HANSARD
NOVA SCOTIA HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
STANDING COMMITTEE
ON
NATURAL RESOURCES
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Tuesday, April 28, 2026
Committee Room
Energy Pricing
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
NATURAL RESOURCES AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Tom Taggart (Chair)
Kyle MacQuarrie (Vice-Chair)
Danny MacGillivray
David Bowlby
Julie Vanexan
Susan Leblanc
Krista Gallagher
Hon. Iain Rankin
Hon. Derek Mombourquette
[Kyle MacQuarrie was replaced by Ryan Robicheau.]
[David Bowlby was replaced by Adegoke Fadare.]
[Julie Vanexan was replaced by Rick Burns.]
[Krista Gallagher was replaced by Claudia Chender.]
In Attendance:
Tamer Nusseibeh
Legislative Committee Clerk
Genevieve Harvey
Legislative Counsel
WITNESSES
Department of Energy
Stephen MacDonald, Deputy Minister
Peter Craig, Director, Electricity
Department of Opportunities and Social Development
Frazer Egerton, Executive Director, Strategic Operations and Innovation
Ecology Action Centre
Chris Benjamin, Senior Energy Coordinator
Efficiency Nova
Scotia
Martha Casey, Interim President and CEO
Robert Burns, Interim Chief Operating Officer
Nova Scotia Power
Chris Lanteigne, Director of Customer Care
Town of Bridgewater
Leon de Vreede, Sustainability Planner
HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2026
STANDING COMMITTEE ON
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1:00 P.M.
CHAIR
Tom Taggart
THE CHAIR: Order. This is the Standing Committee on Natural Resources and Economic Development. My name is Tom Taggart. I’m the MLA for Colchester North and Chair of this committee.
Today, we will hear from witnesses regarding energy pricing. I ask everybody to please turn off their phones or put them on silent. In case of an emergency, we’re going to go out the door here and meet at the Grand Parade.
I will now ask the committee members to introduce themselves for the record by stating their name and their constituency starting on my left here.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
THE CHAIR: I would also like to note the presence of Legislative Counsel Genevieve Harvey and Legislative Committee Clerk Tamer Nusseibeh.
I’d like to welcome all the witnesses, and I’ll ask if you’ll introduce yourselves, starting on my left. Go ahead, please.
[The witnesses introduced themselves.]
THE CHAIR: I’ll ask - there are some folks who have additional witnesses - if they would like to introduce them at this time.
We’ll start with Martha Casey, if you’d like to introduce . . .
MARTHA CASEY: This is my colleague, Rob Burns, Interim Chief Operating Officer at Efficiency One.
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: Attending with me from the Department of Energy is Peter Craig, Director of Electricity.
THE CHAIR: Are there any others?
Would any of the witnesses like to make opening statements?
Okay, we’ll start with Deputy Minister MacDonald, please.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to join you today to talk about energy pricing and affordability in Nova Scotia.
We know many households are struggling with the rising cost of living, including energy costs. In Nova Scotia, energy prices are higher than some other jurisdictions because we still rely heavily on imported fuels to heat our homes, power our businesses, and produce electricity. That dependence exposes us to global price volatility, supply disruptions, and sudden cost increases beyond our control. As an example, we’re seeing higher costs for gasoline and home heating oil right now because ships filled with oil are being held up in the Strait of Hormuz due to the attacks in Iran.
Government is supporting Nova Scotians in many ways, but I’ll focus my remarks in two connected areas. The first is helping individuals and families who are most in need pay their household energy bills and, secondly, taking actions that can reduce or stabilize energy costs for everyone over the long term.
Energy efficiency is one of the most immediate ways to reduce someone’s energy costs. Programs delivered through Efficiency Nova Scotia - such as the HomeWarming, Home Energy Assessment, and Moderate Income Rebate programs, help Nova Scotians pay for upgrades so that they use less energy and reduce their monthly bills.
Since 2022, government has directed almost $250 million in provincial funds and leveraged more than $300 million in federal funding to help 47,000 households achieve permanent savings - as much as $1,500 per year or more - once they upgrade their homes. Those savings last for years.
Government offers several other programs to help people pay their bills, some related to energy and some to help with other household costs, things like the Heating Assistance Rebate Program, Home Energy Assistance Top-up, Seniors Care Grant, Your Energy Rebate Program, and the millions of dollars in diversion funding from the Department of Opportunities and Social Development to help people with utility arrears so they can stay housed or get connected to stable housing.
That’s in addition to broader affordability measures, like lowering personal income taxes, the School Lunch Program, more affordable housing options for thousands of Nova Scotians, increases in the programs that support Nova Scotians who need it most, like income assistance and disability support, and many other federal government initiatives supported by the Province.
The Province’s other area of attention is in addressing energy costs at the system level. The Clean Power Plan is well under way, reducing our reliance on imported fuels and improving our energy security with lower cost, clean energy solutions like local wind and solar power and battery technologies. The new Independent Energy System Operator - or the IESO Nova Scotia - was established as an independent, non-profit organization in 2024 to ensure electricity system planning is based on true need and that procurements are completed and chosen in the best interests of ratepayers.
Government has taken several actions to protect electricity ratepayers from Nova Scotia Power’s proposed sharp rate increases, things like capping rates through legislation, providing a long-term loan to Nova Scotia Power at favourable provincial borrowing rates to lower the fuel costs passed on to ratepayers, extending relief from some greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements, and intervening in regulatory processes to demand more scrutiny from the Energy Board. No one wants to see the cost of living and bills continue to rise.
All of the measures I’ve mentioned today work together to help close the gap for Nova Scotians, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet. It will take more than provincial programs to truly address energy poverty and affordability in this province. We need to grow our economy to generate new opportunities that create good jobs with better wages so more Nova Scotians can pay their bills.
THE CHAIR: Before we move on, I’d like to ask Mr. de Vreede to introduce himself, and then we’ll move on with opening statements. That will give you a chance to settle in before we come to your opening remarks. Is that okay? Go ahead, sir.
Mr. de Vreede.
LEON DE VREEDE: Good morning, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Leon de Vreede. I work as a sustainability planner for the Town of Bridgewater. My apologies for walking in late.
THE CHAIR: Ms. Casey.
MARTHA CASEY: EfficiencyOne’s purpose is to transform the way people use energy. We work with households, businesses, and institutions across the province to help them use energy more efficiently, lower their bills, and at the same time reduce pressure on the energy system. This includes everything from supporting home heating upgrades and energy efficient equipment to working with large industrial customers to optimize their operations and reduce energy waste at scale.
While EfficiencyOne does not set energy prices, our work is directly connected to what Nova Scotians ultimately pay and to the long-term sustainability of the system. Efficiency programs lower energy use, reduce system costs, and help keep future rates stable. Every kilowatt hour saved means less electricity needs to be produced, helping avoid higher and often unpredictable fuels costs that are passed on to Nova Scotians. Our programs put more money back in the pockets of Nova Scotians when they need it most.
Energy pricing is a critical issue for families and businesses, particularly in the context of rising costs, economic uncertainty, and the transition to a cleaner energy system. Energy efficiency is the only practical way to directly influence a power bill. A customer can change a lightbulb, install a smart thermostat, or put in insulation, and they will feel it on their next energy bill.
Affordability is central to our mandate. We design and deliver programs that prioritize long-term measurable bill reductions, particularly for low- and moderate-income households, renters, small businesses, and rural communities. These are the customers who are often most exposed to energy-price volatility and who benefit the most from permanent reductions in energy use. For the nearly 40 percent of Nova Scotians living in energy poverty, this is about being able to afford to stay warm, avoid difficult trade-offs, and have greater certainty in monthly costs.
By focusing on improvements that often last for decades, these investments provide protection from rising costs in both the long and short term. For example, installing a mini-split heat pump in an oil-heated home can lower energy costs by between 15 percent and 25 percent, and participating in the free efficient product installation program can save homeowners and renters up to 12 percent annually on heating costs. Our work to date is helping Nova Scotians save more than $6.4 billion in lifetime energy costs, including $849 million for low-income homeowners and renters.
