We need to talk about Hydro-Québec. Calmly, please. As a society, we need a real debate on electricity, while the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) is preparing profound changes.
Already, some are worried about the “quiet privatization” of the state-owned company. Others claim that Quebec will become an “Energy Wild West” or say: “Hands off our Hydro-Quebec. »
Oh there, just a moment!
Nobody is talking about privatizing Hydro-Québec. And that’s good, because it would be a bad financial idea to sell this flagship for which Quebecers have an almost sentimental attachment, like the play I like Hydro expressed it so well.
No, it is rather a question of allowing private companies that produce electricity (which is currently permitted, for their own needs) to resell this electricity to another company (which is currently prohibited). This would break Hydro-Québec’s monopoly.
We will know exactly when the Minister of Energy, Pierre Fitzbiggon, submits his bill in a few weeks. But the debate is off to a bad start. The CAQ, which did not address these major issues during the electoral campaign, lacks transparency, which is damaging.
PHOTO EDOUARD PLANTE-FRÉCHETTE, LA PRESSE ARCHIVES
Quebec Energy Minister Pierre Fitzbiggon
Quebec needs real states general to build a new social pact on energy. We will come back to this later.
But first let’s talk about the private sector in the sale of electricity, an idea that should not be demonized. Virtually all essential goods – housing, clothing, food, etc. – are sold privately. Why not electricity?
In the era of large dams, it was justified to entrust these megaprojects requiring gigantic financial resources and complex technologies to a state company. Today, technology makes it possible to develop projects on a smaller scale, within the reach of the private sector.
Of course, wind and sun remain public resources. But nothing would prevent Quebec from imposing a royalty on private suppliers, as it already does for other natural resources, for example water or minerals.
The liberalization of electricity has already taken place in many American states and throughout Europe, including the Nordic countries, these social democracies from which we like to draw inspiration. Why not with us?
Especially since Hydro-Québec is overwhelmed. To the extent that the state monopoly is no longer able to meet the demand of all industrial customers, it is difficult to see why Quebec would prevent private suppliers of sustainable electricity from doing so in its place.
It still has to be done properly, with the necessary guidelines and supervision. We would not want the private sector to cannibalize the workforce that Hydro needs for its mega action plan which will require 35,000 workers. In a context of shortage, we must keep an overview and prioritize the best projects.
But if the private sector can serve new customers willing to pay higher prices, so much the better. This will prevent Hydro from subsidizing new projects that end up costing Quebecers dearly… without them realizing it.
It must be understood that current development costs are much higher than those of the past. New projects therefore increase its average cost, an increase which must then be absorbed by all customers.
But because of the harmful politicization of energy, the increase in prices for private customers is capped at 3%. It is therefore commercial customers who are suffering, they who will have an increase of 5.1% from 1er April, if we rely on the documents submitted to the Energy Authority this week.
Because of this unhealthy cross-subsidization, households pay only 86% of the real cost, while businesses provide 134% of the cost. Shops, restaurants, hair salons… all kinds of SMEs which will end up passing the bill on to their customers.
Politically, the government is saving face. But the crucial choices for energy improvement in individuals are not being made. Too bad, because the cheapest energy is the one we don’t consume.
Which brings us back to the big conversation we need to have in Quebec.
With the energy transition, a collective discussion is essential to raise public awareness of crucial choices.
Do we want to reduce our energy consumption habits? In this case, we will have to do more than start our dishwasher at midnight…
Do we want to produce more energy to meet our growing needs? So, we will have to accept wind turbines and transmission lines in our landscape…
It is not by centralizing decisions in his office, as he is accustomed to doing, that “super” Minister Fitzgibbon will gain the social acceptability which is essential to the advancement of projects. We saw it this week with the protests which paralyzed the Northvolt battery factory project, into which Quebec and Ottawa will inject more than 7 billion.
Hydro announced this week a consultation on its action plan. Good intention. But last year, on this date, the CAQ announced a public consultation on Quebec’s energy future. The exercise, quickly completed, came down to discussions between experts.
The CAQ is run by business people who take action quickly, which has its good sides. But by short-circuiting an essential debate, she risks getting burned.
The position of The Press
We are not against the sale of electricity by the private sector. But it still has to be done properly. Quebec needs a public debate that meets the major challenges raised by the energy transition.