https://sencanada.ca/en/Content/Sen/Co
mmittee/421/TRCM/12ev-53159-e
Proceedings of the Standing Senate
Committee on
Transport and Communications
Issue No. 12 - Evidence - March 8, 2017
OTTAWA, Wednesday, March 8, 2017
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met this day at
6:45 p.m. to continue its study on the regulatory and technical issues related to the
deployment of connected and automated vehicles.
Senator Dennis Dawson (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I call the meeting of the Transport and
Communications Committee to order. This evening, the committee is continuing its
study on the regulatory and technical issues related to the deployment of connected
and automated vehicles.
[English]
Appearing before us we have, from Natural Resources Canada, Paula Vieira, Director,
Transportation and Alternative Fuels Division, Office of Energy Efficiency; Dean Haslip,
Director General, CanmetENERGY; Marc Wickham, Director, Energy, Science and
Technology Programs, Office of Energy Research and Development; and Aaron Hoskin,
Acting Chief, ecoENERGY for Biofuels, Senior Technical Advisor, Office of Energy
Efficiency.
If I may ask the witnesses for a two-minute wait, I think Senator Dagenais would like
to propose Senator Boisvenu as the new member of the steering committee. We need
an extra member on the steering committee, and I think Senator Dagenais has a
terrible feeling he wants to do that.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: Mr. Chair, I want to propose Senator Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu as a
member of the steering committee.
Senator Maltais: Seconded.

 The Chair: Are there any objections? Mr. Boisvenu, welcome to the steering
committee.
I want to welcome the witnesses and invite them to start their presentations. The
senators will then ask them questions.
[English]
Dean Haslip, Director General, CanmetENERGY, Natural Resources
Canada: Good evening. First, I would like to thank the committee for this opportunity
to testify in support of your study on the regulatory and technical issues related to the
deployment of connected and automated vehicles.
As you are aware, the regulations, policy, standards or guidelines that will govern the
deployment of connected and automated vehicles in Canada fall within the mandates of
Transport Canada and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I
understand the committee would like to hear from Natural Resources Canada regarding
our work on electric vehicles, given that connected or automated vehicles can be
electric.
Canada benefits from having one of the lowest greenhouse gas intensive electricity
grids in the world, with more than 80 per cent of our electricity being generated by
non-emitting sources. That means that fostering greater electrification of transportation
fuelled by Canada's clean electricity grid can play a significant role in helping us lower
greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector and contribute to the
objectives recently laid out in the Pan- Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and
Climate Change.
Over the last years, NRCan has worked closely with private sector stakeholders,
academia and other departments on the development of the electric vehicle technology
roadmap released in 2010 and subsequently, in 2016, we supported the development
of the roadmap for accelerating the deployment of electric vehicles in Canada 2016 to
2020. Analysis carried out for these roadmaps suggests that to achieve greater EV
deployment, a number of barriers must be addressed.
Specific barriers include the readiness of the electrical grid; the cost, range and
durability of new battery technologies; the integration of recharging infrastructure with
smart grid technologies and vehicle grid interaction; codes and standards for vehicle
and infrastructure and alignment of these with those in the U.S.; the up-front cost
differential between conventional vehicles and electric vehicles; access and availability
of recharging infrastructure, where and when required; consumer concerns over such
new technologies, issues such as range anxiety, battery life, safety and security; and,
finally, availability of vehicle choice to meet the needs of consumers.
My department has developed and implemented a comprehensive suite of programs
and policies aimed at addressing these barriers. I will speak to those related to the
advancement of technology and then I will ask my colleague Paula Vieira to give an
overview of our consumer-related actions.
My branch, CanmetENERGY Ottawa, is one of our four national energy laboratories. Our
mission is to lead the development of energy S & T solutions for the environmental and
economic benefit of Canadians. Along with our sister CanmetMATERIALS Laboratory in

 Hamilton, our transportation research and development program includes emission
treatment technologies, vehicle lightweighting for increased fuel efficiency and studies
of electric vehicles. In addition, our colleagues at the Office of Energy Research and
Development fund research development —
The Chair: Slow down for the translation, please. Sorry.
Mr. Haslip: In addition, our colleagues at the Office of Energy Research and
Development fund research, development and demonstration projects in this domain,
with a focus right now on electric vehicle infrastructure demonstration.
Within the electric vehicle, or EV, domain, our research and development program
consists of analysis of the GHG emission implications of EVs, field testing of EVs to look
at their suitability in the Canadian climate and analysis of the impacts of increasing
numbers of EVs on the electrical grid.
Automobile manufacturers are offering more electric vehicle options over time. We are
seeing offerings with longer range that are also more affordable, driven to some extent
by battery prices that are falling faster than had been expected. Thus, while EV sales
forecasts are quite uncertain, it is not difficult to imagine that in 10 years, the total cost
of ownership of electric vehicles could be at par with the gas-powered vehicle. In this
scenario, electric vehicles could represent 10 per cent of new vehicle sales by 2027 and
5 per cent of vehicles on the road.
What, then, are the implications of such a scenario for our electricity system? In
answering this question, it is important to point out that there are three kinds of
constraints that might present themselves.
First, capacity: Do we have enough generating capacity to handle the charging of that
many electric vehicles if they are all plugged in for recharging at the same time?
Second, energy: Let us suppose that vehicle charging can be scheduled so that capacity
is no longer an issue. Do we have enough power over a long enough period of time to
charge this number of electric vehicles?
Third, infrastructure: Does the local power infrastructure, such as local transformers,
have the capacity to deliver the required power to these vehicles?
Our research has looked at this question. From current electric vehicle use patterns, we
know that 80 to 90 per cent of electric vehicle charging takes place at night. We also
know that electricity demand is lower at night, for example, by approximately 20 per
cent in Ontario and B.C. This presents an opportunity because it means that there is a
lot of excess capacity at night, enough to power up to 700,000 electric vehicles in
Ontario at present.
This means that we could take 10 per cent of the vehicles off the road in Ontario today,
replace them with electric vehicles, and we would still have the generating capacity to
handle the recharging load at night. Furthermore, if we introduced smart charging,
which is basically scheduling, up to 2.6 million EVs could be charged during a six-hour
overnight period, say, between midnight and 6 a.m. That would represent up to 35 per
cent of the vehicles on the road in Ontario.