We could not do what we do and continue to have the impact that we have without significant investment by both the Province and the Government of Canada. Our collective impact on energy poverty is significant, increasingly important, and felt right across the province.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Egerton.
FRAZER EGERTON: I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. My name is Frazer Egerton. I’m the Executive Director of Strategic Operations and Innovation with the Department of Opportunities and Social Development. I’m very aware now of what a mouthful that is.
A little bit about the department: Across our work, we see every day that many Nova Scotians are feeling stretched. They are facing rising costs, whether it’s housing or whether it’s food and utilities, and this, in turn, can create real strain and make it harder for people to maintain stability. Our department’s focus is on supporting people through those pressures. Our role is to respond to those pressures in practical, person-centred ways, working with partners across government and in communities to help people regain their footing and to avoid crisis. That shared goal of supporting stability and well-being is why I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the committee today.
THE CHAIR: Mr. de Vreede.
LEON DE VREEDE: Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. As I said, my name is Leon de Vreede. I’m representing the Town of Bridgewater.
Here are distressing facts from my community. One out of three of our residents juggle bills to pay for utilities. One out of three residents cuts back on groceries to do so. One in six cuts back on health care and medication expenses. One in five shivers inside their homes in winter because they are so cold. One in three of those can see their breath inside their homes. Two out of every five families in Bridgewater live in energy poverty.
These numbers come from McGill University’s research team that we’ve partnered with to complete the deepest community-scale longitudinal study of energy poverty in Canada. These are just numbers. What is hard to communicate is the hardship, suffering, and shame so often faced by the people who make up these numbers.
The fact of the matter is energy poverty is a crushing problem faced by all communities in Nova Scotia. Municipalities can be willing and capable partners who want to see dramatic and responsible action taken. Structural, technical, and financial solutions exist. Several of them have been tested and have delivered meaningful results in Bridgewater.
Our program partnerships include extensive collaborative relationships with Efficiency Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia Power, the Nova Scotia Community College, and the Clean Foundation, through which we have been developing and testing advanced programs and new technologies geared specifically to help low-income and equity-deserving community members reduce their energy burden, achieve stable and predictable home energy costs, and make informed decisions about their energy futures.
[1:15 p.m.]
Despite our progress, our council remains deeply concerned about the problem of energy poverty. We also remain deeply committed to finding structural solutions to this challenge - solutions that are not rocket science. They are good science and good public policy. This includes: increasing public access and financing to affordable home retrofits using standard, off-the-shelf technologies; improving integrations between existing programs and connecting them with local and municipal programs where possible; tightening regulations and incentives to increase the energy efficiency of rental housing; creating trauma-informed energy navigation and support services for residents who need it; and implementing province-wide upstream solutions, including the recommendations of the Colton Report, which our council has endorsed.
I urge this committee to do the right thing and move forward with purpose and willpower to implement the structural solutions for which we and our partners have been advocating for several years. Our citizens and our climate need it, and we are willing to help in any way we can.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I’ve met with many of you before. If you don’t know me, again, I’m Chris Lanteigne, and I lead our customer care team at Nova Scotia Power. My role is focused on customers: answering their questions, finding solutions, and helping them navigate their electricity bills. I’m pleased to be part of this discussion alongside these representatives who are with me today. The organizations here are our partners in this important work.
At Nova Scotia Power, our approved rates reflect a combination of fuel costs, investments required to keep the electricity system safe and reliable, and regulatory decisions that guide how our utility and the system operate. Safety and system reliability are all about keeping the lights and heat on, reducing the frequency and duration of outages, supporting the economy, and investing for the future. The investments that we make and how they’re reflected in rates are reviewed and approved through a regulatory framework governed by the Province of Nova Scotia and overseen by an independent regulator.
Over the winter and early spring, I spent time in communities across Nova Scotia, including Middleton, Truro, Guysborough, Digby, Yarmouth, Sydney, Port Hawkesbury, and Bridgewater, meeting with and talking to customers about their billing questions and concerns. In my conversations with customers about their bills, it’s been clear that many people are feeling the pressure of the rising cost of living and want more options for managing their energy bills, whether they heat with oil or electricity. That feedback is important and something I regularly bring back to my team so it informs how we listen, how we respond, and how we show up for customers every day.
Clarity, predictability, and transparency matter. That’s why my teams are focused on helping customers find an option that works for them. We continue to make progress with an in-house low-income advocate who works together with our customer service associates to support customers with available options, including Equal Billing and payment plans at zero percent interest that allow costs to be spread over 12 or 24 months based on those individual circumstances.
Recognizing the significant impact last year’s cyber incident had on our billing, we took additional steps to reduce immediate pressure on customers. This included no disconnections for non-payment, no interest applied, and no late fees. Instead, our teams continued to work one-on-one with customers to help them get back on track in a way that was realistic and manageable.
In addition to our in-house advocacy efforts and in collaboration with advocacy partners, Nova Scotia Power has contributed to the Salvation Army-administered HEAT Fund, and we remain committed to this important program. We also meet regularly with organizations supporting Nova Scotians, including people at this table, and we’re pleased to participate with and pleased to learn from the Energy Poverty Task Force.
We know there is still work to do and remain open to constructive and ongoing conversations about energy costs and affordability. I look forward to the discussion.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Benjamin.
CHRIS BENJAMIN: The organization ACORN told me the story of a senior on a fixed income named Mr. Boboye. He’s on dialysis and has been waiting for a kidney for 10 years. He lives in an old Nova Scotia housing building with his wife and children. He typically pays Nova Scotia Power $300 to $500 per month. That cuts deeply into his money for groceries and other necessities, yet it still doesn’t cover the bill, so each month the bill gets higher. His latest bill was a real shocker, $1,200. How is he ever going to get that paid?
The hardest part of Mr. Boboye’s story is how common it is. At least one in three Nova Scotia households pays more than 6 percent of income on energy. Of those, 72 percent delay spending on other essentials like food; 46 percent have late or missed payments; and 8 percent have had their electricity disconnected.
In early 2024, the Clean Electricity Solutions Task Force recommended fixing energy poverty following the Ontario model. Then the Energy Poverty Task Force, which the AEC was part of, hired economist Roger Colton, who wrote the Ontario program and dozens of others like it, to create a made-in-Nova Scotia solution based on our unique energy mix, which is heavy on oil and wood, with many old buildings that don’t meet modern building codes and people with relatively low incomes.
Oil heated homes spend 80 percent more on home energy than electrically heated homes. Oil is volatile, subject to spiking prices, as happened when Russia invaded Ukraine and again when the U.S.A. and Israel bombed Iran.
Government-funded assistance through programs like the Heating Assistance Rebate Program - HARP - reduce energy poverty. Last year, government reduced HARP payments to $400 and decreased the income a household can earn and qualify, which cut thousands of homes from that program.
In A Way Forward, Roger Colton recommended a program with four components. Government recently committed $30 million to fracking, mostly incentives for industry. For about $50 million - net of the HARP savings - we could provide four things: an on-bill energy discount of 50 percent for households earning below the low-income cutoff, an arrears forgiveness program, an emergency intervention fund, and ramped up energy efficiency programming for low-income households. If a household participates in any one of these four, they are given access to all four components - so Mr. Boboye and people in his situation can afford their energy bills.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Gifford.
BRIAN GIFFORD: Electricity pricing is one part of what determines Nova Scotians pay for energy services. It gets a lot of attention, but it is essential to look at the larger picture. Insulation lowers bills. Heat pumps lower bills. Oil price shocks increase energy costs, with about 30 percent of Nova Scotians still heating with oil. Through it all, price spikes in 2022 and today, caused by wars, create great hardship for all but especially for lower-income Nova Scotians.
EfficiencyOne’s energy poverty visualization tool is the most accurate tool available for estimating energy poverty in Nova Scotia as prices rise and fall. The best ways to lower energy bills are electrification, including oil to heat pumps, aggressive efficiency measures, renewable energy and battery backup in the electricity system, and credits on the bills of low-income households.
