Natural Resources Committee on April 23rd, 2009

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Again, it is another one of these programs that has been a massive success in Canada, not only because people are educated on the importance of energy efficiency with these kinds of programs being available, but they're seeing savings in their pocketbooks when they make energy efficiency decisions in the house.

I have some statistics. Over 94,000 Canadian households have completed energy efficiency upgrades, and they're eligible for grants. Through the expansion of the new program, which was expanded by about $300 million, we have increased the grant levels available. We anticipate that 200,000 more homes will be able to take advantage of and participate in the program. That has an extra economic effect of $2.4 billion across Canada.

It's a very successful program. We've experienced great feedback on it. More importantly, the provinces have come online to match funds with us on these programs, to make it even more attractive to the Canadian homeowner to do the right thing, become more energy efficient, and save money along the way.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Minister, I know that many constituents in my riding have taken advantage of this good program. I wonder whether you know if other parts of our great country, other Canadians, are also taking advantage of this program.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Yes. In my province of Ontario, certainly there's been a great uptake in people wanting to do home retrofits. In Nova Scotia as well, I heard from the minister responsible for the program, who said it's of great interest to them. Specifically, because Nova Scotia has a much older stock of homes, it certainly is helpful to have the federal as well as the provincial granting mechanism, to make it that much more accessible for people to do energy efficiency retrofits.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

We all will agree that it makes great sense to encourage energy efficiency. We all also know that there are not only homes in this country; we have commercial buildings as well. Are there any measures in place to help make commercial buildings more energy efficient and reduce GHG emissions?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Yes. We not only focus on Canadian homeowners, but we want businesses to be more energy efficient as well. Saving energy is the goal, in general, for energy efficiency, be it in a person's home or in their business.

The ecoENERGY retrofit program provides incentives in the form of financial support to businesses, as well as public institutions and industrial facilities, to help them implement energy-saving projects and reduce greenhouse gases and air pollution. Commercial and institutional participants in the program could receive up to $10 per gigajoule of estimated energy savings, 25% of eligible project costs, or $50,000 per project. That is also a successful program.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Do I have some more time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have time for one more question.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you.

This is a very important question for me, Minister, because I am from Alberta, and the oil sands are very important for us. The oil sands have been a key economic driver, helping to keep our economy relatively strong in relation to most other developed countries during this economic downturn. However, there are challenges that come with oil sands production. Can you tell us whether any action is being taken to conquer those challenges so that Canada can continue to capitalize on this key resource while reducing the impact on our environment?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I agree with you completely. The oil sands are a strategic resource and are key to our energy supply and also to energy security, not only of this country but of North America as well. We are committed to mitigating the environmental impacts of the development of the oil sands, because when you think about it, they hold one of the world's largest oil deposits that is available here in Canada for production.

The current low oil prices have led to the delay of several oil sands projects, which is disappointing. However, world demand will return and will continue to climb. That's a fact. We have to remember that for the Canadian economy, that natural resource is there. It is available for us to make sure that we utilize it responsibly, and at some point in time, when the economic situation improves, the projects will resume.

Recognizing the fact that it is a fossil fuel, however, we must develop that resource responsibly. There are two ways to do that. Number one, in order to deal with the demand for energy in the world, we must do what we spoke about before, which is to increase renewable energy. The second aspect, though, is to recognize that if we are using fossil fuels, we must explore technologies that are going to help mitigate their use.

This economic action plan, as I indicated in the opening remarks, has $1 billion set aside in a clean energy fund. We have a clean energy dialogue with the United States, focusing on those promising technologies that will help us mitigate the use of fossil fuels. In this case, it's carbon capture and storage. In fact, I made an announcement, as I indicated, in March about eight different projects across Canada that are going to be funded by the federal government. They will help, in portion and in coordination with industry, to develop carbon capture and storage for production of fertilizer, for the production of oil, and use in gas as well.

It is important for us to be leading in carbon capture and storage, because we really can be a world leader in it. We belong to a global carbon capture and storage institute. We are a founding member, as is Australia, and we have signed agreements with the United Kingdom with respect to carbon capture and storage. There's great innovation and ingenuity in Canada and great knowledge on the topic. In fact, in Saskatchewan we've had a carbon capture and storage project running for a number of years as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Shory, your time is up.

Monsieur Bélanger, go ahead for up to five minutes.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Madam Minister, you mentioned AECL and Chalk River, so I want to go there.

