SoVote

Apr/25/22 12:30:29 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells. I would like to focus my talk on the following important items in the budget. The first is Canada's critical minerals and clean industrial strategies. In my view, this is, at the same time, the biggest opportunity and the most critical need for Canada today. Daniel Yergin is an economic historian and writer about whom Time magazine said, “If there's one man whose opinion matters more than any other on global energy markets, it's Daniel Yergin.” Mr. Yergin said in his latest book, “You're creating whole new supply chains that don't exist, and you're trying to do it in a very fast time. That means transitioning from Big Oil to Big Shovel.” The second is launching a world-leading Canada growth fund with $15 billion, which will help attract $45 billion in private capital. We need to transform our economy at speed and at scale. The third is creating a Canadian innovation and investment agency, a market-oriented agency, one with private sector leadership and expertise similar to those that have helped countries like Finland and Israel transform themselves into global innovation leaders. The fourth is the review of tax support to R and D. The decades-old scientific research and experimental development program has been a cornerstone of Canada's innovation strategy, which provides tax incentives to encourage Canadian businesses of all sizes in all sectors to conduct R and D. The fifth is cutting taxes for Canada's growing small businesses, enabling more small businesses to avail themselves of the reduced federal tax rate of 9% compared to the general federal corporate tax of 15%. The sixth is supporting Canada's innovation clusters for innovation ecosystems for plant-based protein alternatives, ocean-based industries, advanced manufacturing, digital technologies and artificial intelligence. Before I speak on these six items, I would like to recognize this budget as prudent and fiscally responsible. My personal political ideology is at the centre of the political spectrum, and for me being fiscally responsible is very important. I notice that our fiscal anchor, the debt-to-GDP ratio, is expected to fall to 45.1% this year, and go down to 41.5% by 2026-27, closer to the prepandemic levels. We need to go in this direction so that we have the same fiscal strength if we get hit by another disaster like the current pandemic. Related to this is the composition of our borrowing. We had very low interest rates for a long period of time, and now they have started to trend upward. When the rates were low, our government locked in these interest rates with increasing the size of our long-term borrowing. In the decade prior to the pandemic, on average, about 20% of the bonds issued by the government were issued at maturities of 10 years or greater. Over the course of the last year, the federal government allocation of long-term bonds was about 45%, which is a good thing. The third general observation about this budget is what I have been asking for a couple of years. I have been asking that we launch a comprehensive review of government programs. Some of the programs have been around for many years, and some were introduced in recent times as part of our urgent need to fight the pandemic. We need to evaluate if the programs are delivering what they were intended for. We need to know whether the objectives or the end results are still relevant and/or effective use of taxpayers' dollars. I have said that we need to repurpose or reallocate resources to programs that contribute to quality economic development. I am glad the budget announced the launch of a comprehensive strategic policy review to assess program effectiveness and to identify opportunities to save and reallocate resources to adapt government programs and operations to a new postpandemic reality. Last, the budget dealt with housing, immigration, skills and child care. Yes, these are social policies, but what is just as important is that they are economic policies, too. I entered politics with three objectives. My first objective was affordable housing for all who need it. I am happy to note that the budget builds on the national housing strategy and addresses both affordable housing and housing affordability. Now, I move on to development of critical minerals. As I said earlier, a big opportunity for Canada, and at the same time a critical necessity for Canada today, is developing and implementing critical minerals and clean industrial strategies. The global energy market is worth $10 trillion, and it is undergoing tremendous change. Many significant geopolitical events during the past 100 years were due to energy market considerations, so much so that some have said many countries' foreign policies are totally based on their energy policies. Now, another dimension has been added. What was behind the scenes is now in the front. Energy is a national security issue for all countries. It is both an opportunity and a necessity for Canada to focus on the energy industry. The nature of the energy industry is changing. The transportation sector is going from gasoline-powered vehicles to battery-operated vehicles. Renewable energy sources, such as wind energy and solar energy, are not only becoming financially feasible on their own, but can enhance their standing with battery energy storage systems. Right now, the battery industry is dominated by China. To secure continued availability of batteries in a future battery-dominated world, we need to have our own supply of batteries manufactured in Canada. We have one strong advantage that many countries do not have: We have the critical minerals required to manufacture batteries. Critical minerals are also central to major global industries such as green technology, health care, aerospace and computing. They are used in our phones, our computers and even our cars. Critical minerals are already essential to the global economy and will be in even greater demand in the years to come. We are talking about nickel, lithium, cobalt, graphite, copper, rare earth elements, vanadium, tellurium, gallium, scandium, titanium, magnesium, zinc, the platinum group of metals and uranium. Canada has an abundance of these valuable critical minerals, but we need to make significant investments to make the most of these resources. A thousand-pound electric battery requires about 500,000 pounds of earth to be moved. As Daniel Yergin said, “You're creating whole new supply chains that don't exist, and you're trying to do it in a very fast time. That means transitioning from Big Oil to Big Shovel.” In Canada, we have knowledge, expertise and a long track record of financing and developing mineral projects. We are indeed the world leaders, but we need to move fast now. We need to support the industry with incentives, which this budget proposes. More importantly, we should make the critical minerals regulation process simpler so companies seeking to invest look for a balanced and predictable regulatory environment and a collaborative approach among different orders of government. I am glad that the budget would make important investments in improving our regulatory processes. I will touch on just one other aspect: the Canadian innovation and investment agency. Let us face the bitter truth about innovation in Canada. Our main innovation challenges are the low rate of private business investment in research and development, and the uptake of new technologies. These are key requirements for our knowledge-based quality economic growth and for creating very good-quality jobs. This agency is being modelled similar to those that have helped Finland and Israel transform themselves into global innovation leaders. I look forward to hearing the questions.

