Okay.
Evidence of meeting #5 for Natural Resources in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cap.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #5 for Natural Resources in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cap.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:40 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
—or approaches, but they cannot be used as an excuse to delay action, and they cannot be used as an excuse to not actually reduce emissions.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
Thank you for that. I would certainly disagree with you on that, but I understand where you're coming from.
I have a lot of topics I'd like to get to, so I'll move to another one.
In terms of looking at new technologies, whether solar, wind or a number of things that we're working on, obviously critical minerals are going to play an important role there. These are important for my riding. The Ring of Fire is a notable example there of areas where we can access critical minerals.
Would you recommend that Canada have a broader focus on domestic extraction of critical minerals to help support that transition?
1:45 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
If I may bridge that question back into our original summary report, one of the key things we found was that this concept of getting to net zero is not just a downside. This is probably one of the largest economic opportunities in many generations, and you can see the whole world positioning themselves with regard to how to win economically in this big change. There are huge upsides that we need to position Canada to be able to capitalize on.
We have thought about the concept of value chains and minerals, and we do think that it's very important for Canada to act quickly and strategically in order to be able to capitalize on this potential upside that will only become real if we act.
I think the private sector has a very strong responsibility in this as well.
1:45 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
One of our core principles is that people have been waiting for 30 years for the federal government to do something so that they could act. We're past that. Responsibility needs to be shared equally by the private sector, the federal government, the provincial governments and municipal governments.
1:45 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
—that we will be putting in our emissions reduction report.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
I appreciate that. I'm sorry, but I have limited time. I don't mean to be rude, but I want to get as many questions in as I can.
I'd like to take it a bit away from industry and look at local, individualized community-based solutions and get your thoughts on those. For example, Fort Severn in my riding is the northernmost community in Ontario. It's on Hudson Bay. They're doing a lot of great work to find innovative solutions, using solar power and looking at wind.
I'd just like to get your thoughts on the role that the government can play and should play in supporting those community-based solutions as well.
1:45 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
I think government has a critical role. Creating policy, certainly, is what the finance sector continuously says it needs. One of our principles also though was that there's actually more certainty than uncertainty. We know we are going to need massive electrification. That's key. We know we're going to need probably different energy carrier sources to move everything that's around the landscape. So policy certainty that will allow the finance sector and the private sector to act quickly is very important.
Governments also have a role in direct support, and we think that our work, which we feel will feed into the ERP, will give the government some guidance on where across the full economy the government support is most needed. In many cases it is on the types of things remote communities would need to do.
1:45 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
If I may, I will add that acknowledging regional differences and circumstances is one our values. So solutions proposed at local levels will be very important.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Okay, we're going to cut off that one.
Our next questioner is Ms. Lapointe.
Over to you, Ms. Lapointe. You have five minutes.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Viviane LaPointe Liberal Sudbury, ON
Thank you.
Mr. Wicklum, in your initial observations report that was issued last June, you stated:
The most likely pathways will take into account that there is no one-size-fits-all approach for Canada and prioritize place-based solutions.
I'd be interested in hearing your suggestions today on how the government should create and, actually, also implement effective regionally sensitive policy.
1:45 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
I think what you're stating is one of the great challenges for Canada. If we were in Europe, we would probably be 10 countries or more, based on regional differences, so this is one of the great challenges for a large country like ours.
In the emissions reduction plan that the government legally has to put in the public domain before the end of March, we expect the government will have more details in terms of how that will be done. I think one of the key things that, in our terms of reference, we are asked to do and we're taking very seriously is to engage. So we are here not to be the technical experts. We are here to essentially represent Canada in its full diversity and then to talk to Canadians in their full diversity and get regional and local suggestions about how to actually address the question you're asking. That's the mechanism we're using, and as we develop over the years, we think we can get much more formal in doing that work. But how do we accommodate regionality and local interests? We talk to the regions and talk to local interests. That's key for what we want to do.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
Viviane LaPointe Liberal Sudbury, ON
On that note, were indigenous climate organizations included in your consultations, and what did you learn from them?
1:50 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
We had eight round tables that included a whole suite of indigenous organizations and representations. One of the things we did, at the request of people who were meeting with us—organizations that were meeting with us, in many cases, and in some cases at our request—was to put in place essentially the Chatham House rule. For people to feel they could speak freely and bluntly, we gave people assurance that we wouldn't debrief specifically on what individual organizations or people said in our consultations. That's quite normal.
That said, we did ask every organization to submit a formal submission to our website, and those are all summarized in a summary document. What we can say is that we decided, right off the bat, probably within the first month of our operations, that the concept of listening to indigenous interests and ensuring that the transition to net zero happened in such a way that they could benefit equally from the economic upside was going to be absolutely critically core to our philosophy and our work.
That's a generic answer.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
Viviane LaPointe Liberal Sudbury, ON
Very quickly, what I'm hearing from the mining industry—and I'm sure that the oil and gas sector is facing similar challenges—is that the need to take action is time sensitive and we need to support our energy industries and give them the tools to meet the goals we're setting.
How can government move the process of net-zero emissions along more quickly?
1:50 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
I think that's a struggle that every government is having in the whole world, at the level of the nation, the province, the region or municipality. How do we act more quickly?
My feeling is that we have moved away from a paradigm of emissions reduction, where we've been for 30 years and where we had the luxury of just reducing emissions by a certain amount and the world would have been fine. Collectively, at the level of the world, we didn't move quickly enough, so we're forced now into an emissions elimination paradigm. That removes options from the table for us.
This isn't about what sector can reduce the most cheaply so that we get to a certain reduction: every sector has to drive to zero. I think changing from this emissions reduction to an emissions elimination paradigm also changes the onus of leadership. This is not just about Environment and Climate Change Canada anymore. Frankly, it's about every federal department, agency, crown, province, territory, municipal government—and, I'm going to say, especially the private sector too.
In the private sector are the ones that are actually going to invest. The philosophy for decades has been collectively looking to Environment and Climate Change Canada to say, “Make it worth our while so that we can invest.” That paradigm will not work anymore in an emissions-elimination paradigm. Frankly, I believe the private sector has to inspect how they make decisions, how they contribute to developing policy and regulation and how they contribute to developing investable projects that are aligned with a net-zero society.
I think it's very much a question not of what the government can do but of what everyone can do, especially the private sector.
1:50 p.m.
Co-Chair, Net-Zero Advisory Body
Actually, I just wanted to add that doing little now and doing a lot later will not work. Inaction comes at a cost; we must act urgently. As Mr. Wicklum said, everyone must make a contribution.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Okay, thank you.
We're going to go now to Monsieur Simard, who will have two and a half minutes.