Senator Dalphond: To conclude on the last question, I understand that during that period this bill will not prevent an employer from, with the consent of the union, moving from a defined benefit pension to a defined contribution system with no defined benefits.

Senator Wells: This bill is silent on that. That would be up to the company and its pension holders, whether that’s the union, the employee association or just the general employee agreement that might be present.

Hon. Robert Black, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, presented the following report:

Wednesday, December 14, 2022

The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry has the honour to present its

SEVENTH REPORT

Your committee, to which was referred Bill C-235, An Act respecting the building of a green economy in the Prairies, has, in obedience to the order of reference of December 13, 2022, examined the said bill and now reports the same without amendment.

Respectfully submitted,

ROBERT BLACK

Chair

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: I will take your suggestion away. I don’t disagree with you. I do think it’s important that it’s more visible for Canadians.

In terms of nuclear power, I would say that we’re moving toward a future that must be much lower-carbon, and that, from my perspective, means that all non-emitting forms of energy have to be very much on the table. There are some provinces in this country that are in the very beneficial situation that they have large amounts of hydro. That would include Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec, Manitoba and British Columbia. You have a big storage battery, which enables you to potentially use more intermittent sources of power like wind and solar and to be able to balance that out.

But in provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan, where the baseload power is provided primarily by coal and to a certain extent by gas, the choices are more challenging with respect to baseload perspective. I would say that at the present time, it would probably be nuclear energy or natural gas with a good carbon abatement and, potentially, in the future, hydrogen. The choices are not inexhaustible, and the idea that you can build a grid solely using wind and solar with some kind of storage is, certainly technologically, not there. Cost-wise, it is probably not there.

In that context, I think nuclear is a real option from a non‑emitting perspective. It is a technology that I think people would say is very safe. There clearly is an issue with waste. We have to get Canadians comfortable about how we’re going to manage the existence of nuclear waste. I think we have to have an adult conversation with Canadians about how we’re going to do that. Let’s be clear. A significant part of the electricity for the province of Ontario comes from nuclear power.

[Translation]

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: Thank you for the question. To be very clear, I will answer in English.

[English]

I think it’s a very important question. Step back and look at, for example, the International Energy Agency’s 1.5-degree scenario. The world is not there yet; the commitments from all the countries are not there yet. However, assuming you achieve 1.5 degrees, over the course of the next number of decades you will still be using significant amounts of hydrocarbons. Even in 2015, with a 1.5-degree scenario, you will still be using some amount of hydrocarbons, but you won’t be combusting them. You will be using them for solvents, waxes, petrochemicals and hydrogen. In that scenario, you’re still using 25 million barrels of oil, a quarter of what we produce today, and about half the amount of natural gas that we use today.

In that scenario, you have to be able to produce them with virtually zero production emissions. There are combustion emissions and production emissions. Even if you eliminate all the combustion emissions because you’re using them in applications where you’re not combusting, you still have to produce them with zero or close to zero. That is where we are focused, namely, on driving emissions down in every natural gas and oil sector across the country — not only in Alberta and Saskatchewan but also in Newfoundland and Labrador — to the point where Canada is producing with virtually zero carbon emissions.

There is no forecast right now that says oil consumption will decline until somewhere between 2030 and 2035. At that point it will, as we deploy more vehicles. Of course Canada wants to extract value for its resources, but it wants to do it in a manner that is consistent with a net-zero world.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: We will have a standing vote. We have an agreement on 15 minutes, with a standing vote at 3:50 p.m.

Call in the senators.

Motion agreed to and report adopted on the following division:

Leave having been given to revert to Presenting or Tabling of Reports from Committees:

Hon. Andrew Cardozo: Hello minister, I’m to your right. I don’t know if that’s politically or not, but —

Thank you for being here and answering our questions. I do appreciate the comments you made with regard to just transition, which is awfully important. I have a comment with regard to the program called carbon tax. As I see it, it is a carbon tax and rebate, and people tend to talk about it as the tax only and not the rebate.

My suggestion is that you call it that. You call it “carbon tax and rebate” or “price on pollution and rebate,” but use that word “rebate” more often.

I don’t say this so much as PR for your government but PR for this projet de société, which I think is the largest thing we’re doing in terms of the environment. It perhaps needs to be better explained to Canadians so people have a better sense of it.

Lastly, I wonder if you could just make a comment on the future of nuclear power and the energy mix going forward.

Hon. Salma Ataullahjan: Honourable senators, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the fifth report (interim) of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, entitled Canada’s Restrictions on Humanitarian Aid to Afghanistan, and I move that the report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.

(On motion of Senator Ataullahjan, report placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.)

[Translation]

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Audette, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mégie, for the second reading of Bill C-29, An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: I certainly agree with you that the training you mentioned is extremely important. I am more than happy to come back to you with how Natural Resources Canada is performing relative to other departments, if that would be of interest.

