Industry Committee on May 11th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Good morning everyone. I now call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting 38 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.

Today’s meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website, and the webcast will always show the person speaking, rather than the entirety of the committee.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few rules to follow.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of floor, English or French. I'll remind you that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. When you are not speaking, your microphone should be on mute.

As is my normal practice, I will hold up a yellow card when you have 30 seconds left in your intervention. I will hold up a red card when your time for questions has expired. Please keep your screen in gallery view, so that you can see the cards when I hold them up.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on November 5, 2020, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology is meeting today to continue its study on economic recovery from COVID-19.

I would like to now welcome our witnesses.

Today we have Mr. Robert Lyman, principal, ENTRANS Policy Research Group. We have Ms. Josipa Gordana Petrunic, president and chief executive officer, Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium. We have, from the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers and Businesses of Canada, Veso Sobot, board member. From Mothers Step In, we have Laure Waridel, co-instigator.

From the same organization, we are also hearing from Émilie Robert, a biology teacher from Rouyn-Noranda.

We are also welcoming Jean-François Samray, president and chief executive officer of the Quebec Forest Industry Council, as well as Michel Vincent, director of the Economics Markets and International Trade Branch at the Quebec Forest Industry Council.

From Tavos Industries, Mr. Alexander Kung, director of sales and business development.

Each witness group will present for up to five minutes, followed by rounds of questions. We will start with Mr. Lyman.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Robert Lyman, Principal, ENTRANS Policy Research Group, As an Individual]

Madam Chair, honourable members, thank you very much for inviting me to appear before the committee to offer evidence in support of the committee's study.

After briefly describing my background, I will seek to aid the committee's study by addressing three subjects: the definition of the clean energy sector, the direct and indirect costs of the green initiatives and related measures, and the experience to date concerning the income and employment benefits of the environmental and clean technology products sector.

My professional experience has been almost entirely in analyzing and advising on the public policy issues related to energy, environment and transportation. I spent 37 years in the federal public service, serving under 22 different Liberal and Conservative ministers. I spent the first 10 years of my career in the foreign service with postings to Caracas, Venezuela, and Washington, D.C. After that, I served in five other departments, mostly in economic policy areas.

I retired as director general, environmental affairs, at Transport Canada in 2006, and subsequently, spent 10 years as a consultant to federal and provincial government departments on energy, environment and transportation issues.

I am sure the committee is aware that the subject it has agreed to study is very broad in scope. It's important to define what these practices, or more precisely, activities and investments involve.

Statistics Canada has offered one definition in the statistical reports it has issued since 2007 of the environmental and clean technology products sector. The sector includes companies that are engaged in producing a wide range of products and services. The products include electricity produced from renewable energy sources and nuclear power generation; wind, solar and hydro generation products; equipment for spill response and remediation; biofuels; and others. The services include waste management and remediation services; environmental assessment services; energy efficiency consulting services; engineering and construction services; and others.

The sector, thus, includes almost everything that reduces the environmental effects of economic activity.

Much of the clean technology goods subsector relates to the production of renewable energy equipment and electricity generated by wind, solar and biomass energy. It's important to understand the costs of these goods. I cannot possibly do justice to that subject in a five-minute statement. I will say that the capital and operating costs of wind and solar energy generation represent only a small share of the cost that they impose on the electricity generation and transmission system.

With respect to the direct cost to consumers, the committee should consider Ontario's experience following the passage of the Green Energy Act of 2009. That legislation authorized Ontario's independent electricity systems operator to offer feed-in tariffs at above market rates for renewable energy generation. Further, the province guaranteed those rates for the life of the contracts, generally 20 years, and required that the renewables production be granted “first to the grid” rights over less expensive sources of generation.