 Thus, we know that the electricity grid in Ontario today already has both the capacity
and the energy to handle significant amounts of EV penetration. This analysis, as I
mentioned, was done in the context of Ontario. That being said, all provinces see a dip
in electricity demand overnight that is useful for electric vehicle charging, although the
exact figures will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
This certainly bodes well for our ability to absorb an ever-growing number of electric
vehicles. Having said that, our studies have shown that the biggest hurdle is in the
requisite infrastructure to charge EVs. Specifically, local transformers may need to be
ungraded to handle the potential for several dozen electric vehicles needing to be
charged at the same time in a single neighbourhood.
Similarly, market penetration and adoption of electric vehicles will be predicated on a
reliable and more efficient charging infrastructure for EV charging away from home. A
topic our department, together with our federal and provincial partners, is addressing
through new infrastructure investment initiatives.
Going forward, NRCan will continue to carry out and fund research to address the three
constraints I have outlined. Budget 2016 provided NRCan with $62.5 million in funding
over two years to support the demonstration and deployment of electric vehicle
recharging infrastructure.
Of the $62.5 million, the demonstration component received funding of $46.1 million
over two years to fund technology demonstration projects that advance electric vehicle
charging technology. Through this program, we expect to fund projects that will install
intelligent electric vehicle charging stations that will provide data to utilities to
determine whether the local power infrastructure has the capacity to deliver the
required power to electric vehicles and provide utilities with the ability to adjust power
provided to the charging stations on a time-of-use basis.
For example, on February 27, 2017, the government announced a contribution of up to
$7 million to AddÉnergie towards a $17 million demonstration project that will have
several subcomponents, including working with utilities on the above energy
management issues and inter-operability.
Paula Vieira, Director, Transportation and Alternative Fuels Division, Office of
Energy Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada: In the Office of Energy Efficiency, we
complement these RD&D initiatives with a suite of initiatives aimed at increasing
market uptake or deployment of EVs.
As Dean has already mentioned, Budget 2016 provided NRCan with $62.5 million in
funding over two years to support demonstration and deployment of EVs and
alternative fuel infrastructure.
The deployment component allocates $16.4 million to increase access to refueling
infrastructure along key highways. This entails electric, natural gas and hydrogen
vehicle infrastructure, using commercially available technology to provide an assurance
to consumers that they will be able to recharge when and where it is needed.
The request for proposals we launched in May was significantly oversubscribed. We are
estimating that we will fund 30 projects that have been selected, and this will result in
80 new electric level 3 fast-charging stations, nine natural gas stations and three

 hydrogen refueling stations in six jurisdictions coast to coast, exceeding our initial
program targets for all fuel types.
The first seven projects were announced in December for the construction of 25 fastcharging stations in Ontario by AddÉnergie.
[Translation]
By establishing new infrastructure, we're making it easier for Canadians to choose
cleaner options and setting Canada's transportation systems on a path to a lowercarbon future. This is important because the fuels and technologies adopted today will
determine the mix of technologies on Canada's roads in 2030.
[English]
As with any new technology, consumers need to feel confident that EVs can meet their
day-to-day needs. They need to have access to information that can help them
understand the various EV technologies and help them to inform their purchasing
decisions. Once they do decide that their next vehicle will be an EV, the purchasing and
driving experience has to be similar to what they are used to in conventional vehicles.
That is key to the success of the deployment of any advanced technology.
To address these concerns and others, NRCan is developing, promoting and delivering
consumer awareness materials and tools to help inform the vehicle purchasing decisions
of Canadian consumers. Above and beyond the well-known Fuel Consumption Guide,
EnerGuide label for vehicles and fuel-efficient driver training programs such as
AutoSmart, Budget 2016 provided $2 million per year for ongoing funding to expand
our consumer awareness initiatives, with a specific focus on zero-emission vehicles.
We are working with the U.S. Department of Energy on the development of an electric
vehicle and alternative fuel station location map. We are developing customized apps
which, based on individual driving behaviour, can recommend low-carbon vehicle
purchasing options. We have also undertaken a series of social innovation initiatives,
analyzing the consumer vehicle buying process and developing a social initiative that
will reward efficient driving behaviour.
Going forward, as one of the pillars for the transportation strategy under the PanCanadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change, government is committed
to work with industry on the development of a national strategy for zero-emission
vehicles. The initiative is co-led by Transport Canada and Innovation, Science and
Economic Development Canada. NRCan will play an active role in the development of
the strategy and the implementation of key initiatives thereafter.
Finally, coming back to the deployment of connected and autonomous vehicles, it will
likely be more than a decade before truly automated vehicles, those capable of
independent door-to-door travel, are available to the average Canadian. During this
time, clean vehicle technologies will continue to advance significantly.
It is difficult to predict how electric and connected and autonomous technologies will
converge in the long run, but foundational work that NRCan has done to prepare
Canada for electric vehicles will help ensure that manufacturers will be able to deploy
the cleanest-powered CVs and AVs possible.

 Thank you for inviting us to present today. We welcome your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I'll start by introducing the senators, if I may.
Senator Greene is from Halifax, Nova Scotia; Senator Griffin is from P.E.I.; Senator
Bovey is from Manitoba; Senator Mercer is from Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Galvez, Senator Dagenais, Senator Maltais and Senator Boisvenu from Quebec
are also here. I'll turn the floor over to the deputy chair, Senator MacDonald, and
Senator Boisvenu and Senator Mercer will speak afterward.
[English]
Senator MacDonald: Thank you for being here. The budget you put aside, $62.5
million, have you measured demand for these services? What is the demand that has
been measured, and of the stations that exist across the country today, do you have
any figures for the demand and how much these are being used?
Ms. Vieira: I can speak to the deployment of commercially ready technology, and then
I'll let Dean speak to the demonstrations.
The program — almost $16 million — was designed based on what we know to be the
existing deployment of electric vehicles, of natural gas trucks, heavy-duty trucks, as
well as the upcoming deployment of hydrogen.
It's really important to note that these were to address a barrier where consumers were
saying that the lack of infrastructure is keeping them from purchasing the vehicles. The
lack of natural gas infrastructure is keeping fleets from converting and fuel switching.
We're a little bit of the chicken and the egg, but it's important to map these to what we
know is existing deployment, to place them where we know these vehicles are
travelling, but also to signal to consumers and to commercial fleet owners that the
infrastructure exists for them to then deploy and to purchase these vehicles and do the
fuel switching. It's a combination of both.
Yes, we understand that by placing them on heavily travelled passenger routes —
Quebec City-to-Windsor corridor, for example — we know that that's where the vehicles
are travelling. We know the numbers of vehicles on the road. But we're also signalling
that the government is interested in future deployment and that these are the signals
that people need to ensure that the infrastructure is available and that they can travel
the way they do in their conventional vehicles today.
Senator MacDonald: In terms of the facilities that presently exist across the country,
how much have they been used? What is our level of usage? What is the demand?
Ms. Vieira: I don't have figures on specific use for all the different stations, but
certainly we can provide that to you. Part of the programming — our programming was
just initiated this year — is the reporting back on actual use. Our hypothesis is, of
course, increased use. There are already a lot of private stations that we can draw data
from, and we certainly can provide it to you after the fact.
Senator MacDonald: I think we would find it helpful.