Nova Scotia’s track record is mixed. Significant support for HomeWarming and other well-designed efficiency programs have lowered bills for over 27,000 low- and moderate-income households. With federal help, the Oil to Heat Pump Affordability Program has lowered bills for thousands more. As oil prices skyrocketed and electricity rates increased in 2022, the Nova Scotia government increased the Heating Assistance Rebate Program from $200 to $1,000 per year. The government agreed to join a new Energy Poverty Task Force that we proposed, which made it possible for the task force to get started.
The government’s goals of closing coal-fired plants and increasing renewables to 80 percent of electricity generation are necessary and admirable actions that create stable, affordable pricing. The plans for offshore wind will help Nova Scotians while creating income and helping the world choose renewables. All of this has been important and helpful in making energy costs more affordable in Nova Scotia.
On the other hand, the government decided against creating a better targeted Home Energy Assistance program as recommended by the Energy Poverty Task Force and the Clean Electricity Solutions Task Force set up by the government itself. This is a lost opportunity for much more effective relief on high oil and electricity bills for low-income households. The government decided to go slowly in implementing a new national step building code in Nova Scotia - a lost opportunity for lower bills and new homes.
The new Independent Electricity System Operator is locking us into an expensive technology and high operating cost that will increase bills for decades by proceeding with gas diesel plants to back up renewables and meet peak electricity demand. Batteries are now cheaper than gas diesel plants. There is now evidence that batteries can meet the specified needs of the electricity system. The IESO should issue a technology-neutral request for proposals to determine the lowest cost and best technology to meet the needs of the electricity system and to keep electricity prices more affordable.
THE CHAIR: I thank everybody for their comments. I want to remind everyone that as we go through the question-and-answer period to wait for your light to come on, which activates your microphone and Legislative Television will recognize you.
We’re going to start the first round of questions with the NDP caucus for 20 minutes, followed by the Liberals for 10 minutes, and the PCs for 30 minutes.
MLA Chender.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: Thank you all for being here. I think I’ve spoken with almost all of you at one time or another. I wish we were reporting more progress, particularly on the task force today. But I am glad to have the opportunity to bring this issue forward at a time when, as Mr. Benjamin and Mr. deVreede pointed out, so many families are experiencing the real consequences of the high cost of energy and the lack of support required to deal with that making very difficult choices.
As was mentioned nearly two years ago, the Energy Poverty Task Force recommended the four-part plan that Mr. Benjamin took us through, and I think every group represented here - although maybe some with different hats today - was represented in that group. Since it was released, people’s bills have continued to go up, and while I think a few of our introductory comments centred on geopolitical instability, I would suggest that that trend was in place long before the latest insecurity in the Middle East. I think that is a trend line that we saw happening and that would have continued to happen nonetheless.
People’s bills have increased, and I think importantly, as a context for this conversation, in the latest rate decision from the Nova Scotia Energy Board, they made it very clear in their decision that it was not in their purview to address affordability or to help people address their bills. If they don’t have that power, then that work must be done by government - led by government, I would suggest, obviously in collaboration with partners. I guess my first question is to Deputy Minister MacDonald, now in his broader role - not just looking at demand side but looking at the whole energy system. We’ve asked this question, and asked this question, and it’s a good opportunity to ask it again today: When will we see affordability programs or action on this excellent report that was already created to help people with their power bills in this province?
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: Affordability across the board is a real challenge right now, whether that’s food, rent, and of course energy prices. There are several things that government has done - that the Province has done - to help address energy affordability. The way I like to think about it in my current role, and in past roles around energy affordability, is in terms of three components: The first is the price of energy; the second is usage of energy; and the third is incomes. Those are the three primary determining factors around energy affordability, if you will.
[1:30 p.m.]
Around the price of energy, there are several things the Province has done to help ensure the price of energy that Nova Scotians pay, to the extent they can control it and it’s not impacted by world events, if you will. On the electricity side, the Province introduced a very rigorous energy efficiency framework. Some of the results produced by Efficiency Nova Scotia under this framework are best in class.
The framework itself is very unique in that it is based on an efficiency-first principle in that the utility, Nova Scotia Power, needs to look at purchasing energy efficiency or demand-side management before making higher-cost investments in generation. This framework has literally avoided billions of dollars in electricity costs that are not included in rates.
It’s hard to predict at any one point in time what rates would be, but I can say with some degree of confidence that electricity rates are not as high as they otherwise would have been without the results of energy efficiency and the framework that was put in place in legislation. It’s a very important part of keeping prices under control.
The second area I’ll point to is around more short-term immediate relief for Nova Scotians. Some of the initiatives that are currently in place to support Nova Scotians: the 1-percent reduction in HST broadly and the elimination of the provincial portion of HST on energy bills does provide relief; the Heating Assistance Rebate Program; the energy rebate initiative, which is linked to the provincial portion of HST to provide some immediate relief for Nova Scotians.
Additionally, there are broader affordability measures. I think it’s important not just to consider energy in isolation of other affordability constraints that have been put in place. I mentioned the 1-percent reduction in HST. I didn’t mention in my opening remarks, but I’ll mention it now - the reduction - the indexing of personal income taxes, particularly the basic personal amount, does help on affordability. School lunch programs. There are several initiatives that have been put in place to help with affordability.
Maybe I’ll pause there, Chair.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: I’ll try to get at this another way. I appreciate the answer, but I would say it is worth noting that the Heating Assistance Rebate Program was cut back, as I think another panelist did make clear, at a time when prices are rising.
I also want to reiterate something that we raised when we discovered it, which is that the Your Energy Rebate Program, which was brought in a long time ago - a long time before this government - in fact, the provision in the Energy Act that ensures that that HST rebate on energy remained in absence of a referendum was quietly repealed by this government. So where that Your Energy Rebate Program was guaranteed, it is no longer guaranteed. I think that’s really worth pointing out when we’re talking about broader efficiency measures. I think most Nova Scotians would agree that our heat shouldn’t be taxed. It’s an essential service, and this government has paved the way for themselves to tax it, if they see necessary, and I think that’s concerning.
But I want to get back to the Energy Poverty Task Force and the Clean Electricity Solutions Task Force. The recommendation, as I understand it, was that we create a made-in-Nova Scotia version of the Ontario program, that it was identified that the Ontario program - and I think Mr. Colton designed that program, someone mentioned - that that looked like something that would be the most effective here. My understanding was that government - that that’s been sitting on the desk of successive Energy Ministers for a couple of years now. The idea was that that would be reviewed and that there would be a decision made as to if and how we could design that program.
Can you update the committee on the status of that work?
STEPHEN MACDONALD: I do know that the department has taken a look at the program in terms of its applicability to Nova Scotia in comparison to supports that are already in place that fit the four recommendations of the Universal Service Program in place - bill affordability, arrears management, crisis intervention, and energy efficiency programs.
Admittedly, I don’t have today a current update in terms of the status of whether or not further action will be taken. I do feel relatively confident in saying that there is a broad suite of initiatives in place to help with bill affordability, both in the short term and long term. In addition to my previous answer, I talked about some of the more immediate relief that’s available for Nova Scotians.
I do think it’s important to mention some of the longer-term efforts that are in place to stabilize energy prices in the province. I’m largely speaking about electricity, but that’s also within the context of significant fuel switching from oil to electricity as well, so a little bit more of a focus on electricity. That’s primarily the development of the Clean Power Plan, which is a plan that’s been put in place to hit the legislated target of 80 percent renewables by 2030. The development of the Clean Power Plan, which does rely significantly on local wind resources, some solar, and some imported hydro, is based on renewable energy that provides stable and predictable prices over time.
That’s very good for consumers to be able to make decisions, but also some of the more recent wind procurements which have been added to the system are at very competitive prices. In fact, when we compare some of those procurements to the price of wind in other provinces, it’s some of the lowest in Canada. The program has been very successful at adding wind at a very competitive price. It’s extremely important to making sure Nova Scotians have access to stable, predictable, long-term, secure energy prices that they can rely on, but they’re also local and clean.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: I appreciate that, and I’m going to ask some other folks questions, but I would say I think what I was hoping for today was an update on implementing that plan, designing that plan, and what it would look like. We’ll continue to ask that question until that happens. I think significantly around - we are very aware of the wind development and supportive of it. We know it’s the lowest-cost energy, but when it comes to the constituents we talk to every day and the choices that they’re making, which some of your fellow panel members have mentioned, around medicine and food and heat, government has the unique capacity to be able to address those real-time needs. We believe that there’s more that must be done.
