Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 30 of 192
Eric Choi
View Eric Choi Profile
Eric Choi
2021-05-27 11:26
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and members of the committee for the opportunity to appear this morning.
Let me start by saying a little bit about GHGSat. We're a small SME that was established in 2011 as a private sector solution to climate change. We are headquartered in Montreal, with offices in Ottawa and Calgary, and we now have international offices in Houston and London, England.
Our vision of GHGSat is to use satellites to become the global reference for the remote sensing of greenhouse gas emissions from any source in the world, thereby enabling stakeholders in the energy, resource, power generation, agricultural, waste management and sustainability sectors to make informed environmental decisions.
While there are obviously other satellites up there in space that also measure greenhouse gases, satellites from NASA and from the European Space Agency, for example, it's kind of a neat and remarkable fact that GHGSat, a Canadian SME, is currently the only private sector or government entity in the world that has satellites capable of high-resolution greenhouse gas measurement down to a resolution of only 25 metres. Our satellites—these Canadian satellites—are the only ones that can measure greenhouse gas emissions from sources as small as individual gas wells. This is a critical capability for attribution.
Space technology is going to play an increasingly important role in Canada’s transition to greener and more sustainable practices and to building back better. Out of the 50 essential climate variables identified by the World Meteorological Organization as needed to monitor climate change, 26 of these variables can only be effectively observed from space. Environmental satellites are therefore directly aligned with the goals of Canada’s 2030 agenda for sustainable development, specifically for taking urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts—which is goal number 13—and promoting inclusive and sustainable industrialization and fostering innovation, per goal 9.
When we talk about fields of technology, be it space technology or green technology, there are two ways in which the Government of Canada can play a role in nurturing innovation and expanding sustainable trade opportunities. The first is by investing in early-stage research and development. The second is by being an early adopter of new innovations, thereby lowering the risk and allowing the private sector to bring their new products and services to the international market.
Canada is a world leader in supporting early-stage R and D in both industry and academia. As an example of that, the innovative technology behind our methane monitoring satellites was developed with the support of Sustainable Development Technology Canada, the Canadian Space Agency and the industrial research assistance program of the National Research Council.
To ensure that Canada builds back better during the post-COVID economic recovery, an area of improvement for the Government of Canada would be to support industry beyond the initial R and D phase. One of the most effective measures that could be undertaken in this regard is to be an early adopter of new innovations and, furthermore, to be an ongoing anchor customer for green and sustainable technologies. This would strengthen Canadian competitiveness and expand trade opportunities, because one of the first things that a prospective customer asks internationally is whether a new product or service has been adopted by the domestic market.
There are examples of anchor tendency in the field of environmental satellites that we are familiar with, such as the NASA commercial small satellite data acquisition program in the U.S. or the third party missions programme of the European Space Agency.
This is going to be a pivotal year for Canada as we look forward to COP26 in November. One of the high-profile projects expected to come out of this UN climate conference is the International Methane Emissions Observatory—or IMEO—which is the project of the UN Environment Programme that is seeking contributions precisely of satellite data to identify methane super-emitters and thereby provide actionable data for diplomatic follow-up.
In recent months, we at GHGSat have been engaged with the relevant Government of Canada departments to discuss the potential of providing Canadian satellite methane data to the IMEO as a very highly visible demonstration of our country's commitment to fighting climate change.
To conclude, and to reiterate what some of the earlier speakers have said, the success of our post-pandemic recovery and the industrial transition to greener and more sustainable practices go hand in hand with both the government and the private sector as partners in this endeavour to build back better.
This concludes my prepared remarks, and I look forward to taking your questions.
View Annie Koutrakis Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Annie Koutrakis Profile
2021-05-20 16:49
I know that in your testimony you were kind of hoping to see $30 billion for the strategic innovation fund. We're starting with $7 billion.
If I misquoted you, I apologize.
View Annie Koutrakis Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Annie Koutrakis Profile
2021-05-20 16:50
Okay. This budget includes a significant commitment of $7 billion to the SIF, which has been an effective program in helping businesses grow and innovate.
How do you see the chemical and plastics industry making use of the $5 billion in funding for decarbonization of industry through the net-zero accelerator?
Bob Masterson
View Bob Masterson Profile
Bob Masterson
2021-05-20 16:50
It does provide some opportunities, and certainly we have had three major investments in Canada that have participated in the strategic innovation fund to date, totalling, I believe, a proposed $9 billion. One of those investments was put on hold due to COVID. We'll see if it comes back. Therefore, the industry has experience with that.
The $30 billion number that I mentioned is how much investment, total investment, we should have seen come into our sector. Again, we don't expect the government to fund all the capital investments for our sector, but we expect it to create the conditions where that will come.
