- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Liberal
- Nepean
- Ontario
- Voting Attendance: 67%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $104,578.46
- Government Page
- Apr/18/23 12:51:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canada has made a remarkable recovery from the COVID recession. Canada’s economic growth is the best among the G7 countries. About 830,000 more Canadians are employed today than before the pandemic. Inflation has been falling for the last eight months. Our unemployment is at a record low, and in February, we had labour force participation for women aged 25 to 54 at a record high of 85.7%.
However, we also face many challenges. As we know, globalization is winding down. We see a sort of Cold War-style era returning to the world now. The unipolar world is no more. It is bifurcating into a bipolar or even a tripolar world. Multilateral agreements that were the basis for global trade are also taking a back seat, with the WTO Appellate Body almost unable to function because of vacancies that are not filled because of issues related to some major countries. What we are seeing now, more than bilateral trade agreements, are free trade agreements among blocs of countries; we are also seeing more friendshoring. In fact, this concept of friendshoring is just starting up.
While it is a challenge, this is also an opportunity for us. Protectionism is growing. This is not just from the traditional countries that were practising protectionism, such as developing countries; rather, protectionism is also growing in developed countries, especially countries like the United States.
A few years back, in this chamber, I talked about the importance of artificial intelligence and how that technology will not only affect the corporate sector and the economy but also the entire society. We are already seeing the impact of artificial intelligence and technologies like robotics and automation on this society.
I will be sharing my time with the member for Richmond Hill.
The budget talks about transforming challenges into opportunities. It mentions a need for investment to manage the structural changes, which will not be limited to one sector or one aspect of the economy. Broad-based investment will be required to grow our economy and create good middle-class jobs in the years to come. The scale of required investment is massive, and the private sector alone is unlikely to mobilize the level of capital required in Canada at sufficient speed. However, although we say the private sector alone cannot mobilize, it is expected to invest about $100 trillion in the global clean economy between now and 2050.
Many of the investments that need to be made will stretch over decades and involve high upfront costs, and that is where governments come in. Moreover, key sectors and technologies will have significant spillover effects by driving development of related industries. For example, fundamental inputs to clean production and the production of clean technologies, such as electricity; critical minerals; and carbon capture, utilization and storage, will provide foundations for an expanding clean economy. For related sectors, such as hydrogen and clean manufacturing, this will boost their productivity, support their resilience and help generate new middle-class jobs. Private investment decisions may not take full account of these spillovers, and this increases the risk of underinvestment.
Without the right policy framework, as stated in the budget 2023 document, Canada could see underinvestment in critical areas and a slow pace of innovation in new clean technology. Together, these factors would result in Canada falling behind the United States and other countries that are moving forward aggressively to build their clean economies, create middle-class jobs and ensure more prosperous futures for their people.
Canada must act decisively to ensure that it remains the location of choice for new investment in these sectors, particularly in the face of the U.S.'s recent passage of the Inflation Reduction Act. In addition to this act, we have to take notice of the U.S.'s CHIPS and Science Act, a $280-billion act. It will not only focus $80 billion on the manufacturing of semiconductors in the United States but also invest in around 20 technology centres focusing on advanced technologies, from transition energy and biotechnology to others.
This combination of the IRA and the CHIPS and Science Act is called a once-in-a-lifetime, once-in-a-generation policy of the United States. It has fundamentally rewritten the entire industrial policy of the United States.
We also have to consider the friendshoring that the U.S. is emphasizing now. That is a challenge for many countries in the world, but it creates opportunities for Canada that we are already seeing in the critical mineral sector. I will talk about this in a minute.
Budget 2023 proposes substantial measures as the next steps in the government's plan to “crowd in” new private investment by leveraging public investment and government policy. The goal of this approach is neither to substitute government for the private sector nor to supplement market-based decision-making. Rather, it is to leverage the tools of government to mobilize the private sector.
This approach is not about the government picking individual corporate winners in an effort to engineer a preferred vision for the economy in 2050. That approach did not work in the past, and it is even less likely to work in today's environment of rapid technological change. The tax incentives and investment supports proposed in budget 2023 are designed to set a framework for boosting overall investment while leaving the private sector to determine how best to invest based on market signals.
Canada has been rich and prosperous because of the natural resources we have and the hard work of several generations of Canadians, including present-day seniors. However, the future is changing with the digital economy and the new technologies that are coming up. We have an opportunity, in these challenging times, to invest and grow. One growth aspect is the critical minerals, which are very important for the clean economy that is being envisaged all around the world.