I want to turn to the Affordable Energy Coalition. Mr. Gifford, I’m curious to know what conversations you have had the opportunity to have around this report with the Department of Energy or with government in general in terms of - are you hopeful for progress on this report? Are you engaging with government in a meaningful way around designing and implementing a program?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Gifford.
BRIAN GIFFORD: When the report was published in May 2024, just before we had an open meeting to introduce it to the public, we met with the Deputy Minster of Energy at the time, Karen Gatien, and she assured us that they would look at it seriously. She was aware of the Nova Scotia Clean Electricity Solutions Task Force recommendation. She said that they would definitely take a good look at it and likely act on it, was the impression we had. Since the minister changed and Trevor Boudreau became the minister, we have met with him about the report, and he was very interested and asking questions, and was curious about how it would work and that kind of thing. That was a hopeful sign, but there has been no definite interest expressed in actually going ahead.
I did hear at some press conference somewhere a one-liner from the Premier, I believe, saying that they weren’t going to go ahead with the proposal, but we haven’t heard anything official. We would welcome further conversations and would like to keep it on the table and help make it a reality someday.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: Have you had the opportunity to meet with the Premier in his capacity as Minister of Energy?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Gifford.
BRIAN GIFFORD: No. In fact, we haven’t tried since he became the Minister of Energy. That would be a good idea.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: I have a few questions now for Nova Scotia Power. Mr. Lanteigne is always a good sport. (Laughs) We’ll see where we get.
Last June, Mr. Gregg, the then-president of NSP, told a similar committee to this that he anticipated the insurance would cover the costs of the recent cyberbreach. Of course, this is directly relevant to rates because if not the insurance, then ratepayers. Now, less than a year later, we’ve seen that the Energy Board has been asked for permission to charge ratepayers up to $91 million for cyber security and custom information upgrades, which in our readings still feels like the fallout of the breach.
Can you speak to why customers are being asked to cover those costs?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: Thank you for the question and, perhaps, the acknowledgement at the start of it as well. From my perspective, speaking to what’s in front of the Annual Capital Expenditure hearing for Nova Scotia Power, I won’t get into all the details on that, but I can specifically speak to the customer information system.
In this committee in November, as well as the June committee, items came up where members from the table asked questions about some of the limitations of the customer information system, and we talked about what we were doing to support customers.
One of the pieces that I’m not sure if we said in that committee, but we have said in the past, even prior to the cyber incident happening, is that the customer information system was something that Nova Scotia was planning to modernize and replace. The timing of the hearing is coincidental. That is something that we do want to replace because it’s in the best interests of our customers. It’ll help us modernize our billing system, and we feel that it’s beneficial. It is not related to the cyber incident through those hearings.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: Okay. I understand your explanation, but I still think most people might have expected that such a system would have already been in place. Now, what may be expediting that - it feels connected, but I take your explanation. The reality is that Nova Scotians are still dealing with the fallout of the data breach and the overbilling that followed, notwithstanding public information around whether people needed to keep up. It was onerous for many Nova Scotians who receive a bill and immediately pay it because they feel like that’s what they need to do and what they’ve always done.
The rate hike has been approved, but it hasn’t come into force. The other piece that people are concerned about and reaching out to us about is the request of the company to pro-rate bills based on the new rate and to estimate rather than make sure that Nova Scotians are being charged for the actual amount of energy they were using.
Can you tell the committee how the company is going to make sure that customers aren’t overbilled and are only billed for the energy that they actually use?
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I do agree with all of those concerns. It’s a good opportunity to talk about it. You’re right, the general rate application is still with the Nova Scotia Energy Board right now. The specific question that the Energy Board did ask us about is that when we make a rate change, how we would apply that energy to bills. A couple components happen. The proration essentially applies energy at the old rate for the period of time - the number of days - that’s in the old rate, and the same thing, the period of days that’s in the new rate. It’s important to note that the base charge - there’s no variable usage. That base charge, when it’s prorated, is the exact right way to do it.
For the usage of energy that crosses bills, that would be the main concern that I believe you’re asking about, to clarify. We follow an industry standard approach of prorating the amount, as described and as we’ve been talking about with the Energy Board right now. When we look at that methodology of completing it, it’s something that we know other utilities across Canada do, to apply the change of a rate to the energy bill. From a customer perspective, the variability between the rate of usage at this point in the year - it’s not peak winter season, so the rate change wouldn’t take effect probably until May. The board decision is still pending. I think that’s the main issue that you’re talking about.
In terms of general concerns around billing, I think it is important to note that when we were in here in November, we had actually talked about how our meters would be reconnected to the system by the end of March. That did happen.
[1:45 p.m.]
The estimation of customer bills that had been a concern last year from July to December was about 50-50. In January, with the system connection coming back and being re-established fully, we were up to about 85 percent. February was 92 percent. March was 95 percent. This month, we’re back into that normal operating range where less than 2 percent of customer bills are estimated. That part of the experience has returned to normal, where the bills that are arriving for customers do reflect the actual usage that has been consumed at their home or business.
CLAUDIA CHENDER: I want to thank you. I guess I’ll just ask you a quick one. I believe you were on the Energy Poverty Task Force as well, or the company was represented in those conversations. Has anyone from the company met with the Premier to discuss moving forward on that since he became the Minister of Energy?
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I do not believe so, no.
THE CHAIR: MLA Rankin.
HON. IAIN RANKIN: Thank you to everyone for being here. It’s actually somewhat rare to have so many experts, particularly on efficiency. I appreciate that in a discussion around trying to focus on reducing bills. I know we have this task force that explicitly recommended the reduction of bills for low-income folks. Maybe we can just try to put a finer point from the government perspective, so potentially the deputy minister would answer this.
Is the government now in a position that they have decided that they will not be moving forward with a specific program to target a lower bill for those who are under the energy poverty line and focus instead on the existing suite of programs that were referenced, HARP, the HomeWarming program?
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: To my knowledge, the department has not been given that direction. I do think it’s important to point out that in addition to the examples you gave of focusing on bill reductions, the investments that have been made in energy efficiency to date which do result in immediate and long-term bill reductions both through the legislative policy framework that the government oversees for energy efficiency and electricity sector or demand-side management but also the investments made in reducing oil usage in the province, $250 million since 2022, leveraged another $300 million from the federal government - those programs continue.
IAIN RANKIN: The answer that we routinely get about cost of living, even with power bills, is that HST has been reduced. We all know that HST is not even a consideration with the YERP program that has been on for a long time now. I do want to ask about the direction Efficiency Nova Scotia is taking now with fewer programs. Year after year, we hear of programs being removed.
The deputy minister mentioned - I think it goes back to 2022 when there was a lump sum fund of $140-some million that would take us to 2026. I think it was a three- or four-year program. Is that program basically being dried out? Is there consideration to extending any efficiency programs? We all agree that’s the lowest-cost way of bringing power bills down. What happens with the programs moving forward, like when we see the end of the solar program? What is the cash flow looking like for Efficiency Nova Scotia now that those lump sum initiatives that the government brought in are now, frankly, over? Maybe you can just give me some numbers on how many heat pumps were actually delivered with that lump sum funding.
THE CHAIR: Ms. Casey.
MARTHA CASEY: I’m going to have to come back to you on the specific numbers of heat pumps installed. I will say that the programs themselves, we continue to deliver our sort of marquee programs that serve renters, low- and moderate-income Nova Scotians so there continues to something for everybody. In terms of programs winding down and investments in new programs, that’s driven by demand that we’re seeing in the market and the feedback that we’re getting from Nova Scotians. It’s not a product of running out of money; it reflects the demand. We continue to be in a strong position and are working carefully with partners to ensure that our programming continues.