What I was providing was a historical example. We should have seen $30 billion. We've only seen $7 billion. It tells you that we're falling behind, so there's an urgent need for measures again.
The money in SIF, especially the net-zero accelerator, is very welcome. We have companies that will definitely take advantage of that—my point being, though, it's a minority of the facilities in Canada. We have to create a business environment where we can recapitalize. Getting to net-zero, we have to recapitalize not only our sector, but the mining sector and every other sector in the economy, and that means attracting domestic and foreign investment.
It's a big job, and SIF expenditures alone will not achieve that, as important as they are and as welcome as they are.
Jim Balsillie
View Jim Balsillie Profile
Jim Balsillie
2021-05-20 12:40
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm Jim Balsillie, presenting on behalf of the Council of Canadian Innovators. I'll make two observations about the structure of the modern economy in relation to the budget and conclude with one recommendation.
The accelerated pace of innovation and the digital transformation over the past 30 years has created a new kind of economy in which the basis of wealth and power is derived from the ownership of valuable IP and control of data. Concurrently, the new technologies of this era, centred on the nexus of automated decision-making and machine learning, are reshaping our social and political spaces. Intangible assets comprise 91% of the S&P 500's $28-trillion total value.
This shift is unprecedented in its degree and rapidity, particularly with the emergence of high-profit firms with monopoly positions based on IP rights and control of data assets. Wage growth is now concentrated on the small workforces of firms rich in IP and data, which drives inequality. These firms have a low propensity to invest because they generally don't produce tangible goods. Rather, the marginal production costs of their intangible goods is near zero. Additionally, the nature of the taxation system on the profits of intangible assets allows firms to deploy effective tax-minimization strategies, resulting in tax base erosion for Canada.
Countries around the world, starting with the U.S. in the 1980s, have retooled and recalibrated their prosperity strategies to fit with the shift from the traditional economy to the economy of intangible assets. Canada's prevailing policy orthodoxy, still visible in this most recent budget, is to stick with the traditional production economy strategies for growth, even though such an approach continues to result in weak productivity, lower rankings in innovation indices and, most acutely in the last decade, a decline in our GDP per capita compared with the U.S. As the chart in my appendix shows, Canada's deficit on IP payments and receipts is widening at an alarming rate. This deficit would be much larger if the value of net flows of data was included.
In the contemporary economy, the objective is to generate and control IP and data stock assets for their economic and non-economic benefits amidst rivalrous international economies. Canada's prosperity strategies are not only inadequate but often also counterproductive. The first is creating foreign direct investment agencies and programs that have no contemporary analytical framework, unlike our peer countries globally. The second is a 15-year spree of signing free trade agreements despite economists writing, as early as 2003, that international trade treaties have shifted to dealing with strengthening protections for IP owners rather than traditional tariff reductions. The third is making enormous investments in scientific research without adequate IP policies and strategies. Fourth is the underfunded and outdated mandates for critical regulators in the modern-day economy, such as foreign investment, privacy and competition.
The federal budget reflects an outdated approach to a contemporary economy. It also fails to recognize the real limitations of our institutions. It is irresponsible to pack 270 measures into a 700-page document and expect that they will be implemented. It's futile to invest enormous public funds without updated frameworks and clear strategies that would yield desired outcomes for Canada. While the risk remains high for turning a dollar of taxpayer investment into 10¢, there is also the risk of continued counterproductive measures where taxpayer funds generate negative returns for Canada.
Finally, the redistribution of a fixed economic pie or the prudent fiscal anchors many are advocating for are insufficient without a strategy to generate new wealth. Canada urgently needs growth strategies attuned to contemporary realities and budgets to reflect them.
I offer one recommendation that can foundationally help improve Canada's budget planning and implementation—namely, rebuild the Economic Council of Canada to create in-house capacity for the analysis of the contemporary economy. The nature of today's global economy requires an unprecedented amount of horizontal integration, analytical depth and rapid response to deal with the accelerated pace of innovation and the powerful feedbacks and spillovers that emerge in our networked society. A properly built economic council would lead in the very necessary revival of our policy community and help the government rebuild critical capacity that favours national interest, including post-COVID economic recovery.
In closing, I reiterate that misunderstanding our changed economic realities comes with real consequences to our prosperity, security and ultimately our sovereignty. Helicoptering money does not work like it used to, because the volume of credit needed to produce one unit of GDP growth tripled between 2007 and 2015. Simply chasing jobs with an assumption of relatively homogeneous firms is a race-to-the-bottom strategy that will worsen inequality.
Canada has the potential to build back better, but it begins with knowing what we need to build and how we need to build it.
Thank you.
View Sean Fraser Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Sean Fraser Profile
2021-05-20 13:39
On a similar vein to the question I put to Ms. Tiessen on how we set ourselves up for success, there are a couple of envelopes included in the budget around the strategic innovation fund, including about $5 billion for the net-zero accelerator fund.