 Ms. Vieira: Absolutely.
[Translation]
Senator Boisvenu: First, I want to congratulate you. We met with two important
Department of Transport representatives, and I have the impression that the roles are
reversed. I want you to know that I admire your leadership. When we heard from your
Department of Transport colleagues, we wondered where Canada was headed with this
matter. After listening to you, I'm reassured. Well done! Your presentation was very
good. We learned that initiatives exist, which is important.
I want to take another look at two aspects of your presentation. First, regarding timing,
how much time will people take to decide whether they should purchase an electric car
right now or a conventional car that runs on gas and that will last another few years?
My second question concerns the costs involved in changing the infrastructure, which
are enormous. I'm thinking of the era when we transitioned from horses to gaspowered cars. There needed to be roads, traffic lights and police officers responsible for
traffic. What would be the costs for society with regard to the transition from manned
to automated vehicles? Are you thinking of options? Who will pay for the vehicle motion
sensors on the highways? Will the government pay for them? When we change all gas
stations to electric charging stations, will we let the private sector take care of these
initiatives?
In both cases, you must provide ways to inform people of the choices to make in terms
of purchases and to inform municipalities of the costs to anticipate for this
transformation.
[English]
Ms. Vieira: There are quite a few questions there and some very important
considerations, of course.
With the perspective of timing, absolutely appreciate that the transportation system
that we are taking advantage of today is 100 years in the making, and the transition of
the transportation system to a new low-carbon reality cannot take another 100 years.
We will never meet our climate goals if it takes another 100 years for us to reinvent the
transportation system.
Yes, governments at all levels, as well as the private sector and key stakeholders, are
actively working on how we transition the transportation system to a new low-carbon
reality. It is a commitment we have made under the pan- Canadian framework. It is a
strategy that has been defined, and one that all governments are actively pursuing.
On the investments in infrastructure, it's important to note that the lion's share of EV
charging will happen in the home. That's also the least expensive infrastructure. It is
less than $1,000 to install a level-one charger in your home that will allow you to
charge your vehicle overnight. That is where the lion's share of charge will happen. You
will leave with a full battery charge. You'll come back, and you'll still have sufficient
battery, but you will be recharging and topping up at night.

 However, in order to ensure that we have a similar experience, yes, there will have to
be publicly available recharging. The next, most important place for charging is at the
workplace. This is where we really see the private sector stepping up.
For the early adopters, there are government programs that are now supporting, the
investment in electric recharging at the workplace, at businesses, at shopping centres,
at libraries and at banks. Restaurants seem to be a very popular place. We are starting
to see that build-out of infrastructure.
Are we going to see one at every corner? No, we're not, but it's not needed. It's a
different model. You do not need to have the charging infrastructure at every corner.
You have to kind of rethink how it is that we charge, and the lion's share of charging
will be done in your home.
Is there a societal cost? Is there a huge investment to make? Absolutely. It's a shared
investment. It is no different than the building of the infrastructure that we use today,
where governments and the private industry all invested to get us what we have today.
It will be no different. But let's not think that we are replicating what we have today.
We are not. It's a very different model.
[Translation]
Marc Wickham, Director, Energy Science and Technology Programs, Office of
Energy Research and Development, Natural Resources Canada: In the
demonstration projects that we're funding, the entrepreneurs develop new business
models. In the announcement we made last week with AddEnergie, it was mentioned
that the support will enable the firm to
. . . continue developing a new and innovative business model that will help Canadian
consumers and businesses access charging services on a monthly subscription basis. . .
Various business models will be tested, and the winning models will be maintained. The
change in fuel will generate savings, because transitioning from diesel or gas to
electricity is much less expensive. These factors will be taken into account in the
infrastructure demonstrations and deployment.
Senator Boisvenu: We'll soon need to make different individual transportation
choices. There will be electric cars, which are developing relatively slowly in terms of
independence, and there will be a distance restriction. If I were to drive from here to
Abitibi or Western Canada, I would have problems with the distance involved.
There's also the zero-emissions car, which has a more efficient motor and may
consume pollutants. In both cases, where are the industry and Canada headed? Are
they leaning toward zero emissions or the electric car? What directions will the industry
and consumers follow?
[English]
Ms. Vieira: I'll just assume that when you're talking about where industry is going,
we're really talking about the automotive industry and where the automotive industry is
going.