IAIN RANKIN: For clarity on demand: I know when the solar rebate was pulled away, there was a deadline given to customers to apply. Hundreds of customers met that deadline and then were told they were on a wait-list, so they were basically removed from being able to get that rebate that was committed to them. That’s one example. Is it that demand becomes so strong that they coil back, or is it the other way around, that if there’s strong demand, then you want to increase the programs? I ask for clarity around that.
We continue to hear that it takes several months for those to get rebates. I’m wondering if you have any metrics that you try to achieve for folks who are up front putting the money forward and then waiting for their cheques in the mail?
MARTHA CASEY: I would like to defer to my colleague, Rob Burns, to respond to the question regarding metrics.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Burns at the same mic. No, at the mic to the left.
ROBERT BURNS: To clarify, is the question related to a specific program, or overall, our portfolio in general?
There are a number of different program offerings that would have different timelines associated with them, depending on if they’re customer-directed, i.e. the customer handles the project management component of it. The general timelines for something like the Home Energy Assessment, for instance - the general timeline from when somebody submits it - they have one year in order to finish the work, and then the rebate would be processed.
Those rebates typically will take 90 days. The vast majority of the rebates processed for HEA, for instance - when we receive - is within those 90 days. We have metrics. We track it. There are some instances where they may extend it beyond that due to things like missing paperwork or that type of thing, but for the most part, we are well on track with our 90-day service standard for that specific program. Those are the ones where the customer would pay up front and then be reimbursed through the program.
IAIN RANKIN: In terms of your actual programs, do you have more programs today or fewer programs than two or three years ago? What direction are we going in?
THE CHAIR: Ms. Casey.
MARTHA CASEY: We’re trying to consolidate some of our programs. In terms of program titles and names, we have likely fewer. However, we’re trying to make it easier for customers to navigate. Some of the feedback we’ve had in the past is that it’s difficult to know what customers qualify for. This has been a deliberate effort on our part to ensure that customers know what they’re entitled to.
THE CHAIR: MLA Rankin, with 2 minutes, 28 seconds.
IAN RANKIN: I know, limited time.
Efficiency has huge opportunities here. We were a leader. We did slip in the rankings that came out. That’s because some provinces caught up to some of the initiatives we have, but when you look at the different states that are looking at this, there are about 10 different states in the United States that do things like compete directly with generation, procurement, and things like that and have specific targets in mind. We don’t have a target for the demand side, which would be positive. Sometimes it’s a challenge when government has lump-sum funding that they give and say, “Just put it in this program,” and we don’t have dependable funding year-over-year.
What else is the department looking at? Will efficiency and conservation be at least considered in the government’s IRP planning process to ensure that we’re maximizing the demand side? We know it is the cheapest way that we can help bring power bills down for everyone.
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: Integrated Resource Planning is now conducted by the new Independent Energy System Operator - the IESO - an independent, nonprofit organization that was created to do system procurement, if you will - to do it in a fair manner, in the best interests of ratepayers.
One of the legislative changes that came with the implementation of the IESO and giving the responsibility for long-term planning to the IESO was to give efficiency a seat at the table in that planning exercise. In the past, in terms of past IRP processes - I guess I’m speaking with my task hat on a bit here, if that’s okay - it was always a bit of a challenge to get efficiency recognized as a key resource in that long-term planning. Part of the legislative changes that came with the creation of the IESO was, to use my phrasing, give efficiency a seat at the table. For example, EfficiencyOne is legislatively required to co-operate with the IESO in developing . . .
THE CHAIR: Order. I apologize, but the time allotted for the Liberal Party has expired. We will now move on to the PC Party.
MLA MacGillivray.
DANNY MACGILLIVRAY: I can give Mr. MacDonald a chance to finish that answer, if he would like.
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: The point I was expanding on are the somewhat recent changes to create the Independent Energy System Operator, which legislatively gave efficiency or demand-side management a seat at the table on long-term integrated resource planning for our electricity system. This is hugely important because energy efficiency has consistently been demonstrated to provide a low-cost alternative to investing in higher sources of generation and transmission distribution and should be viewed as a first resource for electricity ratepayers. These changes, which legislatively require EfficiencyOne to co-operate with the IESO, are significant.
In addition, there’s a concept in electricity planning called avoided costs. You invest in energy efficiency and reduce the demand. You don’t need as much generation assets that are paid for by all ratepayers. Those avoided costs through energy efficiency - EfficiencyOne is now legislatively required to participate and co-operate in the development and identification of those avoided costs. I realize this is fairly technical in the weeds, but it is significant from a planning perspective, back to the MLA’s question.
DANNY MACGILLIVRAY: My questions will be for Nova Scotia Power through Mr. Lanteigne. Picking up on the last time you were here, when we talked about miscalculated power bills, have these issues been rectified, and have all the affected Nova Scotians been paid back or credited?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I recall we had a good conversation about that in November, and we also had submitted responses in writing to this committee on January 31st.
The specific issues that we’d been talking about on November 25th were related to the seasonal shift in bills that did see some bills increase on the estimated front at the beginning of November. Our approach to deal with customers who were in those situations was - there are a couple things that we’ve done.
Before we came into committee, we had launched a tool on our website that allowed customers who had estimated bills to take a photo of their meter if they wished to use it. MLA Rankin brought up a great point, that it’s not the customer’s job to do that, but we wanted to give customers more options so that they could get the true reading. I fully acknowledge the question and the point that had come up in November, but that was important for us to provide customers with those options.
The other piece that we did for customers who were in that situation was proactively reach out to customers for whom we felt that the estimate could have been high so that they were aware of this option. We received over 3,000 submissions - not just from those customers but from all customers who wanted to take advantage of that additional option that we did provide them.
[2:00 p.m.]
As bills began to arrive in January for customers who would have - we bill every two months for most customers. So any bill that had that higher bill when it arrived in January, true readings on those bills would have trued up. Most of those customers actually did get true readings as the meter reconnection had started, and we again promoted to customers who got continued estimates that they could actually reach out to us and get a reading on the bill through a photo.
Again, I think it’s important to note we’re in a much different spot than we were back in November. It was just shy of a month after the committee meeting in November. It was December 23rd where the first bill was issued with metered data on it. By March 31st, the meter reconnection was restored. So for the customers who were affected, everyone has gone through the process. Many are now getting their second true read after this meter connection has come into place, and those bills would have been caught up and reconciled.
The other piece we commented on in our January report is that for any customer who had felt that they overpaid, we did offer the opportunity for refunds. While there were 2,000 refunds in Q4 of last year, that’s actually fewer than it was the year before and fewer than it was even the year before that. It was about 2,300 to 2,400 the two years preceding that.
I think for us, one of the normal things that happens is sometimes - first of all, there are customers who sometimes do just overpay. They like to actually have a credit on their bill. There are also situations where customers might, if they’re going through their bank, misplace a decimal point and they will repay it. They’ll actually call us for refunds. We don’t have the ability to specifically put it back to that issue, but it is part of our process to make sure customers were aware of the options that they had available for them. I can expand on that more, but maybe I’ll pass it back if that answers the specific question.
DANNY MACGILLIVRAY: That sounded like a fulsome answer. Also, at the follow-up to last November’s meeting, a colleague of mine - MLA Dave Bowlby - raised the issue about the quite upsetting news that the Long Lake fires had received power bills and their houses were burnt down, basically. Have these occurrences been rectified?
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I actually had the opportunity to speak with MLA Bowlby right after the committee meeting because that was a concern to me as well. I also had a chance to meet with him in his constituency.
I have not actually received the specific customer information to follow up directly, but what I can say is that any customers whose home was affected by a fire - both in the 2023 fires that affected the Barrington area and Tantallon, and also in the fires that occurred last year - our approach was to make sure that we weren’t replicating that exact experience that you described. If one did get a bill, it’s very regrettable. It’s something that we would not have wanted to happen, and if we hear of any situation like this, we’ll definitely follow up with those customers directly.
DANNY MACGILLIVRAY: Lastly from me for now will be: What measures can Nova Scotia Power take to lower people’s power bills?