You're speaking to a group of parliamentarians here. In your mind, what would you have us do when this meeting ends, if we're going to help inform the next step to make sure that the money that's being budgeted for is actually deployed in the most effective way?
Jim Balsillie
View Jim Balsillie Profile
Jim Balsillie
2021-05-20 13:40
We have a problem in that we view firms as homogeneous while they're strikingly heterogeneous in the evolution of the last 20 years, and we view jobs as relatively homogeneous when in fact they have entirely different characteristics for the benefit of the individuals and the country. My number one recommendation is that we do not have the capacity to analyze and create programs and implement and monitor programs to get the outcomes we're looking for in the quality of jobs, the quality of firms, the quality of productivity and the quality of security, which is in this 91% of the economy called intangibles. We talk the game, but we have to understand that Canada adopted an orthodoxy of extreme neo-liberalism 30 years ago.
The economist who wrote for the Macdonald commission, said that if you're going to liberalize labour, capital and markets, that's fine, but you have to pair it with an industrial innovation strategy or we'll go to a low-productivity, low-growth equilibrium. That was Richard Harris. He was the economist for it, and they ignored.... It was a two-book treatise and they only took one of the books. The first thing we have to do is to have capacity, or we're just going to keep, which is the definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.
Shannon Joseph
View Shannon Joseph Profile
Shannon Joseph
2021-05-19 16:11
Thank you very much.
My name is Shannon Joseph, and I am the vice-president of government relations and indigenous affairs for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers or CAPP.
CAPP represents the upstream oil and natural gas industry in Canada. We would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to appear and to be part of its study of Bill C-12.
This legislation and Canada’s work to fulfill its climate change commitments are important to all industries and all Canadians. CAPP and our member companies are strong supporters of and investors in environmental performance and innovation. We want to work with the federal government to achieve its climate change goals. That said, we would highlight for the committee that the pathway to net zero that Bill C-12 sets out is also intended to create economic opportunities for Canada.
We took note of the Prime Minister's comment, particularly on the occasion of the April 22, 2021, climate summit, that our climate change response can be “our greatest economic opportunity.” As members can appreciate, you manage what you measure, hence the inclusion in the bill of milestone climate change targets towards 2050 performance measurement requirements. If the path to net zero is to create growth, investment and jobs, then as well as environmental performance, we need economic targets, and economic performance metrics must be built into this legislation as well.
Beyond this, pathways to net zero are going to look different in the diverse regions of our country as we pursue this agenda. This fact must also be integrated into the bill in the ways that the strategies are developed and evaluated. This should done in close collaboration with provincial and territorial governments and their climate change strategies and policies. Canada is an exporting country, and oil and natural gas are our number one export.
We contribute more than $1.1 billion annually to Canada’s economy. We employ over half a million women and men in well-paying, skilled jobs coast to coast, including 63,000 jobs in Ontario and 18,000 in Quebec. Our national supply chain outside of Alberta includes over 2,700 different firms with annual purchases of over $4 billion. In addition, we purchase over $2.4 billion annually from indigenous-owned businesses representing about 11% of our procurement in the oil sands. We are one of the largest employers of indigenous Canadians and are committed to our important role in reconciliation.
I highlight these points because this industry is an important part of Canada’s economic and social fabric and we have played and want to continue to play a role both in both supporting Canadian prosperity and helping Canada and the world achieve their environmental objectives.
An important way we will play that role is through innovation. One of your other speakers talked about technologies being available, but many still need to be developed. According to a 2018 study by Global Advantage Consulting Group conducted for the Clean Resource Innovation Network, or CRIN, about 75% of all clean technology investment in Canada comes from the natural gas and oil industry.
Not only will our leadership in innovation help to reduce emissions here at home but through technology sharing and export, Canada can help reduce global emissions around the world. An example of this is carbon capture utilization and storage. The Weyburn-Midale project in Saskatchewan is one of the world's largest and longest running. We hope to see more of these projects.
Our emerging liquefied natural gas industry in British Columbia also has a role to play in reducing global emissions and in generating internationally traded mitigation outcomes or carbon credits for Canada under the Paris Agreement.
China alone is adding one new large coal-fired power plant to its grid every two weeks. Coal-fired generation is also continuing to grow in India and southeast Asia, all with a focus on improving living standards for their citizens. If these facilities ran on Canadian natural gas, they would generate significantly lower air pollutants and significantly lower GHG emissions, as Ontario experienced when we switched power sources.
We cannot afford, either environmentally or economically, to take a narrow view of what climate change mitigation can look like in Canada. Bill C-12 should articulate the role that economic sectors and other stakeholders will play in the development of plans and in achieving targets. It should ensure that expertise in the technologies and opportunities available to different sectors and regions are brought to bear on Canada’s advisory panel and overall decision process.
