(Montreal) The spokesperson for employers would like to take the decision of whether or not to connect a new industrial project to the Hydro-Québec network out of the hands of politicians.

This role should fall to the Régie de l’énergie, pleads the Conseil du patronat du Québec (CPQ) in its brief written as part of the consultations carried out by the Ministry of Energy on the supervision and development of clean energies.

Quebec would keep the prerogative of dictating the main orientations in relation to its economic and environmental objectives, but the analysis of the merits of a project should be the responsibility of a neutral body, specifies the president and chief executive officer of the CPQ, Karl Blackburn.

“The Régie must precisely allow it to play a role that is neutral, to play a role that is depoliticized, but above all based on data, on facts,” he pleaded in an interview.

Quebec hydroelectricity is arousing unprecedented enthusiasm, while many companies want to reduce the carbon footprint of their projects. However, the capacity of Hydro-Québec, which envisages the end of the surpluses for 2027, will not be sufficient to respond favorably to all the requests.

The Minister of Economy and Energy, Pierre Fitzgibbon, has repeatedly said that not all projects could go ahead. The government has received a list of requests equivalent to 23,000 MW and nearly 10,000 MW are seriously considered.

This intervention should not be seen as a criticism of Minister Fitzgibbon, replied Mr. Blackburn. “No, it’s a matter of process. »

He adds that the Régie will have to be given the means to fulfill its responsibilities “more quickly” if it is to be given a greater role, concedes Mr. Blackburn. “Unfortunately, it is completely unthinkable and illogical to take so long to evaluate projects that span a period of years before being able to give an informed answer. »

Higher tariffs for households

The CPQ would also like companies to gradually stop indirectly financing the lowest electricity rates paid by Quebecers. He thus calls into question the “social contract” resulting from the Quiet Revolution which ensured low electricity rates for Quebec households.

In 2021, Quebecers paid only 86.2% of the value of the electricity sold by Hydro-Québec, while the general contribution of businesses was 121% and that of large industrialists 113%.

With what is called cross-subsidization, the tariffs paid by companies make it possible to finance lower tariffs for households.

Note that the concept of cross-subsidization takes into account the cost of production. For example, the tariff paid by large industrial projects is lower than the tariff paid by households, but it is less costly to connect industries in relation to their consumption than it is for all households.

Paying “the true cost of energy” would send a price signal to Quebecers, which would encourage better behavior, argues Blackburn. “Unfortunately, today, cross-subsidization greatly penalizes SMEs and does not encourage better energy efficiency. »

“Since the tariff is higher than the real cost of energy, we are in a way penalizing SMEs at the level of the competition,” he adds.

In its brief, however, the association asks that competitive rates be maintained for large companies. “Access to low-cost energy for industry is not incompatible with the implementation of energy efficiency measures and the pursuit of greater energy productivity,” it reads.

Mr. Blackburn sees no contradictions between his demands for household and business rates. His proposal is that business electricity rates “not be raised to favor individuals,” he reiterates.

Companies looking to increase their profits already have an incentive to increase their energy efficiency, he adds. “They are already concerned about reducing their cost of production to remain competitive. »

In its brief, which has 17 recommendations, the CPQ also suggests letting private energy producers play a greater role. It is also suggested not to exclude energy sources such as hydrogen or nuclear from the outset.

“Nuclear today generates waste,” says Blackburn. On the other hand, we know that science and technology are evolving. […] If we close the door now maybe we can deprive ourselves of opportunities for tomorrow. »