The auditor general of Ontario, in her 2015 report, found that from 2004 to 2014, the portion of residential and small commercial customers' bills covering electricity generation costs increased by 80% from 5¢ per kilowatt hour to 9¢ per kilowatt hour. The overall cost of electricity to consumers increased by 56%, from $12.2 billion in 2004 to $18.9 billion in 2014. Between 2010 and 2016, monthly electricity bills, including taxes in major Canadian cities, increased by an average of $37.60 per kilowatt hour. During the same period, electricity bills in Toronto rose more than twice as much.

The annual average household cost of electricity in Ontario rose by 120% from 2009 to 2016. According to Scott Luft, an expert in Ontario electricity markets, the cost of Green Energy Act contracting is now over $4 billion a year, or $80 billion—

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Mr. Lyman, that is the five minutes. Could you please conclude?

[Robert Lyman]

Is that five minutes already? Okay.

I would recommend that the committee lend its support to the establishment of a federal government energy framework that stimulates profitable investment in capital formation, reduces emissions intensity, supports research and development, and provides a planning framework long enough for new technologies to develop the competitive advantages that will allow them to succeed in the marketplace.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

We'll now to go Ms. Petrunic.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Dr. Josipa Gordana Petrunic, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium]

Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today.

I'm Josipa Petrunic. I'm the president and CEO of the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium. It's a long name, but we go by CUTRIC.

CUTRIC is a special kind of non-profit organization. I'm going to start off today by giving you a sense of some of the major projects we've launched that have had an impact on the economy and that give us a pathway forward for the green recovery that, as Canadians, we all want.

CUTRIC is the only organization in North America today that represents members from the transit sector, the manufacturing sector, the electrical and natural gas utility sector, the academic sector, and the software and technology sector. When you put that all together, it means that as a non-profit we basically do technology projects, so we operate a lot like a technology start-up in terms of our innovative and creative thinking. That's exactly what's needed in order to transform our current transit and transportation fleet into a low-carbon smart mobility economy for Canadians.

As we're focused on transforming the transportation and energy matrix that defines how Canadians move, the transit and mobility options we have available to us today and the pollution and operational costs associated with those options, CUTRIC is really aligned with the goal of establishing Canada as a leader in low-carbon smart mobility technology, innovation, design and deployment.

Based on that unique structure, we have been able to design otherwise impossible projects and launch them in Canada today, which is proof of the potential of the green economy that this country can build post-pandemic. We've already been able to help make the country a global leader in the design and deployment of several key low-carbon smart mobility tech projects.

As an example, several years ago, when it wasn't popular to do so, we were able to pull together leading transit agencies, manufacturers and utilities to launch the pan-Canadian electric bus demonstration and integration project. We launched that with TransLink in Vancouver, with Brampton Transit in York region, north of Toronto, and with competitive manufacturers Nova Bus and New Flyer, both electric bus manufacturers in Canada, and Siemens and ABB, both high-powered charging system manufacturers with significant footprints in Canada.

These kinds of projects also integrate the utilities. In this particular project, we integrated B.C. Hydro and Newmarket-Tay Power Distribution as utilities in a global first, to demonstrate for the first time in the world that you can create interoperable, standardized electric bus technology in Canada, deploy it in Canada and attract foreign direct investment in this space.

We are leading similar projects in hydrogen fuel cell bus integration in this country right now, with Mississauga and a data partnership intended with Winnipeg Transit. We're leading an effort to get small, autonomous low-speed shuttles out the door in Markham and in Stratford, in order to make sure that there's transit not only in our urban communities but in our suburban and rural communities as well.

From coast to coast to coast, not only our membership and our staff but also our board of directors recognize that the large-scale procurement and deployment of electrified transit systems using battery power, hydrogen fuel cell technologies and renewable natural gas technologies, along with autonomous and connected shuttles, will create hundreds of thousands of jobs in this country, which they're already doing. We know that by integrating data analytics and cybersecurity into these systems, we will be fostering the growth of clusters of high-paid jobs in a competency that is needed worldwide.