We recommend a greater role for the Governor in Council, and in particular the Minister of Finance, in the development of targets, plans and supportive policies under the act, especially given their potential effects on the whole of Canada’s economy and society. We don't think it is appropriate for all of that to rest with one minister.
By working together, industry and government can accelerate innovation and develop technologies that reduce emissions while delivering responsibly produced energy to meet global energy demand. We hope our recommendations to the committee can support Canada in this process.
Thank you.
Jeanette Jackson
View Jeanette Jackson Profile
Jeanette Jackson
2021-05-14 13:07
That's glorious. Thank you for having me.
I wish to acknowledge that the lands on which our office is located are part of the traditional unceded territory of the Musqueam, Squamish, Tsleil-Waututh and Tsawwassen nations.
Foresight is Canada's clean-tech ecosystem accelerator. We bring together partners to identify, commercialize and adopt the clean technologies needed to support a global transition to a green economy. The innovation community is the heart of everything we do, supported by our partners in industry, academia, government and, of course, the investment community. Our whole mandate is to position Canada as a global leader in clean-tech innovation through programming and relevant initiatives.
I'd like to start with a few statements and applaud the efforts to position Canada as this global leader. To expand clean-tech innovation and adoption, we need to better connect Canadian clean-tech companies to global markets and investors, and government agencies play a key role in a few areas.
The first is around policy and partnerships. The Canadian government has an opportunity to provide thought leadership. An example is through our progressive carbon tax. Through thought leadership, we create confidence in the markets for international buyers and investors to come to Canada because of those types of policy initiatives.
We also want to look at trade agreements. CETA and other progressive trade agreements will also allow us to have better relationships with these regions and ensure that clean-tech ventures understand the best practices to enter those markets and do business.
I'd also like to highlight some of the national strategy opportunities. We've seen lots of great conversations between Canadian and European governments, as an example, on how hydrogen, CCUS and the bioeconomy can play a significant role in both of our economies through collaboration, understanding the needs of each of our respective regions and honing in on what innovation opportunities we can export.
We also need to look at adoption. If we're truly going to scale clean-tech ventures in Canada, we do need a strong domestic procurement incentive program. Really, it's those demonstrations that allow us to home-grow our solutions in Canada and showcase those solutions internationally.
We've also been working on some other adoption opportunities through our SDG connect program in partnership with the trade commissioner service. This strategic matchmaking gives an opportunity for international buyers to showcase to Canadian innovators what their needs are and, again, create opportunities for Canadians to innovate on a global scale and to export.
The next bucket is on capital. We've seen lots of different international mechanisms that really create strong capital environments for early-stage and later-stage investments. It's also important to have strategic investor matchmaking sessions profiling Canadian ventures in all of the respective regions where their technologies could apply.
The next bucket is around innovation. While we are starting to see many clean-tech companies scale, it's important that we have a really strong, robust funnel of earlier-stage ventures as well. I think we need, as a collective, to dig in and ensure that the number of high-quality early-stage ventures are problem-driven and understand the opportunities both domestically and globally. Of course, programs from FedDev and provincial government agencies can really help drive these types of initiatives.
Finally, in terms of scale, we need to see more investment in scaling ventures. I know there have been lots of announcements recently on support to do that, but if we can continue to feed that scale-up mentality and that growth mentality to the ventures and provide the support they need, they'll be much better positioned for exponential export growth. While clean tech 101 was challenging for investors, what we've really seen over the last year is that over $1.7 trillion in capital inflows to ESG and sustainability-related funds have come to fruition, and a record $23.7 billion of venture capital investment was deployed to 1,255 climate technologies.
A combined policy and capital push is a generational opportunity for Canada. We have great technology developers and terrific universities, but our markets and local investors are insufficient to fully capitalize our ventures to compete on a global scale. In fact, a study by SDTC and Cycle Capital shows that Canadian clean-tech ventures are generally able to raise only about half the equity and debt capital as a comparable clean-tech company in the U.S. and other European regions. We need to get Canada's private capital and industry off the sidelines and massively engaged with our clean-tech entrepreneurs if we want to compete in the decades ahead.
To showcase some success stories, we are succeeding in some areas on the international stage. Occidental has a partnership with Carbon Engineering in Texas. Svante has a great partnership with Chevron in California. MineSense has projects in South America, and Enerkem has waste-to-chemicals plants in Spain and China.
We're starting to see momentum, but how do we turn these four stories into a hundred stories? That's what we're really trying to dig into.
As a bit of feedback, SDTC is a great opportunity and mechanism to showcase the demonstration of technologies. It would be interesting to look at having a first project deployment off site as well, as part of that funding model.
