Debates of May 29th, 2023

Department of Finance—Main Estimates, 2023-24

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, we have to produce more electricity and ensure that it is green electricity because that is what investors want.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, could nuclear projects benefit from these tax credits?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, the answer is yes.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, we are also going to talk about hydrogen.

You are establishing a tax credit for investing in hydrogen. To your knowledge, will hydrogen produced from natural gas be eligible for this tax credit?

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The member must direct her question to the Chair.

The hon. Minister of Finance.

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, when it comes to hydrogen, our approach is to have a system that will make it possible to determine the carbon content of the hydrogen that is produced.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, I would like to ask the minister another question.

Is that tax credit reserved only for green hydrogen, the type of hydrogen that Canada's allies who are committed to the fight against climate change really want to buy?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, we understand the importance of having a system that investors can compare with those of other administrations. That is what we did with hydrogen.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, Germany wants green hydrogen. That is what it is asking for. Why then is the government offering a tax credit for the production of grey hydrogen? There are all sorts of colours of hydrogen and the colour depends on the source from which the hydrogen is produced. Right now, it is grey hydrogen. Why invest in that?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, I very much appreciate the questions about the green transition and hydrogen. I agree that our allies, the investors, are very interested in Canada's hydrogen production. We think the ideal approach is to talk about the carbon content—

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, the minister is giving an investment tax credit for clean technology. Since we do not agree on what is clean and what is not when it comes to hydrogen, I would like to know what range of technologies the government considers to be clean.

Can you confirm that this credit will not be used to fund projects related to the oil and gas sector?

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I cannot do that, but I will ask the hon. minister to answer that question.

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, if you would like to help me answer questions, I would be very happy, because this is the third hour of this debate.

When it comes to questions about industrial policies, more often than not, we agree with the Bloc.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, I am glad to hear that the minister somewhat agrees with us. We would like to define the terms “subsidies” and “clean technologies”.

Of the $80 billion planned over 10 years, can the minister tell us how much will be invested in Quebec's green economy?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, all of these credits will be invested in Canada's green economy. As for Quebec, as I said in our discussion about Stellantis, regional equality is very important to me—

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Repentigny.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, there is one thing that is not entirely clear in terms of the questions I asked, specifically relating to when the minister talked about coal. I would like to clarify that. Can tax credits be given to those industries?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, the credits will be used to make investments to create a clean economy and reduce existing greenhouse gas emissions—

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, the government chose to spend billions of dollars in public funds on extremely expensive technology to the sole benefit of the industry. The government therefore accepts the solution that the industry chose. I am talking about carbon capture and storage. Some 400 Canadian academics contacted the government to say no to carbon capture and storage. The analyses and studies are clear: it is the most costly and least useful method and its effectiveness has not been proven. Anything that is captured is often thrown back into the atmosphere.

I would like the minister to explain what it means when the government says that we need to listen to science. Why fall head first into this sham?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, as I said a few minutes ago, generally, we agree with the Bloc when it comes to the need to take action to fight climate change. We may not agree on the use of nuclear technology and obviously we do not agree on carbon capture. We think it is a very important technology that offers a lot of possibilities in Canada thanks to our geological formations. There is a lot of interest from investors. It is a good thing for Canada.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, indeed, we do not agree on carbon capture and storage. This technology has a poor record. For example, the Shell Quest facility produced more greenhouse gas emissions than it captured with its technology.

Around the world, of the 149 projects to be storing carbon by 2020, 100 were cancelled or placed on indefinite hold. Even in the United States, most government incentives were withdrawn.

I would like to know if the minister can tell us what is the secret. Why would this technology magically work in Canada when it does not work anywhere else?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, it is unfortunate but I do not agree with what my hon. colleague said. I believe that it really is a technology that has a lot of possibilities, not just for Canada, but also for the United States and other countries.

The reality is that Canada has created an investment credit. It will be up to the private sector to make the additional investments. The sector—

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Repentigny.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Madam Chair, in 2022, oil companies made $38 billion in combined profits. I think they have the money they need. If they believe in this technology, then they should be using their profits to pay for it.

I am going to ask some questions about Trans Mountain. This morning, the Prime Minister received a letter signed by over 95 organizations calling on the Government of Canada to finalize its assessment framework for fossil fuel subsidies using the WTO's definition. They specified that loan guarantees are subsidies.

In February 2022, the minister said that no additional public money would be invested in Trans Mountain. However, three months later, she gave Trans Mountain a $10-billion loan guarantee. What happened in those three months to make her change her mind?

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Madam Chair, I did not change my mind. Canada offered Trans Mountain a loan guarantee, but we did not put any additional public funds into the project, as we promised. Unfortunately, Trans Mountain may be just another issue on which we do not agree with our Bloc Québécois colleagues.

I am a Canadian sovereignist. Our country's economic independence is very important to me. The economic dependence we have on the United States because we do not have a pipeline to the Pacific is dangerous for our country.