Before touching on that, I just want to mention two fundamental challenges. The first is that many of the investments that will be critical for the realignment of global supply chains and a net-zero future are large-scale, long-term investments. The second challenge, as I have already mentioned, is the U.S.'s IRA, with the related CHIPS and Science Act.
In budget 2022, last year, we committed $3.8 billion to Canada's critical mineral strategy. In March of this year, last month, the government launched the critical minerals infrastructure fund, announcing that this new fund will allocate $1.5 billion towards energy and transportation projects needed to unlock priority mineral deposits.
In addition to this funding, the federal government is entering into bilateral agreements with various provinces. Recently, we signed an agreement with Ontario, what we call the “Ontario table,” where the federal government and the province committed to work together to align resources and timelines and to have a common regulatory approach to promoting the critical minerals required for a clean economy.
I also have to mention that although we have critical minerals and announced investments, and although we have already attracted investments in battery manufacturing and electrical vehicles manufacturing, we still have the stumbling block of the long regulatory processes that are required to see a critical mineral mine start and become operational.
1223 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 12:28:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants.
The Conservative opposition day motion we are debating today has two points I agree with, while I completely disagree with the objective of the motion to appoint a special committee to examine and review all aspects of the Canada-China relationship.
While it is good to have opportunities to review Canada’s relationships with any country so that we can find ways to improve or further strengthen our relationships in a positive way, the objective of this motion is to establish a platform that provides for further degrading Canada’s relationship with China. This motion is designed to provide a stage for harsh and one-sided critics of China. There are things about China that we can and should criticize. I do not foresee any positive outcomes from this proposed committee.
Before I talk about the negative implications of having this committee, let me mention the points I agree with. First, the motion states that Canadians of Chinese descent have made immeasurable contributions to Canada. Absolutely, yes. Our wonderful country, Canada, is an ongoing success story of a nation with extraordinary cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity.
I would like to recognize and appreciate the important contributions that Chinese Canadians have made and continue to make to Canada’s socio-economic, political and cultural heritage. The history of Chinese Canadians goes back as far as the 1700s, but the big movement started in the late 19th century. The road has not always been smooth. Chinese Canadians faced and continue to face discrimination.
If this motion passes and the committee is established, I foresee increased negative perception about Chinese Canadians in our country. In spite of the historical discrimination they have faced, Chinese Canadians, with hard work and determination, have built on the opportunities our wonderful country offers and have been successful in every aspect of society, in the arts, sciences, sports, business and government. To put it simply, Chinese Canadians have made big contributions in building a dynamic and prosperous Canada.
The second point the motion makes that I agree with is that the people of China are part of an ancient civilization that has contributed much to humanity. Again, yes, absolutely. China is a country with a 5,000-year-old civilization. Chinese people have contributed greatly to many fields during their long recorded history. Some of the greatest inventions that have been momentous contributions of the Chinese people to world civilization include papermaking, printing, gunpowder and the compass.
Other than these two points, everything else in this motion aims to design a platform for degrading Canada-China relations, and negatively contributes to Canada’s interests.
If this committee is established, I expect, first, an increased negative perception about Chinese Canadians in our country. We have seen anti-Asian racism on the increase in recent times. The kind of rhetoric I have heard before, and which I am sure will be repeated again in the committee, would lead only to increased negative perceptions of about 1.8 million Canadians who form over 5% of the population.
The second negative effect, if this committee is formed, is further deterioration of our relationship with one of our major trading partners, thus affecting our businesses. China is one of our major trading partners. Canadian exports to China in 2021 were worth about $29 billion. Canadian imports from China were worth about $86 billion.
In addition to low-tech, mundane products, China is also a major technology and high-end products supplier to the world, from telecom equipment to batteries for electric vehicles. China is also a manufacturing base for many products our industries need.
The proponents of this motion appear to be in a make-believe world with no China. Make no mistake, China is and will continue to be a major economy in the world. Canadian businesses need a smooth trading relationship with China, but the end results of this motion, if successful, will achieve anything but that.
The third outcome, if this committee is formed, is the negative impact on the flow of Canada’s most valuable and precious resource requirement, which is immigrants with knowledge, expertise and skills. China, for a long time, has been an important source of our skilled immigrants.
Highly trained Chinese immigrants have become a significant part of our growing knowledge-based economy. While I do not expect a dramatic slowdown in new Canadians from China, the harsh rhetoric will certainly act as a dampener in our efforts to recruit the best and brightest brains as immigrants to Canada.