EDC is also great in supporting the export development opportunities. It would be nice to see some more flexibility in financing options. EDC is not empowered to take technology risks and below-market returns.
Global Affairs has also been a great strategic partner for us in our ventures. We work very closely with the trade commissioner service. Things like industry matchmaking events or SDG connect events are a great opportunity to profile Canadian ventures and position Canada as that global leader.
ECCC has also been very supportive across Canada in supporting CETA workshops. These types of programs help educate all the different stakeholders in the community to understand what we need to do in order to do good business and follow all the trade expectations that have been set at the federal level.
Finally, IRAP's pilot program, both domestically and internationally, is another great tool.
In terms of closing remarks, we really are doing everything we can to help SMEs scale at home to help sell abroad, but we need more resources and tools to do that as an accelerator community. We need to scale the supply of export-ready companies and more proactively source overseas companies seeking Canadian innovation.
We propose a ready-to-export training program—an expanded SDG connect program—that scales our pipeline of export-ready companies. We have some opportunities to present the proposals in that regard.
There is also a critical need for further development of relationships between Canada and the global network of clean-tech accelerators in partner countries. This includes the U.S., the EU, Asia and Latin America. These accelerators are beachheads and validation points for our companies to access these global markets and investors. While we have done some of the work in this area off the side of our desks, we'd love to lean in on this with the federal government as well.
Finally, there are some interesting best practices that we can lean in on. Yesterday an article came out regarding the CAN Health model, which can be applied to clean tech. We would love to work with all of you and your various partners and collaborators to see how that model can help clean tech in Canada scale and really position us as export-ready for global markets.
Thank you for having me. I look forward to Q and A.
Geneviève Aubry
View Geneviève Aubry Profile
Geneviève Aubry
2021-05-13 11:13
Thank you for having me here today.
I am speaking to you today as the director of Collectif Territoire, a non-profit organization based in Abitibi-Témiscamingue, whose mandate is to unite the geniuses of science, arts and industry to produce benefits for ecosystems and communities.
Since 2018, the collective has been working on a project that is gaining support in the community, the Osisko Lake project. This project aims to rehabilitate and improve Lake Osisko, located in downtown Rouyn-Noranda, in a creative and participatory approach that unites several sectors and the population.
Lake Osisko has been damaged by human and industrial activities over the past decades, and is suffering from a variety of problems, many of which are common to different lakes in the region and across the country. These include contaminated sediments, high phosphorus levels, invasive aquatic plants, emerging contaminants, and more. In order to preserve the biodiversity and vitality of this ecosystem, it is important to find creative and adapted solutions to promote its recovery. It is therefore through the search for solutions that we are setting up a true regional innovation laboratory.
The Osisko Lake project is a research and experimentation ground for engineers, scientists, artists and other inventors, who unite their expertise and talents in the pursuit of this noble and inspiring goal. The project already has more than 40 partners. They include industrial companies, artists, universities, college technology transfer centres, schools, public and parapublic environmental organizations, and more.
Numerous people are uniting around the project because it is a positive, constructive project with multiple and powerful benefits. It is a project in which the partners find benefits. It is also a project with a territorial impact. It was selected by the Future of Good organization as one of the 100 best recovery projects in Canada.
The Osisko Lake project is a technological showcase for industrial and mining companies, mainly, that are very active in our region. Their expertise is recognized worldwide. Through this project, these companies enhance and develop inspiring practices in environmental innovation, rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems and bioremediation, and so on. There are many of them collaborating on this project, and they are proud of it.
Added to this rich contribution is that of the Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, about which Mr. Rousson has just given us an eloquent presentation. Researchers from UQAT are participating in the project by contributing their expertise in biology, mining engineering, ethics and digital creation.
The college centre for technology transfer associated with the Cégep de l'Abitibi-Témiscamingue, the Centre technologique des résidus industriels, or CTRI, is also involved in the project, particularly in bioremediation.
The artists bring creativity, a perspective, beauty and questioning, which give the project its colour.
In addition to having a strong core of local and regional partners, the project has reached out, and it has sparked partnerships elsewhere in the province, the country and the world.
The Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology is interested in examining how the Government of Canada, in its stimulus package, can support industries in their transition to greener, more sustainable practices, and support local and regional development and innovation initiatives.
Faced with the magnitude of the environmental, economic and human challenges doubly highlighted by the health and climate crisis, this plan is an opportunity to implement territorial development models in tune with the needs, particular characteristics and strengths of communities.
To support industries in their transition, the Government of Canada must demonstrate its confidence in community-led territorial development and innovation initiatives. You will not be surprised to hear me say that one sure way to support these initiatives is to put in place a territorial innovation support fund. This type of fund is managed by and for regional communities, and it evaluates projects based on their ability to adequately respond, in an innovative way, to community needs.
