high priority not only for governments, but also for businesses, which have a special relationship with their consumers. We're in a unique position that allows us to reach our consumers and deliver those key messages.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you very much.

I only have 20 seconds left. So I will not ask any more questions.

Once again, I'd like to thank all the witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I believe that a green economic recovery is closely linked to health and job creation.

I'd like to ask Travis Allan, vice-president of AddÉnergie, a question about the deployment of his network in Quebec and Canada. We know that, with the arrival of the Biden administration, the U.S. federal government has just initiated a massive project to electrify transportation. Given the Buy American Act, we can expect AddÉnergie to enhance its presence in the United States to produce and deploy more of its network of charging stations there and establish itself as a leader in the electric charging station market in the United States.

Mr. Allan, beyond the immense opportunities in the United States, what are your ambitions for growing your business in Quebec and Canada?

How can the federal government help ensure that our domestic market is developed?

[Travis Allan]

Thank you.

I would say our ambitions are pretty ambitious. We are seeking to grow and create one of the world's leading EV-charging networks and manufacturing companies in Quebec. We've had early success in expanding across Canada and now into the United States. There is so much more to do. As Mr. Lemire has said there's a huge opportunity there.

In terms of some of the important policies and things the government is doing or working on, one is large macro policies like the clean fuel standard, and working to help try to get better outcomes on buy America. This is critically important. Incentives for charging stations and vehicles we hope eventually are a mandate to align with Canadian adoption targets.

The last one is procurement. The Government of Canada and its Crown corporations are hugely large owners of vehicles and parking spaces. That is a big opportunity to get at those transportation emissions. A really great strategy on green procurement could go a long way to supporting not just our business, but many Canadian businesses that are involved in transitioning electrification of transportation.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you very much.

My next question is for Mr. Grenier of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers.

Mr. Grenier, the union has a plan to diversify services and reduce Canada Post's carbon footprint. It's the project you are promoting called Delivering Community Power.

You mentioned that Canada Post could deploy a primary and secondary network of electric charging stations in rural areas.

Can you tell us more about this intriguing project?

[Jean-Philippe Grenier]

Gladly, Mr. Lemire.

As you know, we have post offices across the country. Since the 1990s, most post offices have been protected under a moratorium. They must remain open in their locations, especially in rural ones. Just go to a number of villages and you will see them. That can provide the federal government with a major advantage in terms of installing charging stations in all communities and settings. The charging stations can help with freight transportation as well as green tourism.

Deploying a primary and secondary network would allow electric charging stations to be installed across the country. We have a very large concentration of charging stations in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor, and even in the Halifax-Windsor corridor. However, there are fewer elsewhere. But we are in every community, and using public infrastructure already owned by the Government of Canada would create a primary and secondary network across the country.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you very much.

We know that the fleet of the United States Postal Service, the USPS, will undergo a major shift to electric vehicles in the next few years. What about the Canada Post fleet?

You also mentioned a pilot project involving electric charging stations. Can you tell us more about that?

[Jean-Philippe Grenier]

I'll turn things over to my colleague Mr. Charette, who is much more familiar with the details of this matter.

[Hugo Charette]

Thank you, Mr. Grenier.

The tone has really changed with the new U.S. administration, and President Biden is really showing leadership. In January, he called for the full electrification of the USPS postal service, and things are moving forward. In March, a call for bids was won by Oshkosh Corporation for the eventual manufacture of 165,000 vehicles over 10 years.

Canada Post's strategy is to use hybrid vehicles—an old technology—when we should be using electric vehicles. We had already done a pilot project for electric vehicles, and we are doing a new one. At the end of January, the employer announced that it was aiming for 10% of light-duty vehicles to be hybrid. We are still at the pilot stage for electric vehicles.

A pilot project will also be conducted for charging stations, which will be installed in three mail processing centres and at head office. In total, nine charging stations will be installed across Canada. That isn't enough, and we can do much better.

We were talking about existing potential. According to Natural Resources Canada, the current infrastructure includes 6,050 public charging stations. Our post offices would allow us to double that supply. Here's a striking statistic: there are more post offices in Canada than there are Tim Hortons and McDonald's restaurants combined. So we have an opportunity to show leadership and lead the way, and that's the message we want to send.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I'd like to ask Mr. Allan from AddÉnergie a quick question.

Mr. Allan, would you have the technical capacity to install rapid charging stations that could serve the public 24 hours a day at over 6,000 post offices?

[Travis Allan]

We're very confident in our ability to produce for all Crown corporation and government charging station needs, and we're excited to compete.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

We will now go to MP Masse.

You have the floor for six minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses.

My first question will be for Mr. McTeague.

Welcome back, and thank you for your work here on many issues but the work on anti-counterfeiting was very significant, and I wish more attention could be paid to that again. They were some good initiatives that paid some good dividends at that time.

I want to ask you about Line 5. We're going to have an emergency debate tonight in the House of Commons on it. I'd like your thoughts as to its current status. This is about replacing a current capacity, not building new capacity. What would be the vulnerability if it's basically taken off the shelf?

[Dan McTeague]

It's great to be here, Mr. Masse. I agree with you. This is a great committee that has been able to achieve much, notwithstanding partisan differences. I hope to see that continue under the leadership of all of you here, but yourself as well, being the dean of this committee and, I think, perhaps even of the House of Commons, or almost.

