Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committee today.
I will start by introducing myself. My name is Normand Mousseau. I have a Ph.D. in theoretical physics, and I teach at the Université de Montréal.
I am currently in Paris as a visiting professor at the Université Pierre et Marie Curie. I co-chaired the Commission sur les enjeux énergétiques du Québec from July 2013 until the report was submitted, about a month and a half ago. The focus was on how to manage Quebec's energy-related future in a way that benefits the environment, the economy and society. And during that time, I also authored the following books: Au bout du pétrole — Tout ce que vous devez savoir sur la crise énergétique, L'avenir du Québec passe par l'indépendance énergétique, La révolution des gaz de schiste and Le défi des ressources minières. I think those are more or less the reasons why I was invited to appear before you today.
Among other things, I'd like to share with you my observations when I took a tour of the regions.
In the fall, we received more than 460 briefs to help us prepare our report on Quebec's energy issues. I would say the issues are somewhat common to the entire country.
First of all, Canada does not have an energy supply problem. We have ample energy resources, be it fossil fuels or renewable sources. We have significant, recoverable resources and an export market. There is no doubt that development comes with benefits, but it's important to take a close look at the issues it raises as well. After all, the focus of your study today pertains more to oil.
Canada has yet to really integrate oil development into its climate change policy. Yesterday, or the day before, the IPCC's report came out and the findings demonstrated the importance of climate change-related issues and the need to take action.
It's also important to note that Canada's renewable and non-renewable energy resources vary greatly from region to region. Canada can't simply focus on fossil fuels, which aren't renewable. It also has to support renewable energy resources.
I think we promote Canada. But it's one of the big fossil fuel-producing countries with the least amount of control over its energy and resource development. That remains a major problem that isn't talked about at all or mentioned in the document I received. Why raise the issue? Because it's essential if we want to increase direct and indirect spinoffs to the industry.
Several provinces have implemented specific programs to assume their climate change responsibilities. British Columbia and Alberta both have programs targeting the oil industry, and Quebec has just signed a carbon-cap and trade agreement with California. Regardless, Canada as a whole, and certainly the federal government, refuse to commit to any such efforts. Canada has systematically put up roadblocks to developing the Kyoto approach.
In some respects, that position is understandable. For a primary resource-producing country like Canada, the Kyoto Protocol's underlying philosophy is somewhat problematic because it holds the producer fully responsible for greenhouse gas emissions. But, in my view, Canada shouldn't just be content to do nothing simply because the Kyoto Protocol didn't suit its interests. Rather, it should be proactive and adopt a positive approach, both domestically and abroad; that approach should recognize that the costs should fall to the end consumer, not the country producing energy that is used elsewhere.
The oil produced in Alberta is consumed elsewhere. The end consumer should be the one who pays for the extra emissions associated with production, and not necessarily Canada. There is a way to change things, but the government has to be serious about action. I'd be glad to discuss that further later.
Canada has to increase its investments in the area. Considerable investments have been made in techniques for capturing and storing carbon, but so far, we have seen little in the way of results.
To date, however, those investments have resulted in very little. What's more, investments in other renewable energies are clearly inadequate. Canada has displayed a very strong bias in favour of oil development and seems to have overlooked the fact that the country's capacities in other types of resources are considerable and should be utilized.
I also think that Canada should make a more meaningful commitment in the energy sector. In December 2012, the Government of Canada announced that foreign state-owned enterprises would have to undergo a much tighter review of investments and takeovers in Canada, particularly in the energy sector.
The fact remains, however, that, unlike most big oil-producing countries, Canada still has no major players in the energy sector. Nor does it have the international clout it should for its level of oil production and wealth.
To my mind, it's important for Canada to assume a more prominent role in the energy sector, in both the private and public domains. It should encourage the development of world-class Canadian companies and Canadian energy resources, as well as significantly broaden its support for issues of energy relevance. And, above all, it cannot disregard the issue of climate change.
Thank you.