 It's very important to note that a key driver of where the automotive industry makes its
investments and how it evolves its vehicle types is based on the light-duty regulations.
Phase two of the light-duty regulations are ever more stringent year after year. By the
time we get to 2025, those vehicles will be 50 per cent more efficient than the vehicles
we have today.
That being said, the vehicle manufacturers, in order to meet those regulations, have to
pick a suite of technology choices in their offerings to meet those regulatory
requirements. That will mean that a percentage of their fleet offerings have to be
electric vehicles as well as much more efficient gasoline vehicles as well as hydrogen
vehicles. They will have a suite of technology offerings to ensure they meet the
evermore stringent regulations. It is really those regulations that will drive the industry
to put out those offerings.
It is our job at Natural Resources Canada to ensure that consumers are ready and
understand those new vehicle choices and the new technologies and not only the
economic benefits but the environmental benefits and, through our policy choices and
our program choices, ensure that we make those vehicles as similar to the experience
they have today.
Let's remember that those regulations that are in place today and evolve from now to
2025 are really going to help dictate the offerings of technologies in the marketplace. It
is for us, as well as the auto industry, to ensure that consumers are ready to receive
those and that the infrastructure, the codes and standards are there and the market is
ready to accept those.
Senator Mercer: In your presentation, you said about 30 projects have been selected.
Once fully connected, they will result in the installation of 80 electric vehicle fastcharging stations, nine natural gas and three hydrogen refuelling stations. Please don't
tell me that they will be all along Highways 40 and 20 in Quebec and Highway 401 in
Ontario.
Ms. Vieira: They are not. That's a great question. There will be six jurisdictions. We
will have some in Atlantic Canada, and there will be some in Ontario, Quebec and B.C.
It's important to note that this was a two-year program, so the business cases had to
be developed by the private sector and pitched to the government. Of course the
deployment was going to be where the vehicles are today, so it was very expected that
the three jurisdictions most active in alternative fuel transportation were going to be
able to put strong business cases together. That's where you get the Quebec, Ontario
and B.C. But other jurisdictions were interested as well and built good business cases,
so we will see some in Atlantic Canada and in Alberta.
Senator Mercer: I notice my colleague from Manitoba quickly scribbling down some
notes. My first experience driving a vehicle with new fuel options was in Winnipeg.
Accessibility is going to be a real issue.
I want to go back to the electrical grid that we have in the country. Is the grid
integrated and connected enough to support a country that's driving 10 to 20 per cent
electric cars? Electricity has to be there.

 The second part of that question: Is the technology progressing fast enough to ensure
that fast charges can happen? If I pull into a gas station tomorrow, I'm out of there in
10 or 15 minutes; to recharge my electric toothbrush takes me a few hours.
Ms. Vieira: I'll handle the last part, the part about the toothbrush, and then turn over
the grid readiness.
Level 3 right now is about 20 minutes. The average refuelling time is actually about five
minutes that you spend in a gas station fuelling up your car, so we're not there yet.
We're not at an equitable charging time, but that is part of the research that the private
sector as well as my colleagues are doing to ensure that we cut down that charging
time and we increase battery capacity so you don't have to do it as often.
So 20 minutes, even if you are on a highway and going to Toronto and have to stop for
a coffee and a washroom break, is reasonable; you can now drive long distances and
refuel maybe once. That's a level 3 charger, and our program exclusively only installs
level 3s.
Mr. Haslip: Bringing down the charging time is definitely important, but I think
perhaps a bigger driver is having longer range in the vehicle in the first place so that if
you are driving that long haul, you are only having to stop once as opposed to four
times. Four times 20 minutes is a long time, but one times 20 may not feel so bad.
With respect to your first question about the readiness of the electrical grid, our
analysis has shown that the electrical grid in multiple jurisdictions across Canada — and
we have not yet completed the analysis to give you the numbers for every single
province in the country, but in the jurisdictions we've looked at — is ready to handle
significant penetration of electric vehicles.
We know, and I think one of the senators mentioned earlier, that the penetration rate
of electric vehicles is steady, but it's not going to immediately be 50 per cent of the
vehicle sales. So our feeling is that the electrical grid is already ready to take significant
numbers of vehicles. Based on anticipated growth patterns, the utilities across the
country should easily be able to adapt to those changing conditions as more and more
electric vehicles are introduced.
Senator Mercer: There are four senators around the table from Atlantic Canada. If
parts of Atlantic Canada don't have complete access to the grid and easy accessibility to
electricity, how do we fix that? How does the department or the government
recommend that this be fixed?
Mr. Haslip: Are you referring to the charging infrastructure so that people can charge?
Senator Mercer: Yes, but the grid also has to be available to service those charging
stations. We don't have a fully integrated grid. For example, in my province, and
Senator MacDonald's province and Senator Greene from Nova Scotia, our electrical
generation is somewhat suspect because of our reliance on fossil fuels. We don't have
the benefit of hydro projects nor nuclear power.
Mr. Wickham: There are a couple of things we are doing at NRCan on the
demonstration and R&D side. The constraints we see are on the edge, so it is in the
buildings areas and in the cities. We're doing work on smart grids and focusing on

 problems that occur on the edge and at the community level or in downtown cores and
things like that. We are working with utilities and companies and providing funding so
that new equipment can be developed that could manage loads.
We're also doing studies on usage of electric vehicles, where people are and when their
cars are being charged and where they are driving, to provide information to utilities so
they can better plan. So the combination of new tools, network management systems
to manage the grid, manage loads, and to help utilities cope with the changes in
patterns of distribution.
Senator Bovey: We'll get to Manitoba in a minute.
My first question is: I was interested in the report done in 2008 for Industry Canada,
the Electric Vehicle Technology Roadmap for Canada. My sense is it seemed pretty
exhaustive. In that report, it was predicted that there would be 500,000 electric
vehicles in Canada by 2018, which of course is next year. Am I right that there are
about 30,000 now?
With the roadmap you are doing now, I would be interested to know why the difference
between this comprehensive earlier one, the reality now, and what that does to the
predictions going forward with the sales you're predicting for 10 years hence. I'm
looking for the factual basis of the predictions and what slowed it down.
Aaron Hoskin, Acting Chief, ecoENERGY for Biofuels, Senior Technical Advisor,
Office of Energy Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada: For a point of clarification,
it was Natural Resources Canada that supported the 2008 roadmap as well.
Senator Bovey: Oh, good.
Mr. Hoskin: I was part of that working group.
At that point, EVs were not conventionally available on the market at all. There was no
electric vehicle available in terms of an OEM-produced, so a factory-made, electric
vehicle in Canada. A lot of it was crystal balling. It was a technology roadmap as
opposed to a deployment roadmap, and it was meant to be pie in the sky. Where does
the technology need to go to get us to that 500,000?
Obviously the technology hasn't quite gotten there yet, and if you look at the EU or
Japan or the U.S., at that point in 2008 everybody was saying numbers in that same
ballpark. Nobody has reached those at all, and that's why we did the reset in 2016, to
look at the actual market, how much uptake there had been in the market. The number
of new vehicles that entered the market from 2008 to 2016 is substantial, and that's
why you are seeing more and more new vehicles entering the marketplace and
consumers actually jumping onto the electric vehicle market.
Senator Bovey: If I want to have all my colleagues come and visit me in Manitoba,
they will not be able to get there in their electric vehicles. For some years I lived in
British Columbia, and we got very interested in buying a hybrid car and then found
ourselves moving back to Manitoba, and I have to say I'm very glad we didn't buy a
hybrid car because the availability for charging is not nearly as great in Manitoba's
capital as it was in British Columbia's capital.