In sum, low-carbon smart mobility is a critical area for Canadians. The use of shared smart mobility in mass transit systems has certainly dipped during the pandemic, but don't be fooled. It is critical that we recognize that transit is coming back. There is no doubt our cities will come roaring back. We must recognize that, even pre-pandemic, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Brampton, Quebec City and Montreal were already struggling to move enough people over enough distance to advance our economy efficiently, from both an economic and a human quality of life perspective.

The pandemic has actually given transit agencies the opportunity to breathe, the room to prepare for complex technologies like zero-emissions, connected, autonomous and data-driven technologies. Cities are not going back. Transit is not going back.

The expectation is that the federal government will be a partner in the effort to build a better life for Canadians. Without good mobility systems, we would be otherwise failing our people, and this is both for urban and rural communities. The government has already taken promising steps with transit investments in the clean sector economy. This has been critical: $15 billion in permanent transit funding and $2.75 billion in dedicated ZEV technology for zero-emissions buses. It is complex, but over time it does save money.

In conclusion, I'd like to note that investing in the greening of our transit systems will create jobs in the economy. It is already doing so. I am proof of it. My team is proof of it, and the hundreds of companies and organizations we represent across this country are proof of it.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to being able to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

We will now go to Mr. Sobot.

The floor is yours for five minutes.

[Veso Sobot, Board Member, Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers and Businesses of Canada]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I really appreciate it.

My name is Veso Sobot and I'm an engineer with IPEX, headquartered in Oakville, but I'm a board member of the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers and Businesses. I like to call us the coalition of job creators, and I'll be speaking on behalf of the coalition in my testimony today.

We will share three suggestions for how to unleash Canadian entrepreneurship and help make this decade Canada's decade. Suggestion one concerns trade with the U.S. USMCA or CUSMA, as we call it, has been very helpful in many respects, but contrary to common belief, it does not protect us against buy America. Canadian companies continue to be blocked on U.S. federally funded infrastructure projects while American firms have unfettered access to Canada.

Ironically, the company I work for buys American all day long. Our products are made from American resin. Natural gas that's sent from Canada makes its way to the U.S. and is cracked into ethylene and combined with chlorine and salt to make pellets that are used in long-life building construction products like siding, windows, soffits, decking, fencing and pipe, and of course in the medical sector in a very big way and in the auto sector in a very big way.

Last year, 18% of U.S. vinyl resin production came to Canada. China was America's second-largest customer at 10.1%. Mexico was third at 10%. This year, we expect Canada to be the biggest customer for America, bigger than China and Mexico combined. We have leverage. If you recall, Prime Minister Harper successfully secured an exemption to buy America with President Obama back in February of 2010 using leverage. We think it's time for Prime Minister Trudeau to do the same with President Biden, especially now when there's a shortage of construction products in the United States and the two are ideologically congruent in many respects.

It's in America's best interests to use Canadian products rather than Chinese. Canada shares best practices and has some of the best environmental credentials in the world. Focusing on green infrastructure and Canadian solutions to U.S. problems is the key to an exemption to buy America. An example of that beneficial Canada-U.S. relationship can be found in Burton, Michigan, just outside of Flint. After careful due diligence, Burton removed its water supply lines and replaced them with 19 miles of Canadian innovation biaxially oriented lead-free vinyl pipe, which conserves resources by using significantly less material, reducing its environmental footprint and still providing high strength.

The pipe was made by IPEX in Saint-Laurent, Quebec, just outside of Montreal, using Unifor labour and installed by LiUNA members in Burton. Burton now has cleaner water, has minimized its environmental footprint and has saved $2.1 million U.S. for its taxpayers. Indeed, a 2018 American study showed that Canadian break rates for vinyl pipe were best in class, implying that there's a great benefit to Canadian municipalities' using innovative Canadian technology for infrastructure renewal.

