Industry committee  Thank you.

Industry committee  But we have. With respect, we've cut methane by 50%. You talked about nuclear; we are bringing out small modular reactors. We've been leaders in that. We were the leaders on that and we have no federal funding on nuclear or on our small modular reactor plan. Small modular react

Industry committee  Well, it's a shame that the tone of the bill is so top-down. I guess I would say that there's nothing stopping ministers right now from sharing their methane data with us. We don't need Bill C-235, surely, to work collaboratively with provinces on things of joint interest. As I

Industry committee  In fact, I think it would help if Bill C‑235 referred to working together with respect to the laws and regulations that already exist. Instead of starting fresh in Bill C-235 and saying that now, for these enumerated areas, from tree planting to the rest, we are going to mandat

Industry committee  I don't think the bill is necessary. I think we are already doing significant things in Canada, in western Canada and in Saskatchewan around emissions, and I've referenced some of them. The emissions from our potash sector are 50% lower than those in any other jurisdiction in the

Industry committee  It's very important.

Industry committee  We don't accept per capita. We see that as a misleading intensity gauge. It's intensity that should be gauged, not per capita emissions. When you look at true emissions that Saskatchewan produces, based on that reckoning, it's 0.111%. It's very, very small, and within the global

Industry committee  Well, among other things, it's really looking at the impacts of federal policies, regulations and legislation on our economy, which I think is very relevant for the purpose of committee members this morning. We want to foster what we've built. We want to build on what we have. Th

Industry committee  Well, I've said through the remarks this morning that one thing that's concerning about the bill is the top-down name, the top-down tone, and the implementation of we're not quite sure what. It's the vagueness, frankly. It's both the vagueness and the prescriptiveness, if that ma

Industry committee  I guess it makes me very nervous. I find the bill so general. On the earlier question about consultation, I don't know how you can possibly have a full consultation or collaboration if you speed up. How do you build a green economy in 12 months in the areas that are being listed

Industry committee  I don't think there's much knowledge about the bill. Mr. Carr was quite clear that there hadn't been consultation on this bill previous to its being introduced by him. If I'm understanding him correctly, the consultation would begin following the introduction of the bill. There

Industry committee  It's a very good question, and I'm going to use a very specific example to answer, because we want to make sure we're trying to be constructive about what could help the relationship. I often use the example of our methane plan. The Province of Saskatchewan has federal equivalen

Industry committee  I'm going to answer this in English, if I may. I think there are so many funds, if we're talking about funds that we can access as provinces, like innovation funds. For example, the one that I mentioned that's over $100 million.... Honestly, one loses track of some of these nam

Industry committee  All right. Thank you.

Industry committee  They see that and they are deeply cynical. I guess I would say that if you're going to propose a bill like this that actually talks about building a green economy on the Prairies without asking the Prairies, perhaps you should start with that consultation. To a certain extent her