 If we're talking equality across the country, equal access across the country, I
appreciate the testing is done in some parts of the country, but what will happen to
those parts that will be slower getting the electrical cars, thereby fuelling our cars on
gas? What will happen when we want to go visit our friends who are in the electrical
part of the world? Will we see a great discombobulation like we did in the industrial
revolution between coal fires and non? I am looking for projections based on historical
realities.
Ms. Vieira: That's a really good question, and especially where we started with
demand. I think one of our first questions was about demand and are we ensuring that
we are addressing the demand by putting in our infrastructure where there is current
demand, and my answer to that was it's a combination of both. There is demand, but
we also want to signal to others where potentially there isn't a lot of deployment that
this infrastructure is available and so you can safely and securely buy one of these
vehicles.
Let's talk about the investment that was announced in Budget 2016. It's very important
to note that was a two-year investment. It is the first two years of the green
infrastructure program. It's a 10-year program. I guess in a couple of weeks we'll find
out, but we can expect that there would be a phase 2 of infrastructure investments.
Those investments can come via bilateral agreements with provinces and where
infrastructure dollars flow to provinces for them to make and be able to make those
investments should they choose that to be a priority in their jurisdiction, but there is an
important role for federal government to continue to play, to answer exactly your
question, to ensure that there are no have-nots, to ensure that although an industry
may be ramping up in a given jurisdiction and have a lead there, that there are no
have-nots and that there is essential infrastructure in all jurisdictions, allowing
Canadians to drive coast to coast along our key highways and all of the major
tributaries to our key highways. That is the role for the federal government.
We've certainly proposed to decision makers that there needs to be a combination of
funds that flow to provinces allowing them to make these investments if they choose it
as an infrastructure priority in their jurisdiction, and we hope that many will, but also a
central government role to ensure that we are getting coast-to-coast infrastructure so
that no province, no jurisdiction, is left out.
The Chair: I only have an English version of the document Senator Bovey referred to,
but the analyst has found a French version, and the link will be sent to all the members
of the committee if they want to print it in the language of their choice. It is a thick
document, and we wanted to make sure we had it in both languages.
[Translation]
Senator Galvez: I'm happy to have heard from you. It's very refreshing and
motivating. I bought my first hybrid vehicle, a Prius model, in 2005. Back then, I think I
was the first and only person who drove around Quebec City in a hybrid vehicle.
[English]
I still have it and it has 300,000 kilometres, and I'm not getting rid of it.

 I bought it because I was thinking that the transition between the fuel and electrical
was going to take much longer. In my very short month here at the Senate, I hear it's
difficult to get to this target. The government has said it's very difficult, but all we are
hearing is that it's possible. Maybe it's a generational problem; I don't know. When we
are young or when we have children, they force us to see the future.
I'm very happy for the things that you are saying. We were in Varennes visiting your
R&D with the environmental committee, and we saw these mega batteries that are
filled and drain within 15 minutes. It was unbelievable, so I'm very happy about that.
I have two questions. Can we do a little bit for the common transport? Everybody
seems to be very excited about, "Okay, I don't need a chauffeur; I'm going to go there
without a driver, and I'm going to get there fast and I don't have to worry about
driving,'' but if we want to be synergistic and contribute to the fight against climate
change, what is being done about common transport?
Mr. Wickham: Thank you for your question.
In our Budget 2016 demonstration program, we requested proposals in the area of
transit for electric buses. We haven't announced any projects in this area yet, but we're
discussing with transit authorities and municipalities, and we hope that we will have
some projects announced soon. If that's the case, that would be a foundation on which
we could build in the future, if we received additional funding.
Most of what we've talked about is for passenger vehicles up to now, but in our
demonstration work we are working with trucks, commercial vehicles and electric
buses.
Senator Galvez: That takes me to the second part of my question. What can we do
here? The key is the municipalities. The key is convincing municipalities for this
common transport and civil construction and building codes. You said we have to put
the infrastructure there. We understand the capacity is there. The infrastructure needs
to be built, so what can we do as senators here to help you accelerate this pace to
realize your projects?
Ms. Vieira: That question I was not expecting. It's usually what more can we do. That's
a fascinating question: What role can the Senate play? Certainly the fact that you've
engaged in such a study is important work in that you have all the testimony and
helping support the analysis and pushing us in our thinking, and we look forward to the
report that comes out of this. That in itself is important because it's putting the issue in
the mainstream. Also, through your support and through the conclusions and
recommendations that come out of your study, the government then needs to look at
what other policy and programming options we need to consider in order to facilitate
greater deployment.
I really appreciate your question on mass transit, because it isn't just about single
personal vehicle transportation. Part of transitioning to a lower carbon reality is the fact
that we have to get people out of their cars. We have to get them into mass transit. We
have to make mass transit more effective.
Mass transit can be electrified. Hydrogen could be a source. We are leaders in hydrogen
technology here in Canada. We are leaders in hydrogen production and hydrogen

 technology for mass transit. We are selling it all over the world. We need to adopt more
of it here in Canada, as well as fuel switching to natural gas for heavier-duty vehicles
and buses.
There are a lot of options for mass transit, and I think we need to explore all of them —
not pick winners but explore all of them, as there is great potential. We also need to
take Canadian leadership, because many of these companies are Canadian.
[Translation]
The Chair: Like Senator Galvez, I'm from the Quebec City region.
[English]
We had an experience with a tourist bus in Old Quebec because of the small streets and
protecting the environment and not having too many fumes. They had this electric bus
that would go around Vieux-Québec. For those of you who have been to Quebec, there
are a lot of hills. Passengers had to get off and cooperate with the bus driver in pushing
the bus up the hill. It was not a great success. It was an experiment that proved to be
difficult.
Ms. Vieira: Good intentions.
The Chair: It's not too bad. It's good exercise, but it's not good promotion for the
vehicles themselves.
Ms. Vieira: Great intention, and still some technological evolution to happen.
Senator Griffin: Thank you for being here. I really like how you're tying in the vehicles
that are already out there, that were leading edge a few years ago, and how they have
improved.
Of course, in this committee, we're looking ahead to connected and automated
vehicles. I want to ask a question regarding the regulatory regime. What are the key
regulatory issues that the Government of Canada will need to address regarding
connected and automated vehicles?
Ms. Vieira: I certainly can start on that with some of the most basic, and certainly
where our colleagues in Transport Canada and ISED are focusing, and that is the safety
and security concerns. There is a whole range of regulations that go far beyond what
needs to be available for the traditional passenger vehicle. It doesn't matter whether
it's an EV or a gas vehicle. The idea that vehicles are speaking to and communicating
with each other, communicating with the system, and a Level 5 automation where they
are driving themselves, requires a level of safety and security regulations that are like
nothing we have ever seen. So that has to be first and foremost.
For our colleagues in ISED, the dedicated spectrum to allow these vehicles to
communicate is important because the stability of that spectrum and the availability of
those channels for communicating are going to be incredibly important. If they are truly
dependent on communication and automated, what happens if there is some kind of
telecommunications issue? Can you just imagine? Those are the hurdles we need to
look at today.