1301 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 57 - Apr/25/22

Mr. Francesco Sorbara

Apr/25/22 1:59:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, approximately 800,000 Canadians on a daily basis earn their living from the energy sector across Canada, and I will continue to support them and will always support them. We will have an energy transition here in Canada that reduces our greenhouse gas footprint over the coming years. We have put in place a number of measures. The $1.7 billion for electric vehicles over the coming years and the charging infrastructure are tangible measures that I am proud to support in this budget. At the same time, we know this transition to renewable energy will take time. It is happening, and we will be there. We will make sure the jobs that are created in the green transition are captured by Canadian workers.

126 words

Context: House Hansard - 57 - Apr/25/22

Ms. Elizabeth May

Apr/25/22 7:20:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the call for reducing demand for fossil fuel products is one that resonates for people in Ukraine. The call is for Canada to do the same, as much or more than our European Union colleagues. They are ramping up the transition to 100% renewable energy. Contrary to what the hon. parliamentary secretary has said, Canada's plan is not recognized as one of the best in the world. Our record is one of the worst, and our targets are not aligned with what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned us we must do. I want to mention a Ukrainian activist who formed a group called Stand With Ukraine. Her name is Svitlana Romanko. She describes people who promote fossil fuel expansion while claiming it is to help Ukraine as “peace washing”, not “green washing”, but “peace washing”. She calls it out as something to justify fossil fuel expansion that is unforgivable.

161 words

Context: House Hansard - 57 - Apr/25/22

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC)

Apr/25/22 7:22:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would hope that everybody in this place would agree that lots of Canadians are really looking to us in this place to address the issue of the rising cost of living. Certainly one area where we have seen major increases in the cost of living is energy prices. I would like to say that every Canadian wants Canada to do its part when it comes to ensuring that we have renewable energy and non-carbon-emitting energy. At the same time, the reality is that as much as the government wants to talk about investment in this and investment in that, what it has done is reduce Canada's capacity to produce energy to supply the demand for energy. Now that we are in a time of a global supply crunch, that means higher prices for Canadians when we have that resource here. Again, I think it is wonderful that we are looking for ways both to produce Canadian energy sustainably and to ensure that we have all sorts of good ways to address climate change, but the reality is that many Canadians cannot afford to fill up their cars. For many Canadians, including in my community of Calgary Nose Hill, there are not public transit options available to them. When we look at the price of groceries with fuel as an input cost, those groceries are getting to people based on carbon-based energy. We have to address the climate crisis, but at the same time, listening to a debate that ignores the fact that every Canadian needs carbon energy right now is so out of touch. The question should be how we are producing Canadian energy, which is some of the cleanest and most sustainably produced energy in the world, and meeting this need while looking at producing low-carbon, readily available, low-cost carbon alternatives such as public transit and all of these other good things. People in my community still need to fill up their cars. That is just the reality. Ignoring that reality really says that we, as a Parliament, are out of touch. A while ago, the Americans went to Saudi Arabia and Iran to ask for increased production and exports to the United States to meet the U.S.'s increased demand issue and its supply issues. They did not come to Canada, and that was such a missed opportunity for our country. I had asked the government why the minister of trade had not really addressed this issue of why the Americans were going to these other countries as opposed to coming to Canada. We should be ensuring that we are producing Canadian energy and supplying it, not just to people in our country, to lower prices and reap the benefits, but also to have energy supply security on the North American continent. I just wonder whether the government has made any progress on this, given the increased costs of energy in Canada.

494 words