The fourth negative issue, if this motion is successful, is a further fall in new technology-trained international students from China and a further decline in the numbers of these highly skilled students who become permanent residents and later citizens.
In the growing knowledge-based economy, it is not natural resources that give us prosperity or a competitive edge. It is the knowledge, expertise and skills of the younger generation that can continue to keep us prosperous. In the digital economy, it is the bright, young graduates of today who give us the competitive edge.
China has been a major source of international students, and while China remains the second-largest source for international students to Canada, the trend is declining. It was about 10% less in 2021. The decline began in 2019 and increased due to the pandemic. The anti-China bullhorn diplomacy will only add to the current problem.
Is China perfect? No. China ignores the desire of the people of Taiwan, who have established themselves as an economically successful entity with a vibrant democracy. China has erased the culture and heritage of minorities in its land and the distinctive identities of Tibetans and Uighurs, and we have legitimate concerns for the people in Hong Kong.
As one expert put it, China is neither as benevolent as it claims nor as malicious as it is criticized for being. Let me mention what Jeremy Paltiel, a China expert at Carleton University, said in an article on Global News on May 8, 2021. He said that to see China in the context of “friend or foe” is an overly simplistic approach. “I think that’s a false dichotomy,” he said. “China can be both different and not an enemy.” This nuanced understanding helps countries like Canada that are grappling with thorny issues, including human rights.
The key to a successful Canada-China relationship is to be mindful of the differences without necessarily agreeing with or accepting them. Understanding is not the same thing as pardoning. “We have to be able to find a way of talking across difference without defining 'difference' as being 'enemy',” Paltiel says. “And if we can’t do that, we can’t live in a diverse world.”
To conclude, this motion is not in the interest of Canada and Canadians. Testifying before the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations in the previous parliament, the former Canadian foreign affairs minister and the member of Parliament for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount mentioned a four Cs approach of Canada to its relationship with China: compete, co-operate, challenge and coexist.
He stated, “China is rapidly becoming a global influence with which all countries must learn to coexist. That means that we must recognize situations in which it is necessary to cooperate with China.” He continued, “[I]t also means that we are competing with China when it comes to trade and to promoting our values. It also implies challenging China when human rights are violated or Canadian citizens and interests are jeopardized.”
However, the objective of the proponents of this motion is not to add value or have a meaningful discussion, but to degrade the relationship between Canada and China—
1327 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/10/22 12:53:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kings—Hants.
I rise today to speak to the Bloc Québécois opposition day motion to stop the non-denominational prayer that we have at the beginning of each day in this House.
This month, the Angus Reid Institute, in partnership with Cardus, published a report that offers a comprehensive and first-of-its-kind look at the faith journeys of Canadians, not just among majority religious communities, but across the religious spectrum. Nineteen per cent of Canadians, or one in five, are classified as non-believers. However, four in five have some openness to God or spirituality. The cultural mosaic in Canada is ever-shifting. While those born in Canada continue to shift further into areligious identities, being raised in a religious tradition is common in Canada, with 72% saying that they grew up with religious teachings.
As a Hindu Canadian, I concur that Canadians who are raised in the Hindu faith tend more toward the privately faithful. With that said, the prayer that we have, in my view, is more a tradition that is part of the fabric of the society in our Christian majority Canada, and I support that we continue the current practice.
Many Hindu Canadians during Christmastime have lighted a Christmas tree in their homes. It does not mean that Hindus are practising Christianity; it is about embracing the culture and heritage of the society we live in. The prayer that we have every day, while reflective of the different religions embraced by Canadians, also represents the culture and heritage of our country.
Let us look at the practice of the prayer that we have from a historical perspective. Although the practice of reading a prayer at the start of each sitting was not codified in the Standing Orders until 1927, it has been part of the daily proceedings of the House since 1877. Much later, suggestions were made to rewrite or reword the prayer in a non-sectarian form. Until 1994, no major change to the form of the prayer was made, aside from references to royalty. At that time, the House concurred in a report recommending a new form of prayer, more reflective of the different religions embraced by Canadians. This prayer, which we use now, was read for the first time when the House met to open its proceedings on February 21, 1994.