 Above and beyond that, you're looking at the regular codes and standards that would
be available for any vehicle, for the charging and fuelling of that vehicle. As well,
connected and autonomous vehicles will be part of the vehicles that are regulated
under the light-duty regulations that exist today. They will be part of the choices that
automakers are putting out in their suite of vehicles, so they will be implicated in those
regulations. Certainly those are the ones that would be top of mind from my
perspective.
Mr. Haslip: My answer was going to be the same. The top-of-mind one is safety and
security. The introduction of autonomous vehicles on the roads is a completely new
paradigm in terms of the transportation and the issues around that. Undoubtedly, that
will be the top-of-mind issue.
Senator Griffin: That gives me some appreciation of your role as a federal
government. Another level of government will be the provincial governments, which of
course license vehicles. They too will probably have to have some regulatory changes. I
don't know if you have had any chance to talk to the provincial governments about
that.
Mr. Haslip: As we pointed out at the outset of our opening remarks, the mandate of
NRCan, or Natural Resources Canada, does not actually include autonomous vehicles
per se. While we have lots of interaction with the provinces — and Paula spoke to some
of those — on alternative fuelling, whether it's electric or natural gas or other, we are
not talking to the provinces about issues around autonomous or connected vehicles.
Ms. Vieira: Back to the mandates and the fact that, right now, the work that is
paramount is being governed by Transport Canada and ISED, once these become more
mainstream and now you're looking at mass deployment, commercially ready
technologies and energy use implications, that's where we will take a much greater
role. Just like the deployment of any other vehicle, that's where we really have
expertise in developing the appropriate policies and programs to support mass
deployment of commercially ready technology. I think that, in the near future, NRCan
will start to play a much greater role. But, as Dean says, right now we wouldn't be
undertaking dialogue with the provinces on that.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: First, the governments promote green energy and the use of
electricity a great deal. However, on Parliament Hill, there's no charging station and
there are only a few hybrid limousines. I haven't been to the National Assembly of
Quebec in a long time, so I don't know whether there are charging stations. However,
having charging stations at Parliament and at the National Assembly would set a good
example and would promote green energy.
I want to talk about automated vehicles. When I bought my first car, it had one key. I
could open the window, turn on the radio, and everything worked. Today, vehicles have
so many buttons, and they scare me. I use only the first three or four buttons in case I
open the roof, the trunk or something else. It's frightening!
I find one thing very encouraging. People are living longer and longer, and older people
will need automated vehicles. I think this is good news. You reach a venerable age and

 your driver's licence is revoked for some reason. Imagine programming your vehicle to
take you where you want to go. It's the nicest thing that could happen to you.
Does your industry plan to train people? Whether your vehicle is electric or automated,
the salesperson spends only one hour with you before you leave with your vehicle.
Technology is changing quickly. A few years ago, no one had an iPad. Today, we use
them to work and we understand how they run. It's a good thing. However, if I leave
with an automated vehicle and something happens to me, an unforeseen event, what
will I do?
Does the industry plan to focus on training to help people learn how to use these
vehicles? We hope so. We're living longer and longer, and we'll all want to drive without
a licence and glasses because our vehicle can take us where we want to go.
Senator Maltais: Do you wear dentures?
Senator Dagenais: I don't wear dentures, but I have teeth!
[English]
Senator Mercer: How old are you again?
Senator Dagenais: I am 67, my friend.
The Chair: Do you want to try to answer this?
Ms. Vieira: So the elderly, as a benefit, yes, absolutely. Those who have never driven,
who don't know how to drive, who get beyond an age — not now, but in the future —
will have an option for transporting themselves in a much more independent way.
The other thing about automated and connected vehicles that is of great benefit and
interest is the idea that right now our vehicles spend about 96 per cent of their time
parked. They are either in the driveway at night or at the workplace or whatnot. These
vehicles can potentially be applied 100 per cent of the time, 24 hours a day. They can
be driving you someplace and then you someplace and then you back. They could be
driving people everywhere all day long. Fewer of us will need vehicles. Whether we're
elderly or we have never driven or we're not elderly and we just don't need to have a
car, many of us can share these vehicles because they can be implicated 24-7, so great
efficiencies, great benefits.
Training, great point. We're seeing that with electric vehicles. Salespeople, yes, may
spend an hour with you. It's not enough. Some of the work that we're doing is in
developing programs that we can work with sales agents to ensure that they're properly
trained and they can pass on that training.
The other area where NRCan excels and has world-renowned training is in driver
behaviour training. We have been doing it for years, teaching people how to drive more
efficiently and more effectively. We see the extension of that to these new vehicle
types, how best to drive them, whether it's an autonomous vehicle, connected, EV or
hydrogen. All of those will present new challenges and new learning.
That's where NRCan excels. We have been doing driver training courses and different
applications for years to try to get people to drive more efficiently and therefore reduce

