Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 20th, 2025

[Jamie Stephen]

The first is that anything we make from oil and gas we can technically make from biomass. What matters when we're talking about this is what the implied cost is per tonne of CO2. We can make jet fuel from wood, and we can make diesel from wood, but if the implied carbon cost is $1,500 per tonne of CO2, that doesn't live in reality. This is where you have to look at the other side of the carbon equation, and it's why I bring up BECCS and the carbon dioxide removals. Ultimately, if we're going to actually accomplish any of these climate goals, they have to be done in a way that is pragmatic and is delivering the lowest-cost reductions possible. The clean fuel regulations, I would say, are pretty strong regulations. Keep those in place. Carbon dioxide removals are complementary to that. Ultimately, we're not going to have enough agricultural products to be able to replace a majority of our transportation fuels. That's just not going to happen.

On your second point—

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Just wrap it up, please. We're out of time.

[Jamie Stephen]

Yes.

If you don't have pulp mills, you have to have a market. Yes, historically, we haven't gone and done a lot of pulp wood—so that timber directly for energy or for BECCS—but ultimately, if you want to manage the forest for the forest, you have to have that low-grade market.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Monsieur Martel.

You have five minutes.

He is followed by Mr. McKinnon, who also has five minutes before we wrap up.

Thank you.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Many sawmills across the country are very likely to close. That is what's happened in my riding. The sawmill in Petit-Saguenay announced last week that it was closing, putting 25 people out of work, and impacting 25 families and whole villages that rely on those jobs.

On Monday, I asked Steeve St‑Gelais, the president of Boisaco, whether the government was unwilling to sign an agreement, and he said that would be a logical conclusion.

For that reason, I would like to move the following motion:

That the committee report to the House that it condemns the ongoing and unjustified American tariffs on Canada’s softwood lumber industry, and that it calls upon the government to live up to the promise it made during the election to “negotiate a win” for the workers whose livelihoods depend on a good deal for Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

That motion is in order because it relates to the study at hand.

Go ahead, Monsieur Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

It's very clear where my friend Mr. Martel is going with this. Is that what the motion says? I don't think that's the version I was sent beforehand, because the wording isn't quite the same. Could you send us the motion right now?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Colleagues, because it has different wording, as Monsieur Simard has said, I think we need to see the wording, so I am suspending.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Colleagues, we are back in session.

This was put on notice on November 14, so it is in order.

We're back to you, Monsieur Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I wasn't expecting this today. If we go ahead with this, it means there will be a debate in the House.

I would've preferred to work on the motion a bit before agreeing to it. I'd like to hear what my fellow members have to say. We've talked at length about a proposal. I brought it up to the witnesses. It was raised here. I would've liked to refer to it, since we are looking for a solution.

Perhaps I'll wait a bit.

It's Mr. Guay's turn, so I'll yield the floor to him.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Hang on. Go through the chair, please.

Mr. Tochor.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Chair, prior to your adjourning, I had asked.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

We'll go to Mr. Tochor and then to you.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Briefly, Chair, this has been on notice for a while now. We've heard testimonies about the damaging impacts that these tariffs have had. This is a statement for which I'd be surprised if we didn't have support from all members of this committee, because it is reporting exactly what we've heard from people living the hell that is their lives since these tariffs were put into place.

I think we should concur this report to the House and condone this. I would be shocked if other members of this committee didn't support this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Mr. Guay, go ahead.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Chair, I propose that we adjourn.

I agree with Mr. Simard that we want to study this. We're thinking about some changes we haven't concluded, so I propose that we adjourn the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Colleagues know that's a dilatory motion, and we have to have a vote.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Geneviève Dubois-Richard]

Is it to end debate or to adjourn the meeting?

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Don't I have to adjourn the debate first?

[The Clerk]

No, you don't have to.

I just want to be clear that we're adjourning the debate.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I have a point of order, Chair.

This is shutting down debate. We should be having this conversation at this committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

That is debate. We'll go to the vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4)

The debate is adjourned.

Colleagues, do we wish to adjourn? It's one o'clock.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Witnesses, thank you so much. It was very enlightening testimony today. As we commonly say, we welcome your further thoughts with a brief. Again, finally, thank you for being with us today.

We're adjourned.