Evidence of meeting #19 for International Trade in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was issues.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you, Mr. Lobb.
Is there any further comment on Mr. Blaikie's motion as amended?
Do you want a recorded vote on this?
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
If there's consensus for it to pass, Madam Chair, I don't see a need.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
I don't see any objection.
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
We will now move to Mr. Sheehan's motion.
Mr. Sheehan, you have the floor.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Sheehan Liberal Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Thank you very much.
I've read this into the record and I've circulated it. Due to the time, and also the fact that Mr. Savard-Tremblay will be introducing some motions, I don't know if it's necessary to read it. I would just ask the committee to vote on this now. It's a very important subject and it captures a lot.
I open it back up to the floor, Madam Chair.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
Thank you.
I would propose to Mr. Sheehan a friendly amendment to include “nuclear”, to the broadest extent that you could include nuclear in it, just recognizing from CANDU all the sourcing, servicing and supplying, including the finished reactor.
Any way you can put it in there that makes Mr. Sheehan happy would satisfy me. Seeing as Bruce Power, the largest nuclear reactor in the world, is in my riding, I thought they should be included in that.
Thank you.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
This is a good motion, a very important one, on clean energy, but I see that it lacks one critical thing. In the clean energy space today, the growing viability factor for clean energy is energy storage, and that is batteries—not just for electric vehicles but as an energy storage system.
This motion deals with exportation, but we have to focus also on the importation of these technologies so that we can use them for the development of industry, from mines to manufacturing to technologies. In the U.S., in the last year alone, four or five major projects—close to $10 billion—have been announced for the development of batteries, focusing on both electric vehicles and energy storage systems.
When we deal with clean energy, we should also recognize the growing importance of battery technologies as energy storage, which makes clean energy more viable. We should also focus on trade commissioners helping us get the technology so that the manufacturing can be done in Canada. If they can be manufactured viably in the U.S., we can also get it done in Canada.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you, Mr. Arya.
When you do your witness lists, I'm sure those will be some of the witnesses you're going to want to make sure are there.
Mr. Blaikie.
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I just want to say that I'd be happy to undertake this study. I am concerned and hopeful that we might be able to move quickly to the study on the WTO TRIPS proposal. I would feel far more comfortable voting in favour of the study if it were clear in the motion that we were going to undertake this study after the TRIPS study. I'm wondering if there might be a willingness on the part of Mr. Sheehan and the committee to make that will clear.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Sheehan Liberal Sault Ste. Marie, ON
I'll take care of those three comments now.
Yes, as it reads, it says, “examination on how Canadian clean technology such as hydroelectricity, wind energy, solar energy, carbon sequestration,”—carbon capture—“grid management, and plastics recycling”. That's a “such as”, but I would be more than willing to add, especially with regard to grid management, because that is a lot about batteries too.... We could just put “batteries” in there.
With regard to MP Lobb's comments, let's also add a comma and “nuclear” in there to talk about the good things he is proposing as well.
Yes, I'll accept all those.
Mr. Blaikie, yes, at the last meeting I mentioned this would be about a three- or four-meeting study—maybe four now with those two more things introduced—and I said that we could plug it in as we need to, as we go along on this important study. Obviously, I just voted to support Mr. Blaikie's motion, so I'm okay with that.
March 12th, 2021 / 2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
First, with regard to the priority of studies, I agree that Mr. Blaikie's is probably more timely because of what we're dealing with.
Mr. Sheehan, if you're agreeable, another thing that we could add in here is LNG. We could probably add in another 10, 20 or 30 items to the list.
Perhaps the best way to address this, rather than being prescriptive and listing everything we can possibly think of, is if we don't list anything and just leave it more general. Call it “clean technology” and then move on. Then it gives more options, because if this study isn't going to happen very soon, within the next week or so, there might be other emerging ideas that come to us. Rather than being so prescriptive, I would like to suggest that we just keep it general. Each of us, as we have different witnesses and ideas, can bring them forth at that time.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Sheehan Liberal Sault Ste. Marie, ON
If you don't mind, Madam Chair, I can reply to that quickly.
The carbon capture and sequestration goes around some of the industries that you were talking about and some of the great technologies that they're using in trying to get down to net zero.
It's a “such as”. As the chair mentioned, with regard to anyone who wants to bring forward witnesses around clean tech or anything else, I think that would be up to the MPs' purviews. I was just using this as an example. You're right; we could probably list 10, 20 or 100 things. They're just examples, so I would welcome the introduction of whoever would like to testify and is doing great work in Canadian clean technology.
The message is understood. Thank you.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Rachel Bendayan Liberal Outremont, QC
Thank you to my colleague, Mr. Sheehan, for putting forward the motion, and to Mr. Lobb for the proposed amendment, which I am supportive of.
I just want to indicate that we are now at 2:58. Rather than having an extensive discussion about the calendar, scheduling and where we're going to put these motions, which we haven't done for any of our previous motions, I would suggest that if we are close to finishing debate, we vote on the motion before us, as is, with the amendment. I'm not sure if it's necessary to vote on them separately.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB
First of all, it's a good motion by Mr. Sheehan. I think this is a study we really need.
I would echo Mrs. Gray's suggestion just to keep it broad, because almost every day, something new comes into this industry to improve the green, general environment and so forth. We are in the middle of it in Canada, and it would be nice to keep it open and generic. I want to make sure that nothing in the motion will limit our ability to invite witnesses.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Yes, Madam Chair. I was just going to make the suggestion that perhaps we say “such as but not exclusive to”, or “such as but not....” I'm trying to think of the wording here, off the top. I just want it to be really clear that we can open this up. As we've said, there might be other ways we haven't even thought of, so it would be such as but not—
3 p.m.
Conservative
3 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Mr. Sheehan, this is your motion, with a suggested amendment from Mr. Lobb. Are you wanting to change it, or do you want to have a vote on your original motion as amended by Mr. Lobb, or...?