With regard to suggestion number two, many of you have seen the poll this week that says 74% of Canadians believe government debt is too high. We believe one way to lower that debt is to unleash entrepreneurs, especially those who export. Consider incentivizing exporters by exempting them from, let's say, the carbon tax, and watch the debt problem be reduced over time.

With regard to suggestion number three, another important thing that can be done to help is to stop the attack on plastics. Environment and Climate Change Canada is poised to declare plastics toxic any moment now, when in fact that's a classic overreach. They're not toxic. Doing that presents the danger of killing Canadian jobs in every sector. It's creating a chill that is already driving investment out of Canada, when all that's needed is an effective, coordinated provincial litter strategy.

In conclusion, we urge the committee to help, first, to secure an exemption to buy America, second, to incentivize Canadian job creators to export, and third, to stop self-inflicted wounds like the ones from declaring plastic as toxic, which it's not.

Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

With that, we will now go to Mothers Step In.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Dr. Laure Waridel, Co-Instigator, Mothers Step In]

Thank you very much.

My name is Laure Waridel, and I am an eco-sociologist and an associate professor at UQAM's institute of environmental science. I am speaking as a mother stepping in for my children, Colin and Alphée and, since recently, for my little daughter Théodora, who will be only 29 in 2050, a turning point when we will see many changes in ecosystems and the climate if nothing is done right away.

That is why my colleague and I are appealing to you this morning. I will now let her introduce herself.

[Émilie Robert, Biology Teacher, Rouyn-Noranda, Mothers Step In]

Good morning.

My name is Émilie Robert, and I teach biology at the Abitibi-Témiscamingue CEGEP. I am a mother stepping in for Jeanne and Hugo.

[Dr. Laure Waridel]

So we are speaking today as mothers who are part of Mothers Step In, a movement of mothers, grandmothers and great grandmothers from all walks of life, joining forces to protect our children's future. There are 5,600 of us across Quebec and beyond. Twenty-five groups are active locally, which requires political courage at the municipal, federal and provincial levels. In Canada, we work with For Our Kids.

We feel that, to protect our children's future, we must protect the environment and social justice. That is why we have been calling for months for a fair and green recovery and are providing our elected members with the document “101 ideas for the recovery”, part of the Pact for the Transition, to which we have provided a link at the end of our brief.

To avoid crises like the one caused by COVID-19, we must urgently transform our economy. Much more is needed than the greening of technologies. We must address overconsumption and waste. We have known for a long time that the planet's resources are limited, as is the capacity of ecosystems to absorb our waste, including plastics, of course. An increase in unlimited material and energy consumption in a world with limited resources is mathematically impossible, and it is up to our governments to implement the regulations necessary to remaining within planetary boundaries.

You, who are our elected representatives or work with them, must immediately stop supporting anything that contributes to a gradual destruction of life on Earth. On the contrary, you must encourage whatever protects the Earth. Here are a few concrete ways that would help put words into action for a fair and green recovery.

First, real climate legislation must be passed, and subsidies for fossil fuels must end.

As elected members of the House of Commons, you have the power to act so that Canada would have a real piece of climate legislation. It is imperative to improve Bill C–12 on net-zero emissions, so that measures would be implemented to require us to meet scientifically established targets as quickly as possible, without waiting for 2050. Canada must adopt accountability and transparency rules as soon as possible. Starting now, the government must consider all the repercussions of climate decisions from coast to coast and from north to south.

A real climate test should force the government to immediately stop subsidizing fossil fuels and to do away with the Trans Mountain pipeline. According to official figures from the Energy Policy Tracker, since the beginning of the pandemic alone, the Canadian government has invested more than $30 billion in subsidies for the fossil fuel sector. That is equivalent to over $800 per Canadian, without taking Trans Mountain into account, which will cost taxpayers more than $12.6 billion over the next few years.

Right now, our government is funding the destruction of our children's future. That money must be invested in the economy's green transition. The Canadian government must directly support workers and communities that depend on fossil fuels, so that they can start looking for solutions.