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I don’t want to repeat everything that was talked about in the general rate application hearing in January. Also, again, that matter is still in front of the Nova Scotia Energy Board. I think from our perspective, first I want to acknowledge the opening comments and some of the answers to the questions from all of the witnesses here today. That means a lot to us too - understanding that the cost of everything in Nova Scotia has increased. Yes, electricity prices have risen as well.
I think our approach when we’re working through the regulated process of filing a general rate application to the Energy Board, it does ensure that we’re keeping rates at the lowest possible amount to charge customers. From our perspective with individual customers, we really want to work with them to ensure we’re doing everything we can do to support them.
Going back to the situation where we do know the billing experience with us over the last year, the discussion in November, and some of the questions this morning, we know that it was not ideal. We do regret that, but we also recognize that in some circumstances, customers owe us balances right now. Our big focus is on helping those customers find a path to pay off those balances. We’re still not charging late charges. We’re still not charging interest on balances that customers have. Again, we have not disconnected any customers for not being able to pay their bill since the incident was detected last April.
Our big focus now is going to be on making sure customers understand we’re going to allow them, if they have accumulated a balance, to spread those payments out and continue with an interest-free approach to be able to manage any bills that have accumulated over the course of the past year.
THE CHAIR: MLA Burns.
RICK BURNS: My question is for Nova Scotia Power. We have been about a year from the cyberbreach. Nova Scotia Power has been playing catch-up in addressing the problems that they experienced in the cyberspace. We hear questions about upgrades to new systems. What can you tell Nova Scotians to reassure them that something like that can’t happen again; the system is built to a capacity that’s more resilient today than it was when this problem happened a year ago?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I believe we met the first time about a week or two after it happened at a community event in your neighbourhood.
A couple of things: I believe you have a background in IT as well. Cyber events, the frequency of them, you will know and everyone else will know, that it has been occurring a lot more. You almost can’t go through the news every day without finding a new issue that is happening.
Nova Scotia Power did invest in cybersecurity prior to this incident occurring last year. Of course, we continue to invest in it. As we have rebuilt the systems that were affected from last year’s incident, we’re always making sure that cybersecurity is at the forefront.
Part of the recovery from the cybersecurity incident was working with consultants outside of Nova Scotia Power to help ensure that we were making decisions that would be keeping cybersecurity as a top priority. The worry for any organization is that these attacks are very real, but it was definitely a focus for us. We understand how important it is to protect our customers’ data.
RICK BURNS: I do think it’s reassuring to hear that that is being addressed, that you have had consultants in looking at it. When we look back at the process and the struggle that Nova Scotia Power experienced when this did happen a year ago and the things that have been done to address it, such as you described, if an incident were to happen again, how would Nova Scotia Power react differently or respond differently to make the experience better for Nova Scotians?
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I think maybe what I’ll talk about is the feedback of actually a lot of people in this room that has even helped inform how we have adjusted our approach as we work through this incident. My colleagues whom I have worked with on the Energy Poverty Task Force at this table, as we have gone through this, we have met with the Affordable Energy Coalition, for example, to get their guidance on how we’re actually doing things. The feedback from this committee in November helped inform some of the changes that we’re going to make. It’s really just about getting the message out there more because when we talked in the committee, one of the themes that came out of November is that we had answers for some of the challenges that were happening, but the feedback we heard from this group is that we weren’t getting the message out there a lot.
After the committee was over, after conversations with Mr. Benjamin and others from the Affordable Energy Coalition, we did a couple of things. We started increasing advertising on explanations of what was happening and what customers could do about it. We didn’t just use channels like social media. We actually made sure that that information was out on radio, connected to television, to try to get the word out there.
I think directly from the meeting here, we had talked about community sessions we had done to help support people signing up for credit monitoring. The feedback that came from this meeting was that that was a really good idea and to do more of that.
We have had eight sessions across the province so far. We’re going to continue to do that, to get out and talk to people more. From a learning perspective, there’s obviously still more work to do to kind of recover. As we have been going along, we have been trying to realize the current state we’re in, taking feedback from important relationships that we have including many in this room again to adjust our approach to make sure that we’re helping our customers as best we can.
RICK BURNS: You’re right. We did meet at a community meeting. Thank you for that. Thank you for coming out and doing that. I want to ask a follow-up question to that. While you were out in Hammonds Plains-Lucasville, you shared a community infrastructure project about the work that was happening in the area and the long-term plan for stabilizing the system in that area. Can you help me reconcile when we see power outages in our area and we see communities in the dark due to natural events, inclement weather events, how that project, that work, and that resiliency that you’re trying to put into the system still leaves customers in the situation where they’re checking online to see when their power might be coming back?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: Reliability, I know, is a critical piece for our customers, so we’re here today and we’re talking about the specifics on energy pricing and affordability for customers, but reliability is also a very important topic. It’s really the anchor of our recent general rate application - the investment that we’re making into reliability. We understand that it’s really important for customers to be connected. In the Hammonds Plains area and across the province, we have a five-year reliability plan that is spending $1.3 billion, including doubling the vegetation management budget - the tree trimming, if you will - that we had just a few years ago because trees contacting lines is the number one reason for power outages.
Again, we know that outages still do happen. We understand how impactful they are, but it’s definitely a huge priority for Nova Scotia Power to make sure that we’re improving the reliability performance so that customers are experiencing better results in that area.
THE CHAIR: MLA Fadare.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Good afternoon. I’m really happy that we’re talk about reliability because there’s one form of the wage is important, affordability, but reliability is very critical. I know yesterday there was a power outage and there were a lot upset residents in Clayton Park West reaching out to the office. One actually wrote to me and was really upset because he had an appointment at Nova Scotia Health and it’s an appointment he was waiting for for months. Because of that, it becomes a missed opportunity, which we don’t know how it will be rescheduled and all that. So reliability is very key.
I think it’s important for us to understand that when we talk about reliability, we also have to remember that it’s not just something to be affordable but is has something that people can rely on. Because people travel different kilometres across Nova Scotia for various appointments, but people were really, really upset yesterday because we got lots and lots of calls about that. I think the reason that was given was that it’s not really very tenable for many persons. A crow was the reason why there was outage.
I’m just concerned about that. I think it’s something that we need to think about. How do we ensure that we have a system that people can actually rely on because sometimes it’s about a life-and-death situation also.
My question that I basically want to ask right now is: Where is Nova Scotia Power presently sourcing their natural gas for some of your facilities? We’ve heard that natural gas is one of those needs that you have. I’m just curious about where you’re presently sourcing from and how does that factor in terms of reliability and also in terms of cost?
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I appreciate the questions. Just a couple of things there. Obviously, I fully understand the scenario of the customer that you spoke to who missed an appointment. That is why we’re focused on reliability. Unfortunately, wildlife interference - yesterday it was a crow for the one you’re talking about - that does impact things.
The one thing that I do want to say is - a couple of parts to answer on the natural gas procurement. The first thing what I will say is that the focus of Nova Scotia Power in obtaining fuel for generation and any other purpose is to make sure that we’re doing it at the lowest cost possible to all of our ratepayers. However, I’m not an expert in the space specifically where the procurement is coming from; so if we could, Chair, I’d like to take that piece away and we can get back to the committee on that.
ADEGOKE FADARE: I’m not sure if you will be able to answer this second question because I’m just curious around transportation cost of this energy, itself. I want to believe that this natural gas is not presently sourced from Nova Scotia - probably based outside of Nova Scotia. Do you think you potentially can save on transportation cost if this energy is sourced from within Nova Scotia? I’m just wondering if you are able to answer that.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I appreciate the question. I don’t think that I could provide a full answer. Obviously, with transportation, if something didn’t have to go nearly as far, that’s beneficial, but it would be another question that we’d need to understand the full picture of before we could provide an appropriate response for this committee.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Thank you for your honest answer. I just would like to move over to the department. We’ve heard pretty loud and clear that the Premier and the Minister of Energy of this particular department is not pleased with the power rate hike that has been approved by the energy board. What steps did your department take to be heard in this process and to advocate for Nova Scotia? One of the things we’re hearing everywhere - I’m sure that we all are feeling it also - is regarding the cost. So what steps in terms of advocating have you taken for Nova Scotians with the energy board that you could share with us today?