Sir Gary Streeter, a member of Parliament in the United Kingdom, on a similar motion in the U.K. House of Commons in 2019, said:
The crux of the argument for abolishing Parliamentary Prayers is that by taking all references to religion and God out of politics and public life, we will then have a truly neutral public square. However, that would just be to replace one worldview and set of beliefs with another. As human beings, we all bring a set of beliefs about the world and the nature of human life to any debates around pursuing the public good. Secularists might argue that their worldview is the best on which to base society, but they cannot do so by claiming neutrality. Rather than striving for a ‘neutral’ public square, we should instead recognise that we are increasingly becoming a pluralistic society, where a multitude of different beliefs and worldviews coexist. In a pluralistic society, freedom of belief is vital, yet this is not achieved by forcing all references to religion and God in public life to be pushed to one side.... For those who do object, for whatever reason, there is no obligation to participate in the prayers.
In an article published in the Canadian Parliamentary Review in 2009, Martin Lanouette said:
...the form and content of the prayer recited in parliamentary legislatures is part of a debate that seeks to pit the special relationship each legislature has with its religious heritage, against the desire to adapt this heritage to contemporary cultural realities.
He went on to say:
So why does the need for prayer persist despite this secular storm and all the unending controversies? As stated in Marsh v. Chambers, traditions are often seen as “a part of the fabric of the society,” and at a time when contemporary societies are tending to become more diverse, the argument for tradition continues to occupy an important place in the collective imagination. A defensive reaction? Quite likely. A bastion of identity? Most definitely. All of which has not stopped many parliaments from wanting to take matters even further, not to weaken the “old” identity but to breathe new life into it.
He continued:
If it is to be practised, this ritual must be an act of recognition that focuses on uniting rather than dividing people. Simply eliminating the prayer is another option, but it is not a more impartial one, since the adherents, who have the same rights, will feel they are victims of discrimination as well.
There is a growing trend in our society to identify and amplify the things that divide us, rather than the things that unite us. The intolerance that is being propagated today by those on the extreme left of the political spectrum is the same intolerance that was the cornerstone of the extreme right. In the name of political correctness, voices are being shut down, books are being banned, and any view or opinion that deviates even an inch from the far-left ideology is immediately drowned out.
The practice of praying does not mean that the state is in bed with religion. None of the issues we discuss and debate and none of the legislation we pass here in any way or form connect any religion to the state. Let us continue the practice of the prayer we have out of respect to over 80% of Canadians who practise one religious faith or another.
As a politician, I go to temples, mosques, synagogues, churches, etcetera, but it does not mean I associate the state with religion. Since 2019, I have seen the Bloc Québécois opposition day motions, and never once have I seen them propose anything that is of importance to Canadians' economic realities. Today we are facing challenging times; the energy transition is going towards the battery, and Quebec and Canada could become leaders in the world in this technology. We have not seen the Bloc Québécois present any motion on anything that is of economic importance.
1087 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/22 12:30:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells.
I would like to focus my talk on the following important items in the budget.
The first is Canada's critical minerals and clean industrial strategies. In my view, this is, at the same time, the biggest opportunity and the most critical need for Canada today. Daniel Yergin is an economic historian and writer about whom Time magazine said, “If there's one man whose opinion matters more than any other on global energy markets, it's Daniel Yergin.” Mr. Yergin said in his latest book, “You're creating whole new supply chains that don't exist, and you're trying to do it in a very fast time. That means transitioning from Big Oil to Big Shovel.”
The second is launching a world-leading Canada growth fund with $15 billion, which will help attract $45 billion in private capital. We need to transform our economy at speed and at scale.
The third is creating a Canadian innovation and investment agency, a market-oriented agency, one with private sector leadership and expertise similar to those that have helped countries like Finland and Israel transform themselves into global innovation leaders.
The fourth is the review of tax support to R and D. The decades-old scientific research and experimental development program has been a cornerstone of Canada's innovation strategy, which provides tax incentives to encourage Canadian businesses of all sizes in all sectors to conduct R and D.
The fifth is cutting taxes for Canada's growing small businesses, enabling more small businesses to avail themselves of the reduced federal tax rate of 9% compared to the general federal corporate tax of 15%.
The sixth is supporting Canada's innovation clusters for innovation ecosystems for plant-based protein alternatives, ocean-based industries, advanced manufacturing, digital technologies and artificial intelligence.
Before I speak on these six items, I would like to recognize this budget as prudent and fiscally responsible. My personal political ideology is at the centre of the political spectrum, and for me being fiscally responsible is very important. I notice that our fiscal anchor, the debt-to-GDP ratio, is expected to fall to 45.1% this year, and go down to 41.5% by 2026-27, closer to the prepandemic levels. We need to go in this direction so that we have the same fiscal strength if we get hit by another disaster like the current pandemic.