Second, focus should be placed on the green tax system.

That would help internalize the environmental and social costs of products and services. The polluter pays principle should be applied along the economic chain. That will create real incentives for investing and disinvesting money in order to reduce the environmental footprint of our individual and collective behaviours. Since the wealthy consume more goods and typically pollute more than those less well off, they would have to take on their fair share of responsibility.

The carbon pricing policy implemented by the current government must be only the beginning. Extended producer responsibility in terms of producers' impact on the environment and on society must apply to all economic sectors and to all types of pollution along the economic chain.

I have unfortunately gone over my time, but I want to appeal to you once more. We are asking you to make decisions that truly take into account the future of our children, and of your children and grandchildren.

Thank you for your attention.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

Up next are the representatives of the Quebec Forest Industry Council.

Go ahead for five minutes.

[Jean-François Samray, President and Chief Executive Officer, Québec Forest Industry Council]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me to contribute to your discussion on the green economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

My name is Jean-François Samray, and I am president and chief executive officer of the Quebec Forest Industry Council, which brings together sawmill, veneer, pulp, paper, cardboard and panel companies in Quebec, as well as engineered wood manufacturers.

Today, I want to stress not only the importance of the forest industry's role in our communities' economic recovery, but also the fact that it will be just as much of a key player in the fight against greenhouse gases, or GHGs. Various levels of government will be responsible for creating the context to enable the forest industry to participate fully in those two issues and to support its efforts in innovation, so that it can help reach our objectives.

The Quebec forest industry, which generates over 142,000 jobs, is the economic engine of some 900 municipalities. Nearly 70% of Quebec's municipalities are connected to that industry. The average annual income in the forest industry is $66,500. That sector contributes $41.5 billion to the province's economy and $17.7 billion to the gross domestic product.

Just recently, a study conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers showed us that, in 2019 dollars, and not at the cost of wood today, $150 is collected in taxes per cubic metre of processed wood. Of that amount, $50 is going to federal coffers. So investing in the forest sector is a win–win–win initiative. It is a win for the economy, for communities and for the environment.

A number of international studies emphasize the importance of an active and responsible forest industry. Among them are studies carried out by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, or FAO, and the International Energy Agency, or IEA. Added to those studies is the Natural Resources Canada annual report titled “The State of Canada's Forests”, which demonstrates that triple role.

So it goes without saying that we are happy the federal government is investing $3 billion over the coming years, so that two billion trees can be planted in the near future. However, a portion of those trees must be harvested eventually to enable sustainable forestry, which could make the most of the various iterations of that carbon neutral product. When a tree is cut down and sawn into planks, it sequesters its carbon longer than its counterparts left to themselves in the forest. In other words, when wood is used as a building material, its CO2 retention period is extended. It is a better alternative to other building materials, such as steel and concrete, which consume up to 34% more energy and emit 81% more GHGs.

Our industry is not short on challenges. The softwood lumber sector is booming, and the demand comes from the United States, Canada and from around the world.

However, the United States Department of Commerce imposes countervailing duties on softwood lumber imports from Canada. But the World Trade Organization, or WTO, concluded in its final report that Quebec is complying with international trade rules. We are counting on the Canadian government to use the WTO's conclusions and require an exemption from countervailing duties on products from public forests, an exclusion for businesses that mostly get their supply on the American side, and an integral refund of the money already collected.

When it comes to innovation, the panel sector and the pulp and paper sector are undergoing a complete transformation and are innovating constantly. Concerning panels, a great deal of research is going into the production of new green adhesives to meet consumer demand. The pulp and paper sector is no exception. A number of innovations have been announced over the past few months, including by FPInnovations, which uses cellulose in the manufacturing of products to fight against COVID-19.

So government support in research and development and in innovation is crucial, especially for FPInnovations, but also for the academic sector and for businesses, to help the industry make a shift and remain a leader in the new green economy.