The most successful projects are often those that emerge from the regions, and whose development is not hindered by the restrictive or exhaustive criteria of certain government programs.
A territorial innovation support fund is a fund based on the evaluation of the impact potential of projects according to the needs and distinctive features of the regions from which they emerge.
An innovation support fund is a fund administered independently, by a selection committee whose legitimacy is widely recognized by people in the area concerned.
It is a fund that provides support to understand and document the impact of projects and mobilize the knowledge gained. It is also a fund that promotes the transfer and scaling of the innovations, knowledge and skills developed, to benefit other communities and regions.
I have long dreamt of such a fund, and I hope that today's forum has allowed me to make you aware that, in Canada's green recovery efforts, it is essential to give the regions a free hand to choose for themselves the projects that have the greatest potential to impact and benefit communities.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would simply like to say to the honourable member from Pontiac that his riding is enormous and includes the municipality of Grand-Remous, which is close to the UQAT centre in Mont-Laurier. Our ridings are neighbours.
Ms. Aubry, the city of Rouyn-Noranda will soon be celebrating the 100th anniversary of its foundation. The city is not as old as Montreal, which will be 400 years old soon, or La Pocatière, but it will nonetheless be marking its centenary and you will probably be involved in the celebrations.
What can you tell us about the role Collectif Territoire is playing in our economic and environmental recovery in terms of regional innovation and helping industry to transition? What role can Collectif Territoire play in this recovery?
Geneviève Aubry
View Geneviève Aubry Profile
Geneviève Aubry
2021-05-13 12:09
Collectif Territoire is a middleman in the world of innovation. A middleman plays a vital role when there is a systemic vision for innovation which calls upon the skills and expertise of various organizations. This role is all the more important when stakeholders are using the innovation ecosystem to bring key actors together and tear down silos and borders. This is the role we are playing.
We add value to the transfer of scientific knowledge to industry, as Mr. Rousson mentioned, because we bridge the gap between applied and pure research. We also work to foster scientific awareness among school-aged children by encouraging artists and cultural organizations to contribute to efforts aimed at gathering knowledge, teaching and communication.
All this contributes to a holistic vision and ensures that we are not only talking about radical innovation, but also reworking existing innovative projects that will lead us to a sustainable green recovery.
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ali Ehsassi Profile
2021-05-13 12:47
Thank you, Madam Chair; and thank you to all of the witnesses for appearing before committee today.
Mr. Mills, I wonder if I could pick up where you left off. You were explaining to us the need to stimulate innovation and risk-taking, and things of that nature.
Given that you explained to us how it's important to incentivize risk-taking to spur innovation, I take it that you look at it from a comparative context. What jurisdiction or country would you say has done the best job on that particular front?
Mark P. Mills
View Mark P. Mills Profile
Mark P. Mills
2021-05-13 12:48
Traditionally, it has been the United States and Canada. This has been the epicentre of new business development. New small business formation has been in North America, not in Europe. In fact, whatever measure you use to look at new companies, new formation of companies, North America has been, up until very recently, what we'll call the “friendliest jurisdiction” in which to be an innovator, an entrepreneur or a small business.
That has become more difficult, certainly in some areas, especially resource extraction. Most small, privately funded mines have left the United States a long time ago, and Canada has had the same trouble. However, it has been the best jurisdiction.
Germany, France and Italy have lagged. This is not a criticism of them as people; it's just the reality of the governance.
Let's go back to BlackBerry, the beginning of the smart phone revolution. It's traced to Canada, frankly, and then the United States, of course, because Apple did one better. I still like my BlackBerry, by the way. I don't use one anymore, for obvious reasons.
Those are good examples.
We hope and expect to have that kind of innovation in physical resource areas like mining and oil and gas. It's a tougher one because they're [Technical difficulty--Editor] industries. Innovation is harder because of the scales involved, but not impossible.
Mark P. Mills
View Mark P. Mills Profile
Mark P. Mills
2021-05-13 12:50
Well, let's clarify. [Technical difficulty--Editor] hedge funds with private equity, which is a different category of private money. Hedge funds have a notorious role because they hedge investments, so to speak.
For most innovation, obviously there's a role for government. This is a very old debate, and a very important one, especially in modern times. [Technical difficulty--Editor] last 80 years since World War II, we've talked about how governments can play a role. However, the essential answer is because of the nature of risk in doing something different than everybody else is doing today, if you want to reward the innovator, you have to give them the latitude to do it, which means they have to find money. It's always still the money.