 their gas consumption. We see that as an extension of what we will be doing for those
vehicles.
It's also important that at the point of sale, those people are well-prepared and welltrained, because that can support the purchasing decision. If they are well-informed
and well-trained, it can really push that sale, so that is a very important consideration
and, yes, one we're very much looking at.
Senator Dagenais: Thank you so much.
[Translation]
Senator Maltais: Green energy is the ideal for the future. I'm particularly interested in
a certain energy, namely, the energy tax. You know the governments seek to heavily
tax a litre of gas. If gas is eliminated, electricity could be taxed, of course. The
governments can't live without taxes. Let's not kid ourselves. This applies to all levels
of government.
The federal government currently returns part of the gas tax to municipalities to fund
infrastructure, roads or other things. The municipalities will continue to need these
things, and they'll need tax revenues. If gas is eliminated, should electricity be taxed?
If electricity is taxed, more will need to be produced. Senator Mercer touched on the
topic earlier. Half the electricity producers in Canada generate nuclear or coal power.
Nuclear power is reaching the end of its era and must be replaced.
Will we lose anything we save in carbon emissions with electric cars by producing coalfired or oil-fired electricity? Has your study helped analyze this aspect?
[English]
Mr. Haslip: That's a pair of interesting questions.
On the question of gas taxes, I do not believe that we have studied that particular
question. What I would say is that the introduction of electric vehicles is something that
is going to take place gradually over time. Just as gas taxes will fluctuate from year to
year, the provision of gas taxes from the federal government to other orders of
government will change over periods of time. I think governments will adapt over a
period of time as the volume of gasoline that is sold in this country changes.
With respect to the point you made about electricity grids and provincial grids and the
differences between them, I was tempted to speak earlier, but Paula did such a good
job of answering the rest of the question that I didn't jump in. I wanted to make the
point that it's clearly true that some jurisdictions in Canada, such as British Columbia,
Manitoba, Quebec and Newfoundland, have extremely clean electricity systems, such
that if you take a vehicle on the road today and replace it with an electric vehicle, you
have effectively completely eliminated that greenhouse gas contribution, very close to
100 per cent. Then there are other jurisdictions like Ontario, for example, where, while
there are some fossil fuels burned in the production of electricity, we still have quite a
clean grid. But I would say that there is no jurisdiction in Canada where the
replacement of a conventional, gas-powered vehicle today with an electric vehicle
would make you worse off.

 Even in a jurisdiction that uses a lot of coal like Alberta or Saskatchewan, the
replacement of an internal combustion vehicle with an electric vehicle is, at worst,
carbon-neutral and could produce some greenhouse gas emission savings, depending
on the assumptions in your model. Certainly, I think with the signals that we have seen
from, for example, the Alberta government on phasing out of emissions from coal-fired
power, with the steps we have seen in Saskatchewan towards implementation of carbon
capture on coal-fired power plants, with the increasing emphasis in New Brunswick and
Nova Scotia on increasing amounts of renewables in their grid, I think all of the trend
lines are very positive for the benefits of electric vehicles from coast to coast.
[Translation]
Senator Maltais: You didn't talk about Ontario. You talked about the other provinces,
but not Ontario.
[English]
Mr. Haslip: I thought I mentioned Ontario.
Senator Maltais: No.
Mr. Haslip: In Ontario, we have quite a clean electrical grid. I don't have all of the
figures at my fingertips.
Ms. Vieira: The Canadian average would be a reduction. So replacing a conventional
vehicle with an electric vehicle, on average, Canadian power would be 80 and Ontario
45. So based on the power source and the power generation and combination in
Ontario, you're still looking at reductions of 45. The national average is 80 because we
have some provinces that are — for example, British Columbia and Quebec — anywhere
from 80 to 98 per cent reductions in emissions by replacing that one vehicle with an
electric vehicle. In Ontario, you're still looking at 45, so much to Dean's point, there is
no jurisdiction where you're going to get a negative.
Mr. Haslip: I was going to say I think we should check that figure, because that's not
the figure I have. I have 91 for Ontario.
Ms. Vieira: Sorry, 58 to 70 are the numbers we have. I'm sorry. I apologize.
[Translation]
Senator Maltais: I was talking about the renewal of coal-fired, nuclear or oil-fired
power plants in Ontario, because there aren't many dams. If the amount of electricity is
increased, more energy must be produced.
Senator Boisvenu: Or, Quebec could sell electricity to Ontario.
Senator Maltais: Wait a minute. The Americans thought of it before you. I want to
know how the energy renewal process will go in Ontario.
[English]

 Mr. Haslip: I think a detailed question about how Ontario is going to meet its power
questions in the future is outside our departmental mandate. That's a question for the
province to answer.
However, as I pointed out earlier, the introduction of electric vehicles, even in
significant quantities, is not going to cause turmoil in the energy system. The specific
examples I quoted in my opening remarks were about Ontario. Ontario can already
handle a large number of electric vehicles, given the fact that 80 to 90 per cent of that
charging occurs at night. As I believe I said in my opening remarks, even as electric
vehicles grow in significant numbers over time, the year-to-year increases in energy
demand are going to be such that we feel that provincial utilities are going to be able to
make those adjustments.
Senator Greene: I would like to pick up on the same line of questioning. You
mentioned "carbon neutral'' before. I suspect that Nova Scotia is probably a jurisdiction
that is carbon neutral with regard to that, or worse.
Mr. Haslip: It's close.
Senator Greene: It's close. Okay. So if it's true that it's carbon neutral — and it's true
that we all want to reduce the carbon footprint — what is the incentive for the
provincial government of Nova Scotia to invest or help to make this technology
available?
Ms. Vieira: I think that one of the things we have learned through our dialogue
through the pan-Canadian framework is that all jurisdictions are committed to
supporting Canada in meeting its climate goals. All provinces are seeing, in some cases,
that major transformations of their power sources and their power supplies are
required. Major investments in infrastructure are required. Carbon pricing regimes will
be put in place and a whole series of instruments. But we did not see, without
exception, any province that felt that they could not do more and that they could not
support Canada in meeting its climate goals.
Are the options and what is implemented coast-to-coast going to be the same? No,
there is no magic bullet. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. But even in the Atlantic
provinces, we saw a real willingness to come to the table with a multitude of solutions.
The government is supporting that through huge infrastructure transfers to the
provinces and billions of dollars introduced in Budget 2016 to help that transition.
Senator Greene: I'm sure that the Province of Nova Scotia and any province would
want to help, but my question is, what is the economic incentive for them to do so if
the result of what they are going to do is not going to really change anything with
regard to the carbon footprint within the province?
Mr. Hoskin: We have talked about electric vehicles specifically, but the other side of
electrification of transportation is hydrogen. Using hydrogen allows more renewables to
enter the grid. I know that Nova Scotia has invested a little bit or maybe more than a
little bit in renewables like wind. By bringing in electrification, using hydrogen, you can
use that as a controllable source so that when the wind is blowing to the point that
demand is not there, you can just take all the excess electricity and generate hydrogen.
Then it's there to use in your vehicle afterwards. So the incentive to provinces like Nova
Scotia, for instance, would be supporting other alternatives, other electrification