We know that the government, perhaps even Natural Resources Canada, has commissioned a study by the National Bank to determine whether or not AECL should be privatized, and if so, how. Is there any more information that you would be prepared to share with us today on that matter?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

As you indicated, sir, the government announced a review of AECL last year. It's part of our commitment to due diligence and good governance and responsible management, but more importantly, we recognize that the world is going through what is being termed a “nuclear renaissance”. There is a demand for clean, low-emitting electricity, and nuclear power does indeed provide that.

The overall objective of the review was to bring forward options to strengthen the corporation. We have received that report from the National Bank. My officials are reviewing that report and will be making recommendations on the report. It's very important--if I could just take one more second on this--to indicate that it's not just about reviewing Atomic Energy Canada Limited. We must recognize the fact that the nuclear industry in Canada is so important, with 30,000 jobs and great economic activity.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

So there's no information or no more of that report that you can share with us today?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Currently, my officials are reviewing the report. They will be making recommendations.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you.

What's leaked is that the recommendation about privatizing is that the proprietary information and knowledge for the CANDU be privatized to 51%, therefore ceding control. There are those who have equated that to a similar mistake. Especially because of the current renaissance, as you mentioned, Minister, they are sort of equating this to the decision of another government in the past about the Avro Arrow.

Are you prepared at this point to rule out privatization?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

We're taking a look at all options that are available in order to strengthen Canada's commitment to nuclear research, and the officials are reviewing it.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you.

Your government, with the support of the opposition, refused the acquisition by foreign interests of MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates. Are you prepared to rule out acquisition of AECL or majority control of AECL's technology by foreign interests?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

It's a complex matter. As I indicated, the National Bank study has been received by the department. The officials are reviewing it, and we'll consider any options that the officials bring, but no decisions have been made.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

So you're not prepared to rule it out. Okay.

In December there was a spill of tritiated water. On December 14 CanWest News Services reported that and reported that they got that information from the engineer, who was saying, and I quote, “Operators now must wear protective clothing inside the reactor hall because of the beta fields”, because of a “minor spill of tritiated water”. But the next day the chief nuclear officer for the facility denied that there had been a discharge of active water. Then later, you tabled a report in the House confirming that there had been.

There are those who would like to see a fairly open and public investigation on this matter, with full disclosure. Is that not being done in order to not affect the possible value of AECL, if you did decide to privatize and sell it?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I have to say that's an interesting juxtaposition of thoughts, but it's not the case.

The health and safety of Canadians is our greatest concern. So we asked for a report from CNSC, we asked for a report from AECL, and we asked our officials in Natural Resources Canada as well to report on what happened. Those reports discussed in depth what happened, and indeed they were tabled in the House, as I indicated. But more importantly, since then both AECL and CNSC have had public meetings and have talked about the incidents in public and have indicated that they will do better in terms of disclosure.

This matter was fully disclosed. It has been tabled, and the reports are there to read.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Along those lines, there was supposed to be a planned release of some treated radioactive water that had been collected as a result of last December's leak. Has this been done, and if so, have there been public reports of this? Again, how have we assured the public that there are no worries, especially when those operating the plant have to wear protective suits?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I can't speak to the operations of AECL, because AECL operates Chalk River and are the most appropriate people to talk about what internal measures they take with respect to employee regulation. But what I can say is that it is well disclosed and it is actually on websites talking about what happens with radioactive water and how long it's stored and how it is then re-released into the environment. All that information is available online for people to take a look at. It's fully disclosed and it is part of the operations of AECL and Chalk River, and they're the most appropriate people to discuss it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Allen, for up to five minutes.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming today.

I do appreciate the remarks you made with respect to the black liquor issue. This is a huge issue in New Brunswick with our pulp mills, recognizing that this U.S. subsidy represents about $120 to $150 U.S. per tonne subsidy to the U.S. marketers. So I appreciate the recognition, and I can't stress enough on you and your ministerial colleagues to press this issue with the U.S. as best you can to make sure that we have our companies on a level playing field.

I would really appreciate your comments on that.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

It is of great concern from two perspectives. From an environmental perspective, it's almost a perverse way of dealing with an incentive that is meant to encourage the use of cleaner fuels. In a backwards way what is happening is that this black liquor is being mixed with diesel fuel in order to get access to the subsidy. And it is a significant subsidy. It qualifies mills for 50¢ per gallon of a refundable tax credit, and that helps the bottom line of those mills in the United States.

I have written to Secretary Chu on the matter and expressed our concern that in a time of global economic recession, when all industries are enduring much pain, this subsidy is working to render anti-competitiveness. Internally, we're discussing it with industry, DFAIT, and all the appropriate officials here in the government to see what we can do, taking a look at options, and moving forward on the matter.