The risk-taking is taxed. Let's just use a specific example. If you tax risk-takers the way you tax non-risk-takers, you get fewer risk-takers. It seems unfair to reward the risk-taker for the outsized gain in lower taxes, but what you don't see is behind the scenes, for every successful company, there are hundreds that fail. As we all know, it's an old truism, but it's a true truism. Therefore, simplistically, if you want more of it, tax less of it.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Minister, as you know, the greater Montreal area and other parts of Quebec are home to thousands of tech start-ups. At the beginning of the pandemic, they told us that the wage subsidy program was inadequate in terms of coverage. A start-up is, by definition, a business where someone puts up their own money while working towards a technological development, which, once ready, they can sell and reap the benefits of. The government turned to the innovation assistance program, administered by the National Research Council of Canada.
Now, some start-ups are asking why the program was not extended until September 25, like other income support programs. As we know, the innovation assistance program provides more than $250 million in funding, largely to start-ups. Some have even warned that, if the program ends, they could go bankrupt by the end of the pandemic.
Why end the innovation assistance program when we are this close to the goal line?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you for your question.
I must say, I certainly recognize how important Montreal's innovation ecosystem is. Toronto, where I'm from, has a similar ecosystem. Mr. Julian is here, and Vancouver, in his riding, has an ecosystem as well. The same is true of many other Canadian cities and municipalities.
Start-ups are a very important part of our growth plan. Canadian innovators will find quite a few measures in the budget that are meant to help them, especially small and medium-sized businesses wanting to make growth-oriented investments.
The budget truly focuses on growth and the future, with numerous programs that will be particularly helpful to these types of businesses. If you like, I can put together a list and send it to you.
Jean-François Samray
View Jean-François Samray Profile
Jean-François Samray
2021-05-11 11:31
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen members of the committee.
Thank you for inviting me to contribute to your discussion on the green economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
My name is Jean-François Samray, and I am president and chief executive officer of the Quebec Forest Industry Council, which brings together sawmill, veneer, pulp, paper, cardboard and panel companies in Quebec, as well as engineered wood manufacturers.
Today, I want to stress not only the importance of the forest industry's role in our communities' economic recovery, but also the fact that it will be just as much of a key player in the fight against greenhouse gases, or GHGs. Various levels of government will be responsible for creating the context to enable the forest industry to participate fully in those two issues and to support its efforts in innovation, so that it can help reach our objectives.
The Quebec forest industry, which generates over 142,000 jobs, is the economic engine of some 900 municipalities. Nearly 70% of Quebec's municipalities are connected to that industry. The average annual income in the forest industry is $66,500. That sector contributes $41.5 billion to the province's economy and $17.7 billion to the gross domestic product.
Just recently, a study conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers showed us that, in 2019 dollars, and not at the cost of wood today, $150 is collected in taxes per cubic metre of processed wood. Of that amount, $50 is going to federal coffers. So investing in the forest sector is a win–win–win initiative. It is a win for the economy, for communities and for the environment.
A number of international studies emphasize the importance of an active and responsible forest industry. Among them are studies carried out by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, or FAO, and the International Energy Agency, or IEA. Added to those studies is the Natural Resources Canada annual report titled “The State of Canada's Forests”, which demonstrates that triple role.
So it goes without saying that we are happy the federal government is investing $3 billion over the coming years, so that two billion trees can be planted in the near future. However, a portion of those trees must be harvested eventually to enable sustainable forestry, which could make the most of the various iterations of that carbon neutral product. When a tree is cut down and sawn into planks, it sequesters its carbon longer than its counterparts left to themselves in the forest. In other words, when wood is used as a building material, its CO2 retention period is extended. It is a better alternative to other building materials, such as steel and concrete, which consume up to 34% more energy and emit 81% more GHGs.
Our industry is not short on challenges. The softwood lumber sector is booming, and the demand comes from the United States, Canada and from around the world.
However, the United States Department of Commerce imposes countervailing duties on softwood lumber imports from Canada. But the World Trade Organization, or WTO, concluded in its final report that Quebec is complying with international trade rules. We are counting on the Canadian government to use the WTO's conclusions and require an exemption from countervailing duties on products from public forests, an exclusion for businesses that mostly get their supply on the American side, and an integral refund of the money already collected.
When it comes to innovation, the panel sector and the pulp and paper sector are undergoing a complete transformation and are innovating constantly. Concerning panels, a great deal of research is going into the production of new green adhesives to meet consumer demand. The pulp and paper sector is no exception. A number of innovations have been announced over the past few months, including by FPInnovations, which uses cellulose in the manufacturing of products to fight against COVID-19.
So government support in research and development and in innovation is crucial, especially for FPInnovations, but also for the academic sector and for businesses, to help the industry make a shift and remain a leader in the new green economy.
We also think that using biomass in the heating sector must be done by adding depth to the stream, and not by cannibalizing existing businesses that are making value-added products.
In conclusion, we feel that the government must invest much more in the Investments in Forestry Industry Transformation program, the IFIT, because $55 million, the amount allocated over two years, is clearly insufficient.