Mr. Masse, if anybody in eastern Canada gets carried away with the idea of the new economy based on green, they may want to remember that should Line 5 close, fully 50% of all the propane supplies in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes, fully 45% of all the fuel, jet fuel, diesel, all of the things that we tend to overlook here not just in this discussion but in all of our interest in having a great rebalance, a great reset, build back better.... We tend to forget the significance of the existing current market, which isn't just something that's conducive to affordability and great jobs across Canada, but is our number one export, oil and gas.

You remember, Mr. Masse, I was no big friend of big oil companies. I took them on in a way no other member of Parliament had or has since taken them on. I continue to do that today by providing people an idea as to how they can best manage their finances. But I have to tell you, if Line 5 does close, consider that to be the worst-case scenario of a situation where we would see the crippling of the Ontario and Quebec markets.

The Quebec plant, Suncor, would be without at least 50% of its fuel. Some suggest that they can get the project restarted where they can get an oil pipeline from Portland, Maine, all the way back into Montreal to help alleviate things, but we're talking 540,000 barrels of oil.

We're talking about the entire infrastructure of our economy. Yes, even at a critical time, the PPE, the petrochemical sector, all of these sectors would be affected not just materially in terms of lost jobs, but also through increased prices and a potential for pretty much a shortage of energy as we head into summer.

At a time in which the pandemic hopefully will come to an end or near its end, we could very well see a scenario unfold where Americans have no trouble adapting given the massive amount of pipelines that they allowed to be built under previous administrations while Canada has been navel gazing. For other alternatives like energy east, as we know, regulatory changes by this government made it impossible for that particular project to go ahead as a line, of course, that's existing and currently in place. There really aren't a lot of other alternatives available. At a time when we are contemplating all sorts of great new forms of energy and wishing away the idea that somehow we're not a clean country in terms of our energy matrix, nothing could be further from the truth. We are probably the cleanest country when it comes to production of energy. We now find ourselves at a significant and distinct disadvantage.

For all of us over the summer, should this happen, should a court uphold Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer's challenge to shut down that pipeline, I think we'll be talking to our constituents about more important things: being able to put food on the table, making sure they keep the house warm, being able to eat, being able to move goods and services without this pipeline. As for putting all our eggs in one basket, maybe this committee should also be discussing—it's not for me to do that anymore—how we get more pipelines built in this country to protect our energy sector and to protect the interests of Canadians.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

You mentioned constituencies. I want to draw out a particular equation and situation here. You have an auto background as well too. In my riding where we make the Pacifica minivan, it's also a hybrid. We're trying to transition. I've been pushing for a battery plant and a number of different new initiatives in the auto sector. We're seeing that. If Line 5 goes down though, will the costs of energy and even production of the cleaner energy alternatives, being the hybrid Pacifica and so forth, compromise our competitiveness especially when we're looking at the eastern nations or other places that don't have the types of standards and environmental oversight? I worry about the costs skyrocketing and as we try to transition to this hybrid, and it has an electrical component, it becomes almost uncompetitive, and then we put ourselves out of the transition business.

[Dan McTeague]

That's a very good question, Mr. Masse.

I did work for Toyota Canada, public relations, Lexus Toyota. I introduced the first hybrid model in Canada. You would know it today as the Prius. Back then it was called the Tsunami. We changed the name for good reasons. While it is older technology, nevertheless in electric vehicles not everything that is new doesn't have a background in being old. We had electrical vehicles in the 1920s. We abandoned those.

It's not to say we shouldn't proceed in that direction, but what are we trying to achieve here? The economic impact of saying if we shut down every vehicle that has an internal combustion engine around the world, that would see a 6% drop in carbon emissions globally. It's a nice idea, and short of being those who have money and interests and are funded by taxpayers and subsidies to espouse the new technology, the new green economy, I think we have to deal with facts at hand. We see the Pacifica model being threatened. I think that's a signal to the rest of Ontario of just how bad things are going to get from the closure of Line 5 among other things.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you so much.

Unfortunately, that's the end of your time, Mr. Masse.

Before we start our second round, I want to let committee members know that last month the Special Committee on the Economic Relationship between Canada and the United States tabled an interim report specifically on Line 5. If you are interested, it has been tabled in the House and is available online.

With that, we'll start our second round of questions.

MP Dreeshen, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Thank you very much.

Thank you to all of our witnesses.

One of the things we've been hearing lately from environmental activists and their commentary is so much an anti-oil rhetoric. We forget that our aboriginal voices are out there saying that they need oil and gas, natural resources and jobs, so they have been committed to that. We sometimes forget that this highly skilled workforce that we have has come about because of our commitment to our natural resources sector and the wealth that it has been able to attain for all Canadians.

Again, as we've heard from some of our other witnesses, we may want to talk about mining so that we can become leaders as far as the battery industry is concerned. However, what makes us think that this is going to be easily attained when we have Bill C-69, which is probably one of the biggest barriers for this? Over-regulation.... We heard how it takes months in some countries to get approval, and it drags on for years and years here in Canada.

Obviously, we have a lot that has to be done for us to deal with this. We talk about our ethically sourced coffee, but we don't talk about ethically sourced oil and gas. These are some of the concerns that I have.

Today Bloomberg has just indicated that China's emissions now exceed the emissions of all of the developed world combined, yet we keep talking about how great it will be that China will be on side and that all will be right with the world as far as the environment is concerned.

Mr. McTeague, I wonder if you could tell this committee what the impact of the Liberal government's decision to triple the carbon tax will be on the Canadian economy. Will it help to meet our emissions reduction targets, or will it simply cripple businesses, stifle innovation and make Canada even more uncompetitive on the international stage while doing very little to reduce emissions?