Related to this is the composition of our borrowing. We had very low interest rates for a long period of time, and now they have started to trend upward. When the rates were low, our government locked in these interest rates with increasing the size of our long-term borrowing. In the decade prior to the pandemic, on average, about 20% of the bonds issued by the government were issued at maturities of 10 years or greater. Over the course of the last year, the federal government allocation of long-term bonds was about 45%, which is a good thing.
The third general observation about this budget is what I have been asking for a couple of years. I have been asking that we launch a comprehensive review of government programs. Some of the programs have been around for many years, and some were introduced in recent times as part of our urgent need to fight the pandemic. We need to evaluate if the programs are delivering what they were intended for. We need to know whether the objectives or the end results are still relevant and/or effective use of taxpayers' dollars. I have said that we need to repurpose or reallocate resources to programs that contribute to quality economic development. I am glad the budget announced the launch of a comprehensive strategic policy review to assess program effectiveness and to identify opportunities to save and reallocate resources to adapt government programs and operations to a new postpandemic reality.
Last, the budget dealt with housing, immigration, skills and child care. Yes, these are social policies, but what is just as important is that they are economic policies, too. I entered politics with three objectives. My first objective was affordable housing for all who need it. I am happy to note that the budget builds on the national housing strategy and addresses both affordable housing and housing affordability.
Now, I move on to development of critical minerals. As I said earlier, a big opportunity for Canada, and at the same time a critical necessity for Canada today, is developing and implementing critical minerals and clean industrial strategies. The global energy market is worth $10 trillion, and it is undergoing tremendous change. Many significant geopolitical events during the past 100 years were due to energy market considerations, so much so that some have said many countries' foreign policies are totally based on their energy policies.
Now, another dimension has been added. What was behind the scenes is now in the front. Energy is a national security issue for all countries. It is both an opportunity and a necessity for Canada to focus on the energy industry. The nature of the energy industry is changing. The transportation sector is going from gasoline-powered vehicles to battery-operated vehicles. Renewable energy sources, such as wind energy and solar energy, are not only becoming financially feasible on their own, but can enhance their standing with battery energy storage systems.
Right now, the battery industry is dominated by China. To secure continued availability of batteries in a future battery-dominated world, we need to have our own supply of batteries manufactured in Canada. We have one strong advantage that many countries do not have: We have the critical minerals required to manufacture batteries. Critical minerals are also central to major global industries such as green technology, health care, aerospace and computing. They are used in our phones, our computers and even our cars.
Critical minerals are already essential to the global economy and will be in even greater demand in the years to come. We are talking about nickel, lithium, cobalt, graphite, copper, rare earth elements, vanadium, tellurium, gallium, scandium, titanium, magnesium, zinc, the platinum group of metals and uranium. Canada has an abundance of these valuable critical minerals, but we need to make significant investments to make the most of these resources.
A thousand-pound electric battery requires about 500,000 pounds of earth to be moved. As Daniel Yergin said, “You're creating whole new supply chains that don't exist, and you're trying to do it in a very fast time. That means transitioning from Big Oil to Big Shovel.”
In Canada, we have knowledge, expertise and a long track record of financing and developing mineral projects. We are indeed the world leaders, but we need to move fast now. We need to support the industry with incentives, which this budget proposes. More importantly, we should make the critical minerals regulation process simpler so companies seeking to invest look for a balanced and predictable regulatory environment and a collaborative approach among different orders of government. I am glad that the budget would make important investments in improving our regulatory processes.
I will touch on just one other aspect: the Canadian innovation and investment agency. Let us face the bitter truth about innovation in Canada. Our main innovation challenges are the low rate of private business investment in research and development, and the uptake of new technologies. These are key requirements for our knowledge-based quality economic growth and for creating very good-quality jobs. This agency is being modelled similar to those that have helped Finland and Israel transform themselves into global innovation leaders.
I look forward to hearing the questions.
1301 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/22 12:55:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Nickel Belt.
I would like to thank the people of Nepean for electing me for the third time to this chamber. I promise to continue to work hard in delivering services with the help of my staff, and will continue to represent them here in this august chamber.