Thank you.
View Warren Steinley Profile
CPC (SK)
That would make sense, because one of the comments you made was that sometimes you couldn't differentiate between natural gas going into a house and a grain dryer or a barn, and there is an instance where a natural gas line doesn't have its own meter that goes to a barn or a grain dryer, because many farms have different farmyards for their grain dryers and their house.
I was very surprised by that comment, because that just doesn't happen anymore. You can always tell what natural gas is going to be used for heating a home and heating a barn, drying grain or running an irrigation pump, so that was a bit surprising to me.
Mr. Parry, you've said many times that innovation is driven by carbon pricing or a price on carbon in agriculture. Do you believe that statement?
View Warren Steinley Profile
CPC (SK)
Okay, thanks. That's perfect.
I'd ask: Can you tell me the tax that was forced on farmers that led to the innovation of zero tillage?
Matt Parry
View Matt Parry Profile
Matt Parry
2021-05-04 16:23
A tax on farmers that led to zero tillage.... I don't believe there was a tax in that area.
View Warren Steinley Profile
CPC (SK)
Yes. That was an amazing innovation that led to great soil conservation and the ability of farmers to have better soil quality and more nutrients in the soil.
Mr. Parry, can you tell me the innovation that led to crop rotation for grazing for ranchers across Canada, and what tax led to that innovation?
Matt Parry
View Matt Parry Profile
Matt Parry
2021-05-04 16:23
It was done through official management practices and the sharing of information among farmers. I don't believe there was a tax involved in that, so—
View Warren Steinley Profile
CPC (SK)
I agree with you 100%. I think innovation and conversations through farmers and sharing data have led to amazing innovation in the agriculture sector. I put on the record that saying—and having very senior people in the Department of Agriculture say—that innovation is brought forward in agriculture by carbon pricing is something I think many people I represent and many people I know would have a difficult time believing is the only way to get to innovation.
I think that's what this bill is about, when you talk about it. You can't get innovation. I know we talked about how there might be innovative and new technologies for grain drying. There might be, but that's five to 10 years off. The reason, Mr. Parry, you couldn't mention one is because there isn't an innovation right now that can dry 50,000 bushel bins, other than natural gas or propane. We're a long ways off of that.
This bill Mr. Lawrence is proposing is that exemption to give farmers a chance to continue to do what they do well, because there are farmers in Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba who pay tens of thousands of dollars on a carbon tax because of using grain dryers and irrigation pumps.
Mr. King, you talked about irrigation. My farm still has delivery. They have a propane tank, and that propane tank is delivered by a truck into the yard, and that tank runs a motor that pumps irrigation through the pipes. It's not just a pipeline. There are still cases where propane gets delivered for on-farm use. I think Mr. Lehoux would have many people who have propane delivered to heat barns in his riding of Beauce.
Those are just a couple of things I wanted to point out. Farming is an agribusiness in Saskatchewan and western Canada, and they're very big operations. These grain dryers are solid equipment, industrial equipment, that gets used to keep people fed, not only across Canada but around the world. I believe these farmers need this exemption to make sure they can continue to provide that good service.
My final question would be: When it comes to crop rotation—and I know you guys know this very well—it is one of the great innovations in agriculture that led to keeping nutrients in the soil. Once again, I'd ask Mr. Parry: Was there a tax brought forward that induced crop rotation practices by farmers across Canada?
Matt Parry
View Matt Parry Profile
Matt Parry
2021-05-04 16:26
I think you likely know the answer. There was no tax in that regard, but I would note that I don't think I ever said that carbon pollution pricing was the only tool, just that, in a number of circumstances, it can be efficient and effective in providing a price signal to promote innovation and the development of new technologies.
View Warren Steinley Profile
CPC (SK)
I appreciate that statement very much, and I know farmers are as innovative as they can be, because they know that their bottom line is very important. I know they do whatever they can to innovate, not only for the environment but for the bottom line and to ensure that their operation is successful now and for the next generation of farmers in Canada.
Thank you both very much for your time.
View Dave Epp Profile
CPC (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Lawrence.
Mr. Parry, I believe you said in your testimony that agricultural greenhouse gas emissions have been stable since 2005. What does that tell you about the rising production from agriculture since then? With rising greenhouse gas emissions from virtually every other segment of our society, what does that tell you about the innovation and environmental stewardship of the agricultural community?
Matt Parry
View Matt Parry Profile
Matt Parry
2021-05-04 16:41
It states that the sector has made significant progress in reducing the emissions intensity of production and in producing agricultural products more sustainably, with a lower greenhouse gas emissions content. It speaks to the innovative capacity and performance of the agricultural sector in Canada.
Results: 1 - 30 of 192 | Page: 1 of 7

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data