 options, that allow them to green their grid by providing a controllable load while also
helping Canada to meet the transportation options.
Mr. Haslip: I would say one other thing, which is I think what we have seen in terms of
electric vehicle purchase patterns over time is that it takes a while to get from there to
here. So even if it's sort of no net advantage or a small net advantage today, I think
the important point is that in 10 years, when penetration rates are much higher, that's
the goalpost you're aiming towards.
Not to pick on Nova Scotia, but I think we have seen lots of examples in their support
of marine projects in the Bay of Fundy. Our research centre works with Nova Scotia
Power on biomass co-firing in some of their plants. There are lots of initiatives in Nova
Scotia to green their grid today that are going to help in the future.
Senator Greene: Have you done any economic modelling on the impact on consumers,
for example, the typical family of four that has two cars so they have to put fuel into
two cars, both at night and on the road, comparing that under an electrification scheme
with what they burn and pay for in terms of fossil fuels? Have you done a comparative
modelling like that?
Mr. Haslip: You're talking a straight-up cost comparison?
Senator Greene: Yes.
Mr. Haslip: Not in terribly great detail and taking account of differences in prices.
Electricity prices vary from province to province today. You have to look at escalators
and what not. I think what you see today is that for some people, an electric vehicle is
actually a more economical option. One of the engineers at my research centre owns an
electric vehicle. He shared with me the spreadsheets. For him, total cost of ownership
of an electric vehicle in Ontario today was a better buy for him. But that involves a
certain set of assumptions that may not be the typical driver.
That's important as well, that people have different use patterns. They live different
distances from their homes, and are you the kind of person that leases for three years
and flips it back, or are you going to hold on to that car for the long haul? There's a
bunch of different assumptions that go into that.
What we can say is that based on the significantly declining price of the battery
technologies, that's going to do two things. It's going to drive longer range, and it's
going to drive reduced cost, and over the medium term, we can expect the costs of
conventional vehicles and electric vehicles to cross for a larger fraction of the
population.
Senator Greene: That's good. Well, I encourage you to do some economic modelling,
and if you do, we would like to have it.
[Translation]
Senator Galvez: I want to finish by speaking about two things, including technology.
[English]

 Technology seems to be the key for the success of this. What do you think at present is
the most difficult challenge? What is the time frame that you think is required to be
able to pass to the next step or phase?
And just one little ricochet question: You have mentioned needing new regulations and
new policies. Can you be more specific and say what new regulation or new legislation
will assist you with your work?
Mr. Haslip: So let me be clear. Are we talking about electric vehicles?
Senator Galvez: Yes, we are talking about electric vehicles.
Mr. Haslip: Very good. I'm going to say the battery technology. That's the biggest one.
One of the principal concerns for consumers in purchasing electric vehicles and one of
the biggest barriers for commercial offerings of electric vehicles has been range. That's
driven by the battery technology. There are many people who feel that if their car is
only going to be good for 50 kilometres, that's not going to be a vehicle that is for
them. It may be good for short hauls around the city. If you only use your car to drive
to work, and it's 10 kilometres each way, then that's fine. But that's not everybody's
situation.
But as I was just mentioning, what we have seen is increases in battery technology.
Regarding batteries in 2017, when you look around the world, you look at not just the
issues of electric vehicles but issues all over the place. Intermittent renewables require
in many cases new approaches to managing demand, and storage is an important
component of that. Battery technologies are being driven from a whole bunch of
different directions, whether it's your laptop computer, your electric vehicle or your
power grid. Very large industrial players with very large research budgets are working
very hard on these things. Let's hope that we are seeing a tipping point there.
Of course there are other barriers, which we talked about at the beginning, but if you
are looking for the one technological issue, I would say that's it.
Mr. Wickham: Another one would be the charging infrastructure itself, which is
evolving. It's the speed of the charging infrastructure, the integration. There are a lot of
different places where you might want to have a charging station, so it needs to be
developed for those different applications. We are currently working on developing
those.
Ms. Vieira: In terms of other policies, I wouldn't necessarily say regulations as we're
really not a regulator. But for the policies and programs that can help support greater
deployment, one of them is connected to battery. Remember when I said that the key
to the successful deployment of any new technology is making it similar, if not better,
than something people are accustomed to. The battery is one those things. And it's not
just the range, the ability to go further and the recharging, but the battery itself.
Let's remember that in these vehicles, you cannot run out to the Canadian Tire when
your battery is dead and spend $200 to replace it. You are looking at an $8,000
investment, and that is scary to people. If you have a vehicle and the battery dies, you
go to Canadian Tire and spend $200, and I'm done. But that is not the case.

 In trying to tackle that barrier, we need to be putting policies in place, whether it is
battery guarantees or assurance programs that allow for some kind of cost-shared
replacement with the OEMs or greater warranties on these products — as it will be the
most expensive replacement part that will be needed — so consumers can confidently
buy that vehicle.
The other issue is resale. This technology is still very new. Everybody understands how
to go on to autotrader.ca and see the value of their vehicle. They are accustomed the
Camry and the Honda Civic. Anyone can tell what the resale value of those vehicles is.
With these, not so much; it's difficult. It's still an unknown and still new.
That changes the ownership model. I'm used to having my vehicle, switching it out
every five years, and I'll sell it on autotrader. I don't know what will happen when I buy
an electric vehicle. I don't know who will buy it from me and how much it will be worth
when everybody knows that that battery may need to be replaced. There are some
common consumer ownership issues that need to be tackled.
Another issue is the experience, convincing them that an electric vehicle can actually
meet their needs because, for the most part, we do not drive 400 kilometres in a day.
It's about ensuring that it's more than an hour test drive, ensuring people fully
understand their own driving behaviour today and that these vehicles are viable options
for them. It's about designing programs and initiatives that help get consumers over
some of these ownership barriers.
Senator Galvez: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Since one of the objectives of these meetings, and
the televising these meetings, is to educate Canadians and keep them informed, I'm
like Senator Boisvenu and I appreciate the fact that you gave us confidence in the fact
that our government seems to be very up to date on the issue. Canadians appreciate
the fact that you made a wonderful presentation tonight, and I thank you.
I would like to tell colleagues that after the break, we will be hearing from the Office of
the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.
The committee is adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)