[2:15 p.m.]
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: There are several steps that the Province took with respect to the most recent general rate application that I think you’re referring to.
The most significant of those would be the intervention - registering as an intervener in the regulatory process. The Premier, as the Minister of Energy, submitted strong and compelling closing remarks, making it clear his lack of support for the rate increase, or any rate increase, at a time when Nova Scotians are facing a lot of challenges broadly with respect to affordability. There were a number of technical points in the submission itself, which the Province contested. There are a few that I’d like to point out. One is a higher level of scrutiny on the operating expenses of Nova Scotia Power. In the preliminary decision by the Energy Board, they also highlighted some pullbacks on operating expenses, executive salaries, and whatnot.
Moving away from the most recent general rate application, there are several other initiatives that the Province has undertaken with respect to ensuring that the increase in electricity rates is as low as possible. I mentioned a few of those in some of my other remarks earlier today, but a couple that I’d like to highlight relate to leveraging the power of the Province’s balance sheet to help Nova Scotians. For example, the Province did a debt buy-back of $117 million of fuel costs, which lowered the amount that needed to be recovered from Nova Scotians.
This predated my time, but I understand the Province worked hard to convince the federal government to put forward a $500 million loan guarantee. There are estimates of how much that has alleviated pressure on rates; upwards of 19 percent are some of the estimates, so it’s significant.
Of course, future actions leveraging the balance sheet of the Province would need to be dependent on some of the other fiscal pressures the Province is facing, but those are a few examples of interventions by the Province.
THE CHAIR: MLA Robicheau.
RYAN ROBICHEAU: You answered my first question, so that’s good. I will continue with questions for the Department of Energy.
Deputy Minister, we have new energy coming onto the grid quickly. How can Nova Scotians know that the path being taken will be affordable, as well as being in their best interests?
STEPHEN MACDONALD: I’ve talked about this a bit in my responses today, but one of the key actions that the Province has taken was to separate from Nova Scotia Power the management of the grid and the procurement of new energy resources. Our electricity system is undergoing a fundamental change that’s driven by the legislative requirement to achieve 80 percent of our electricity to be generated from renewable sources by 2030.
The Province produced a document called the Clean Power Plan, which sets forward the pathway to achieving that 80 precent renewable generation by 2030. That pathway includes the integration of local development and integration of local wind sources. It also includes several initiatives related to grid stability and reliability, which I think has come up a couple times in some of the questions - things like the development of grid-scale battery storage. Nova Scotia Power has announced 150 megawatts of grid-scale battery storage. I believe two of the sites are in operation, and I think the third will be coming online in 2026. Through that Clean Power Plan, there’s an ambition to procure an additional 150 megawatts of that grid-scale battery to help stabilize the grid and help manage with peak demand in times when renewables may not be optimal, if you will.
Those decisions, going forward, will be made by an independent non-profit organization, the IESO, as I mentioned. That is a fundamental part of how the management of the system is done going forward.
A couple other points I’ll just mention very quickly, and that is the introduction of the element of competition in our electricity system. There was a recent announcement - it escapes me (Interruption) - thank you - which introduces direct competition for customers to Nova Scotia Power. That is a really important development in our electricity system. The other program is the Green Choice Program, which allows industrial facilities to identify and potentially take on their own sources of renewable energy. Again, that element of competition and choice for consumers is very important to make sure that the price Nova Scotians pay for clean, reliable electricity is as fair and reasonable as possible.
RYAN ROBICHEAU: I think you’ve seen my questions because you’re answering them quite quickly. That’s good.
We’ve learned the hard way this year again that the fluctuating price of fossil fuels can impact affordability in a big way. What steps is your department taking to provide made-in-Nova Scotia energy solutions that aren’t at the mercy of the global market?
STEPHEN MACDONALD: A theme that many jurisdictions around the world are focusing on, particularly in these turbulent times, is energy security and the development of local energy resources to provide that energy security. Nova Scotia is blessed with an abundance of both renewable and non-renewable energy sources. I think one of the previous questions had to do with where natural gas for Nova Scotia Power is procured. All natural gas that’s used in the province comes from outside the province. We pay some of the highest rates for natural gas of any province in Canada, and I would dare say anywhere in North America.
We have natural gas resources both onshore and offshore. There are various initiatives at the department spearheaded by the Premier as the Minister are initiating - a study by Dalhousie University to examine the opportunities for onshore natural gas. The Province and the federal government, through their joint regulator, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Energy Regulator - excuse me if I missed the last part of that - have issued a call for bids for exploration. Of course, a really significant, in my opinion, nation-building project and a project that the federal government has deemed of national significance: the development of offshore wind or, as it’s commonly known, Wind West.
Nova Scotia is blessed with some of the greatest, best offshore wind anywhere in the world. It’s very consistent wind; it’s at a high-capacity factor so it blows a lot and it blows very consistently. You can make decisions on that. There are some estimates that the resource potential of offshore wind, as much as powering 25 percent or meeting 25 percent of all of Canada’s energy needs. It’s a significant economic development opportunity for the Province, but it is a renewable energy resource that we can export and take advantage of the many economic opportunities associated with it.
RYAN ROBICHEAU: I live near the ocean in St. Marys Bay. I can attest that there’s plenty of wind for future projects.
I’m going to change my questioning to the Department of Opportunities and Social Development. Energy affordability is one of the many pressures that families face. How does OSD balance immediate crisis response with long-term stability, and what are you doing to address the problem in the long term and not just responding to the short-term crisis?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Egerton.
FRAZER EGERTON: I think the department always has to balance between the immediate needs of clients and participants and long-term planning to afford them stability in their income, and ultimately to break the cycle of poverty that brings many people to interact with the department. Some of the more significant long-term and structural changes have been four increases in the amount of income assistance and income assistance rates since the start of 2024 - I would suggest perhaps most significantly to tie them to the rate of inflation, which affords people an understanding in advance as to when and by how much their income assistance rates will go up and allow them to plan accordingly.
There was the introduction of the disability support supplement, which is for income assistance clients who have a disability. That was introduced a couple of years ago at the rate of $300; it’s now $324 per month, because it’s also linked to CPI. We have a cohort of just shy of 6,000 participants in the Disability Support Program. That is an income-tested program, so these are folks who would substantively feel the pinch of power rates as well as the ability to afford the basic needs. We have seen an increase in the funding to the Disability Support Program over the last five years. It’s now an $800-million program, so it’s larger than many departments.
We’ve seen shifts in programs like the Nova Scotia Child Benefit . . .
THE CHAIR: Order. We’ve reached the end of the time allotted for the PCs. We will now move onto the second round of questioning with six minutes for each Opposition party and 12 minutes for the government side.
MLA Leblanc.
SUSAN LEBLANC: Thank you, Chair. I don’t have much time, so I just want to go back to talking about the Energy Poverty Task Force report for a moment. I’ve heard a number of questions that do frankly boil my blood, because we know in this room - we all know and we’ve talked about it several times - that this government is capable of and responsible for regulating Nova Scotia Power.
Given that information, or given that reminder, and also going back to the Poverty Task Force report, I want to ask Mr. Benjamin: Last year, you said something similar. You said the Houston government “have done nothing to address the situation despite a program recommended by the Energy Poverty Task Force” and that “People are understandably angry with Nova Scotia Power, but we need to also expect solutions from our government.”
What solutions should this government be putting in place immediately? I’d like you also, if you have a minute in these six minutes, to talk specifically about the particular situation for people who are renting homes or apartments.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Benjamin.
CHRIS BENJAMIN: The solution’s in the report, A Way Forward. It’s called a Home Energy Assistance Program. It’s what I laid out in my opening remarks. It’s a four-part pronged program on bill relief, arrears management and forgiveness, emergency intervention for when there’s a real tough temporary situation in a household, and ramped-up energy efficiency programs. The key is that if you sign on - if the household signs on - to any one of these, they automatically get looped into all of them.
One quick point is that government does have flexibility on how this rolls out, obviously, but those are the four components that we think really would pull thousands - almost 30,000 - households out of energy poverty.