We also think that using biomass in the heating sector must be done by adding depth to the stream, and not by cannibalizing existing businesses that are making value-added products.

In conclusion, we feel that the government must invest much more in the Investments in Forestry Industry Transformation program, the IFIT, because $55 million, the amount allocated over two years, is clearly insufficient.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

Our next presentation will be by Mr. Kung.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Alexander Kung, Director of Sales and Business Development, Tavos Industries Inc.]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I’d like to thank the members of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology for this study on economic recovery after COVID-19 and for having us here as a witness today.

My name is Alexander Kung. I am the director of sales and business development here at Tavos Industries. I want to take this opportunity today to share our experience this past year as a rather young company while navigating through the pandemic.

Tavos opened up its business in late 2018 as a manufacturer of paper alternatives. Our short-term goal is very simple. We want to educate and aid our own community in transitioning away from single-use plastics. Long term, we would like to see a complete halt of the use of single-use plastics by 2025.

We stepped into full manufacturing of green consumer products and packaging that would hopefully make a dent in our annual three million tonnes of plastic waste. We know that Canadians recycle only 9% of this plastic waste. We do we need to do better. We were very happy to see the government plan to ban single-use plastics back in 2019. We urge the Canadian government not to delay this any longer.

One of our next plans is to diversify from paper alternatives to bamboo products as well. We have several projects in our pipeline that target different single-use plastics in common households in the next few years. Unlike trees that take decades to come to fruition, bamboo is a fantastic alternative to single-use products.

I also want to touch on our experience as a younger company this past year, as we also did enter into a completely different new industry. When the pandemic began last March, our business essentially collapsed alongside the hospitality industry, when hotels, restaurants and bars were forced to close. This was very devastating for us, having to lay off a significant number of our employees and not knowing whether or not we would survive post-pandemic. We decided to temporarily pivot our business to manufacturing hand sanitizer and other PPE to assist in the massive shortages we saw in our community. This was very challenging for us as a young company, entering a completely different market, operating with 30% of our staff capacity and realizing the complete market domination of imported PPE.

As we started to manufacture our first PPE product, which was hand sanitizer, we witnessed hundreds of thousands of bottles thrown away around our own community. We believed there should be a better alternative to this. We decided to take it a step further and ditch the use of plastic bottles. We spent our first few months innovating and pioneering the first-ever single-use packet of sanitizer, which is made of 95% paper material. We are on track to manufacture a 100% completely biodegradable packet that can hold sanitizer as well.

As Canadians continued to purchase more, the demand grew for higher-quality, domestically made PPE. There were many instances in the past year where imported sanitizers contained traces of mercury, lead or methanol. This is very toxic to human skin. More recently, imported masks in Quebec contained graphene, which, if consumed in consistent or large amounts, could result in some lung damage.

All these problems resulted in an influx of new Canadian manufacturers. The industry itself did flourish. We partnered with members of the Canadian Association of PPE Manufacturers, CAPPEM for short, which is a rather newer association that employs over 1,000 Canadian PPE workers and aims to ensure that Canadians will never again be vulnerable to shortages of PPE during a time of pandemic or otherwise. We have also partnered up with several Canadian PPE manufacturers across the country to share our own resources and accessibility to certain products.

We also partnered up with a company that manufactures the Air Sniper. It's a very effective air sanitation device that uses UVC technology. In December 2020 it was tested and proven to kill COVID-19. The Air Sniper is a Canadian product manufactured in Alberta. It is a highly impactful solution that we have today that can allow our companies to open safely and help jump-start the economy. Unlike other air sanitization devices, it also produces zero ozone.

We recommend that the Canadian government not delay the ban on single-use plastics any longer; look inward when procuring for PPE, as Canadians are now more than capable of supplying domestic demand; and implement technologies like Air Snipers to help transition to opening our businesses safely in, hopefully, the final phase of this pandemic.

Thank you. I look forward to answering any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

With that, we will start our rounds of questions with a six-minute round.