Natural Resources Canada has been a leader with respect to many issues. In fact, the portion of the department that used to be called the Major Projects branch is actually now named Nòkwewashk, which is an Anishinaabe word, and is really more about partnership. We have worked hard to ensure that we are thinking about this in a completely different way.

One area we are looking at is how we can ensure, on a go‑forward basis, that Indigenous communities benefit not just in terms of six jobs and three procurement contracts but in a long‑term, sustained way from projects that take place in their traditional territories. We also want to ensure they have a voice in terms of how these projects are undertaken.

So I am very supportive of the work you mentioned. Typically, though, directives to staff within the departments fall within the purview of the deputy minister, who is responsible for the employees. But each and every day, I am and my deputy minister is encouraging the department to do better on those issues. I would be very surprised if we were not one of the best departments in the system.

[Translation]

Hon. Mobina S. B. Jaffer: Honourable senators, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the ninth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, which deals with Bill S-205, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to another Act (interim release and domestic violence recognizance orders).

(For text of report, see today’s Journals of the Senate, p. 1143.)

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Would Senator Wells agree to take another question?

Senator Wells: Yes.

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore informed the Senate that a message had been received from the House of Commons returning Bill S-223, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (trafficking in human organs), and acquainting the Senate that they had passed this bill without amendment.

[English]

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the third time?

(On motion of Senator Oh, bill referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.)

(At 5:23 p.m., the Senate was continued until tomorrow at 2 p.m.)

Senator Housakos: Honourable senators, with leave of the Senate and notwithstanding rule 5-5(f), I move that the report be placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration later this day.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this report be taken into consideration?

(On motion of Senator Jaffer, report placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration at the next sitting of the Senate.)

[English]

(1520)

Senator Cotter: By way of background — and I think Senator Wells knows where this is coming from — you observed the part about employees getting a modest degree of super priority for unpaid wages and the Wage Earner Protection Program filling in some of that gap. The evidence from the Wage Earner Protection Program is that there is still a significant shortfall for employees. Indeed, that plan itself acknowledges that its recovery — subrogated, that is, in the place of workers — is a recovery of about 2% or 3%.

I recognize the dilemma you described about the other place, but when one thinks about workers who might lose some portion of the pension they will collect 20 years from now versus the shortfall of last month or the month before and paying the rent with credit cards, the attraction of a super priority seems to me to be compelling for the parts of wages they have not been able to get. I would be interested in whether you think that’s an appropriate issue to be considered in this exercise?

Senator Wells: It’s a really good point, Senator Cotter, and you and I have spoken about this. I read the transcripts from the other place where they addressed it. It was removed not because it was a bad idea. I think it’s a great idea. I agree that severances and unpaid wages may be even more important — they’re certainly equally as important.

I think it’s something we should explore further at committee. If there is an amendment to that, we will address it there. If there are some sharp edges that might suggest that it wouldn’t pass again in the other place, then we would have to deal with that. On principle, I think it’s an excellent idea. If this is the vehicle for it, then terrific. If it’s not the vehicle for it, then maybe that’s something this chamber should seek.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Minister, Nunavut has significant gold resources with four producing mines and more on the horizon. However, it also has significant infrastructure and transportation challenges.

I’m wondering if there is any consideration being given to adding gold to the critical minerals list.

Hon. Jonathan Wilkinson, P.C., M.P., Minister of Natural Resources: There is a definition of how we deem things to be critical, and part of it is the resource availability in this country. Part of it is also related to where we actually see skyrocketing demand on a go-forward basis, and that is largely driven by minerals that are going to be in some way tied to the energy transition — not solely those that are used in batteries but, for example, uranium, which is used in nuclear power.

At this moment, I don’t think gold would fit those criteria. However, what we have said is that the list is going to be reviewed every three years, and folks can make arguments. There are other minerals that are not presently on there that people are making the argument should be on there. That is why it is intended to be an evergreen list on a go-forward basis.

As you would know very well, senator, gold is one area where Canada has actually thrived in terms of being able to advance the industry. It is a pretty healthy sector. As I say, I would never say never. That’s the reason we made it an evergreen list.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Minister, welcome to the Senate.

Exactly one year ago, you received your mandate letter asking that you establish a pan-Canadian grid council to promote infrastructure investments, smart grids, grid integration and electricity sector innovation.

Can you further elaborate on your update on the council, its establishment, structure, membership and the priorities it will have? I ask that question because, as a senator from Quebec, I am proud that 94% of our electricity is generated by hydropower. Canadians can be proud that over 80% of our electricity comes from non-emitting sources. However, according to some reports, despite major investments in recent years, we still need to invest about $200 billion by 2035 to meet current green grid goals and even more to accommodate rapid growth in electricity demand.

Hon. Raymonde Gagné (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) moved third reading of Bill C-36, An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

[English]

The Senate proceeded to consideration of the third report of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications (Bill C-11, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, with amendments and observations), presented in the Senate on December 14, 2022.