The committee was studying the implications of the Canada-China preliminary joint arrangement on the electric vehicle sector. Appearing were Julian Karaguesian, Nadja Johnson Bressan, Karim Zaghib, Sarah Goldfeder, Brendan Sweeney, and Bentley Allan.
Julian Karaguesian, a visiting lecturer at McGill University, argued that the tariff relief agreement with China should be seen as part of a larger trade deal that could benefit Canada more than China, given their complementary economies. He stated that importing 49,000 Chinese EVs does not pose a national security threat, comparing it to iPhones assembled in China, and said Canada must diversify trade beyond the U.S. to maintain prosperity. He recommended accepting imports as part of a quid pro quo while protecting skilled manufacturing workers through industrial policies.
Nadja Johnson Bressan, associate dean at Niagara College, warned that importing Chinese EVs without access to their design specifications creates safety risks for first responders dealing with battery fires, as batteries can reach 3,000°C and carry lethal currents. She said the arrangement threatens the college’s research partnerships with automakers and could undermine trades training programs, as the sector needs workers with skills for low-carbon technologies. She recommended policies ensuring EVs are built in Canada to support skills training and research.
Karim Zaghib, a professor at Concordia University, noted that China dominates LFP battery production, a technology developed in Quebec, and said Canada lacks the ability to scale up battery cell manufacturing. He recommended joint ventures with Asian companies to build gigafactories in Canada, and suggested legislation requiring that batteries contain a minimum of 50% recycled materials by 2040 or 2050. He disagreed with the idea that Canada will lose the EV value chain, emphasizing the need for a win-win relationship with partners who invest in Canadian research and manufacturing.
Sarah Goldfeder, executive director at General Motors of Canada, said the change to the EV surtax weakens Canada’s ability to protect its automotive industrial base and poses national security risks from foreign-controlled vehicles. She noted GM is the top EV seller in Canada but that consumer demand has been lower than expected, making the market fragile. She recommended ensuring any imported EVs fully meet Canadian safety, cybersecurity, and data governance standards, and warned that unfettered access could hollow out the skilled workforce.
Brendan Sweeney, president of the Pacific Manufacturing Association of Canada, said the import quota undermines investments by market-oriented automakers like Honda and Toyota, which manufacture 77% of vehicles assembled in Canada. He argued it disrupts the level playing field and introduces an irritant into CUSMA negotiations with the U.S., which is the primary destination for 90% of Canadian-made vehicles. He recommended maintaining a market-oriented policy environment and avoiding actions misaligned with the U.S.
Bentley Allan, vice-president at The Transition Accelerator, described the condition of Canada’s auto sector as an emergency, noting that Canadian content in vehicles has fallen below 50% and the production-to-sales ratio has declined sharply. He said the federal government’s February 2026 auto strategy is a good step, particularly its remissions framework linking market access to investment in Canada, echoing a successful 1980s duty remission scheme. He recommended using that framework to build domestic industrial capability while being selectively exposed to Chinese EVs.
After the testimony, the committee debated a Liberal motion to study positive examples of EV infrastructure implementation in Quebec and British Columbia. The motion was amended to remove the word "positive" and to refer to lessons learned throughout the country, then adopted. A Conservative motion to study the government’s agreement concerning Spaceport Nova Scotia was introduced, but the committee moved to proceed with drafting instructions for the EV study report, and the meeting concluded without further witness questions.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.