I would also like to use this opportunity to thank my family. First is my wife Sangeetha. I have been married to her for 31 years and knew her four years before that. For 35 years, she has been a friend and equal partner in everything I have done. She is a solid rock for me. I would also like to thank and recognize my son, our only son, Siddanth, who is a chartered accountant. He is a sounding board for many of the ideas and thoughts I have in my work as a member of Parliament. Many times he is a partner in very in-depth intellectual discussions, whether related to the crypto economy, to MMT, modern monetary theory, or to historical accords and linking historical facts to current geopolitical events. I thank my family, who have been with me throughout these years.
I would also like to thank the great group of volunteers who helped me win this election, the third one in a row. One distinguishing feature of this campaign with this group of volunteers is that 80% of them were students. These young Canadians worked hard and helped me get elected. It is these young Canadians, our children and grandchildren, who were the focus when I first entered politics.
I entered politics with three main objectives, one of which was that I wanted to ensure Canadian society and the economy remained robust and competitive in the global knowledge-based economy, thus securing prosperity for our children and grandchildren. Today, we are rich. Canada is prosperous because of the natural advantage we have from our natural resources. With our oil, gas, minerals, metals and forestry products, combined with the hard work done by several generations of Canadians, we enjoy prosperity and a high standard of living today. However, five or 10 years down the road these natural advantages will not be sufficient to ensure our continued prosperity. The global economy is going toward a knowledge-based economy, and I want to work hard so that Canada is at the forefront of this knowledge-based economy.
Let me quickly go through some of the technologies that dominate this knowledge-based economy. They include artificial intelligence, energy storage, quantum computing, robotics, genome sequencing and blockchain technologies. These technologies in the knowledge-based economy do not just affect the businesses, the corporate sector and the economy. They have a big impact on the entire Canadian society and our way of life. It is therefore very important for us to recognize this now and take action so that we continue to be at the front end of these technologies.
In this knowledge-based economy, the natural advantages we have will not ensure prosperity because there is a flat world out there. Our children and Canadians today have to compete with students from different parts of the world, whether from Sydney, Australia; Tokyo, Japan; Shanghai, China; Frankfurt, Germany; or Mumbai, India. Everywhere there is competition in this knowledge-based economy because everybody has a level playing field. We therefore need to empower our children to be quite competitive in that world.
Let me quickly go through some of the specific examples and how they affect us.
On artificial intelligence, three of the world's most accomplished and deep thinkers, former Google executive Eric Schmidt, Henry Kissinger and Daniel Huttenlocher, have recently written a book on artificial intelligence, the way it is transforming human society and what this technology means for all of us. Today, artificial intelligence has learned to win chess by making moves that human grandmasters had never conceived. Another AI discovered a new antibiotic analyzing molecular properties that human scientists did not understand. Now, artificial intelligence-powered jets are defeating experienced human pilots in simulated dogfights. Artificial intelligence is coming online in searching, streaming, medicine, education and many other fields, and in doing so, it is transforming how humans are experiencing reality.
The second quick point is on genomics. To sequence the first whole human genome in 2000, the human genome project cost over $3.7 billion and took 13 years of computing power. Today, the same thing costs less than $1,000 and takes a few hours.
Third, the trillion-dollar transportation sector is actually changing dramatically today. Battery-powered vehicles are a reality. This may not be true so much in Canada, but it is a big reality in China, some parts of Europe and the United States. We have to invest to make it possible. We need to be at the forefront of those technologies.
On the issue of the batteries, Canada has the natural advantage of having the rare minerals that are required in the manufacture of battery cells. What we need is a comprehensive plan to develop the mines, process the minerals, manufacture the batteries, pack the battery cells and obviously get into vehicle production. We need to do that, and we are still very far away from it.
For the knowledge-based economy, we have made significant investments in the last budget: about $440 million for the pan-Canadian artificial intelligence strategy, $360 million to launch a national quantum strategy, $90 million for the Canadian Photonics Fabrication Centre and $400 million in support of a pan-Canadian genomics strategy. We have made these investments. Also, for a clean and green future for a transition from internal combustion engines to battery-operated electric vehicles, we have established the critical battery minerals centre of excellence.
I have called for the immediate establishment of a task force to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy for the development of mines and technology for battery manufacturing in Canada. We need a team Canada approach to understand the impact of these new technologies on the new knowledge-based economies, and the impact they are having not just on the economic sector, but also in Canadian society in our day-to-day lives. We must be ready for that. We need to keep Canada at the forefront of these new technologies in the knowledge-based economy to ensure that we continue to remain prosperous and that the standard of living we enjoy today is available to our children and grandchildren too.
1090 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