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

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My thanks to all the witnesses for joining us today.

I will first turn to Ms. Waridel.

We have met before. You once stayed in my constituency, at Notre-Dame-des-Sept-Douleurs, on the beautiful Île Verte.

Ms. Waridel, the Liberal government has set itself the target of decreasing greenhouse gas emissions by 40% to 45% of 2005 levels by 2030. Given that Canada has not reached the targets it has set itself in the past and that those emissions continue to increase, do you believe that the targets are realistic?

We must also recognize that Quebecers have become great purchasers of sport utility vehicles, SUVs, which somewhat contradicts our claim that we are focused on the future in environmental terms.

Could you explain that contradiction on the part of Quebecers?

[Dr. Laure Waridel]

Thank you for your questions, Mr. Généreux.

Are the targets actually realistic? That depends on one's point of view. It seems to me to be much more unrealistic to fail to tackle our greenhouse gas emissions more seriously than we are. That requires changes much greater than those that the Liberal Party is currently considering and proposing.

We should be modelling ourselves more on the Scandinavian countries, for example. They have not set 2050 as the date for reaching carbon neutrality. They want to do it as soon as possible. We have to look at carbon neutrality as an objective to be achieved as soon as possible.

You ask me whether or not that objective is realistic. Let me ask you: when some major players on the planet decided that they wanted to go to the moon, do you believe that they asked the engineers how far they could get? No. They said: “The objective is to walk on the moon. Now we have to find the means, to develop the technologies and to do what has to be done to achieve that objective.” I feel that we need that kind of mindset if we really want to protect the future for our children.

We must listen to the science, and we are not doing that at the moment. Basically, we are not ambitious enough.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Don't you believe that we are already listening? There have actually been some fundamental changes.

“Matter can neither be created nor destroyed”, they say, and my mother always used to say something similar. So we know that we will need petroleum for another 30, 40, 50, 60 years at least, maybe 100 years, for transportation, for heating and for everything else.

I feel the industry is adapting and making major improvements.

Do you at least acknowledge those improvements? Honestly, if we don't get our petroleum in Canada, where are we going to get it from?

[Dr. Laure Waridel]

I acknowledge that some efforts have been made, such as the proposals for the circular economy. We did not have time to really talk about them in our presentation, but they are in the document we submitted. That is certainly one way to apply the principle that “matter can neither be created nor destroyed” and to model ourselves on nature. However, we have to do more than that because, at the moment, despite all the talk, our greenhouse gas emissions are actually increasing.

When we look at the various sectors of the Canadian economy where emissions continue to increase, first place undeniably goes to the oil sands and to fossil fuels. So we have to look at the science and the exact figures. We have alternate solutions. We waste a huge amount of energy. You mentioned SUVs, that's a great example. We must find other ways to meet our transportation needs without using as much petroleum.

Petroleum will be an issue as long as we keep investing in infrastructure, in pipelines and such, that needs to remain profitable for decades. But we know that we have start the race for carbon neutrality now. The future, the health and the quality of life of our children all depend on it. So we must find other solutions. We must reframe our priorities around what is most important for us, and that, in my view, is our children.

Someone said earlier that we're killing jobs. In my opinion, we're killing the future of our kids right now. That's what we do when we buy a pipeline.

That is what we are doing when we subsidize fossil fuels to the tune of $30 billion. That money should be going directly to support the workers. With $30 billion, how many people could we pay to move to other sectors full-time? Alberta has potential in solar and wind energy, and they are just starting to explore it.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Ms. Waridel, I understand the objective. We all agree that ultimately we are going to have to reach carbon neutrality in order to leave our children a much cleaner environment. I have grandchildren myself.

I commend your movement, Mothers…

[Dr. Laure Waridel]

Mothers Step In.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I commend the Mothers Step In movement.

I might really want to start Fathers Step In.

[Dr. Laure Waridel]

We need you to do that.