SUSAN LEBLANC: I do take your point from your opening remarks, too, about that $50 million versus the $30 million going into the research on fracking. It makes it very digestible information when you put it in that way.
Given what we’ve heard from Mr. Benjamin, Deputy Minister MacDonald, I would like to ask you - well, you know already, because we’ve heard from so many people, that trust between Nova Scotia Power and the people of the province is broken. People are spending more than 30 percent more on their energy bills compared to the average Canadian for fairly unreliable service. Since the data breach last spring, Nova Scotians still don’t know if their power bill is actually based on the amount of energy they’ve used.
My question to you in your new role is - as I said, we know that the government regulates this company and should do everything possible to ensure Nova Scotians get better services. I appreciate the Premier’s remarks as an intervenor in the rate application, but to the end that the government can do more than simply intervene in words: What work has the Minister of Energy done thus far to launch a much-needed full review of Nova Scotia Power?
[2:30 p.m.]
THE CHAIR: Mr. MacDonald.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: I’ll start by saying that I’m not entirely sure how much work has been done on that full review piece yet. I have to get up to speed on that, so full disclosure.
It’s important to note that you’re correct. There are a number of things that the Province can do around influencing Nova Scotia Power on how it conducts itself but also from a legislative policy perspective. One of the more significant things was the increase in fines or penalties to Nova Scotia Power for lack of performance and increasing the amount the Energy Board can fine Nova Scotia from $1 million to $25 million. That’s significant, and that should be a significant motivator to improve reliability and performance, but we know that, in and of itself, won’t do it all.
The Province, like many jurisdictions, has an independent energy regulator. Part of the legislative changes I mentioned earlier to create the Independent Electricity System Operator also had an additional component to restructure the Utility and Review Board and to create a separate, stand-alone energy board focused on the oversight and regulation of energy in the province. That again, from my perspective, is a significant development.
In a previous life, I spent time on a national task force looking at what Canada needs to do to build out its electricity grids to achieve net zero by 2050. One of the common themes around that table - and the table was represented by utilities across Canada, not-for-profit organizations, and I was the energy efficiency person on the committee, if you will - but a consistent theme was empowering regulators to be able to make decisions and hold utilities to account. The creation of the energy board itself is a pretty significant step in that direction.
THE CHAIR: Order.
MLA Mombourquette.
HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: I’m going to go as quickly as possible here because I have a couple things I want to ask, but thanks, everybody, for being here.
My first question is for Nova Scotia Power. This is a bill that we tabled in the Legislature. In cases where Nova Scotia Power has overcharged customers on their power bills, will you pay them back with interest?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: From our perspective, we’ve been working hard to get the billing system and the experience for customer billing back to normal. The main concerns that customers are calling us about right now - in fact, pretty much all the concerns - are customers who were underestimated and may have underpaid, and also the seasonal usage on the bill is driving a large balance onto the bill.
From our perspective, now that we’re getting back to the point where - again, this month is after the meter reconnection. All bills are in place. We’re continuing to do an assessment on the accuracy of the estimated bills. I know we filed some information with this committee back in January, so our work is still ongoing, but that’s not what’s driving customer questions to our offices right now.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: It’s something that we’ll continue to pursue, but I don’t have much time, so I’m going to jump right into why I wanted to be here today.
We’re here today to support and have a conversation around energy poverty and supporting Nova Scotians. It’s good to see you, Deputy Minister MacDonald, and I commend you for the work that you did in efficiency.
I had the privilege of being the minister of that department for over three years, and in those three years, we talked a lot about supporting low-income Nova Scotians: over 11,000 low-income houses retrofitted; the best solar program in the country; and programs to support Nova Scotians right across the board. It’s important for me because, as we have these conversations, and you hear the big narrative around oil, gas, and offshore wind - things that are important, particularly offshore wind, where we’re all supportive - we still don’t know how we’re moving the power, and it is still years away.
What are not years away are efficiency programs. They are the ones - and there’s a huge conference happening right now in Halifax, Greenbuild. These are the people - those programs that we put in place years ago put hundreds and hundreds of people to work to help Nova Scotians reduce their power bills. My fear is that the government is pitting oil and gas - which I also lived when I watched two major companies seal their wells and leave, weren’t coming back, and had a big conversation around community consultation, fracking, and gas. I feel like the government is forgetting that this efficiency world is, right now, the place where we can help people save on their power bills and build the economy, and they’re not talking about it at all.
I’m happy that you’re in the role now because you’re a pro at this stuff. You built a lot of these programs around the province. You built a lot of programs that help support low-income Nova Scotians, and I hope that is part of the direction. You have a wonderful staff behind you who are pros at this stuff. EfficiencyOne has been fantastic to work with - great leadership team there, right across the board.
I’m going on a bit of a rant here, but the fact of the matter is that I have six minutes, and it’s important to get this on the record that there are a lot of energy conversations happening right now in the province. Some of it is long out and some of it has a lot of questions around public stakes and new infrastructure, but I wanted to reiterate - because I knew I only had a few minutes - if we’re going to help Nova Scotians, it’s in efficiency. Period. Right now. You can do it, build those programs, expand on those programs, and put people to work, particularly in rural Nova Scotia, where we saw a residential solar program go from 15 companies to 70 in a year because we had the right incentives in place. They were great partnerships between the provincial and federal governments.
I’ll leave it at that, for now. I had to get that on the record because now you’re in a role where you have so much expertise in it, and I’d like to give you the last minute to comment on some of my comments.
STEPHEN MACDONALD: I have a couple remarks.
First, I’ve seen no evidence of pitting efficiency against other resources in my time, either with Efficiency or my relatively short time with the department.
Speaking specifically to the role of energy efficiency in the province, it is significant, both the industry that’s been developed and - my colleague from EfficiencyOne can correct me on the numbers, but I think there are something like 5,000 direct jobs in the province.
I recently read EfficiencyOne’s annual report - I think it’s just out - great document. Efficiency spending is at the highest level ever in terms of for 2025 and, I suspect, for 2026, as well. The amount of money flowing into Efficiency from various sources is the highest it’s ever been. That’s an indication of the commitment to energy efficiency. I certainly understand - you have a unique perspective on how efficiency can be balanced with some of the other resources we’re trying to add to the electricity system in particular.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: This is a good conversation because money is drying up and governments make decisions. It’s not just the decision at this level, but it’s also a decision at the federal level. We’ve had the same conversation. I’ve had the opportunity to sit with the minister - the national minister - and express the same thing. As we go toward these nation-building projects, which are important and which have opportunities for this province and beyond - while we’re in that journey, these programs put people to work . . .
THE CHAIR: Order. The time allotted for the Liberal Party has expired. We will now move to the PC party.
MLA Robicheau.
RYAN ROBICHEAU: Going back to the Department of Opportunities and Social Development, I know that you were cut short during the last answer, so if you would want, we could finish that answer. It was around short-term and long-term solutions.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Egerton.
FRAZER EGERTON: Thank you very much for allowing me to continue on this one. I think I’ll just focus on a couple of other programs and changes that the department has initiated, and just sort of reinforce the notion of its long-term planning and the importance of sustainably helping people meet their basic needs and also breaking the generational issue we see with people in the department.
A couple of things: I’ve talked about IA and the DSP Remedy. I would also point to programs like Path, which is a program that provides youth who are leaving the - former children in care. It gives them six years’ worth of payments and support to allow them - to act as a sort of financial proxy that a parent might do to allow them to integrate into the community of their choice, to pursue education, or to buy the things that might set them up for life.
I think a very important element to what the department does is its work on homelessness. Five years ago, we spent around $10 million on this. I appreciate that this is an issue that has emerged with a vengeance both in Nova Scotia and in the country as a whole. Our spending on that has gone up - the percentage is a little bit obsolete, but it’s $165 million in the next budget. There are real and concrete spendings and investments on behalf of the lowest-income Nova Scotians.
OSD is concerned with the 4 percent in Nova Scotia who earn the least money. When we’re talking about energy poverty, it’s impacting our 40,000 clients and participants, I would suggest, more than anybody else. There are real and substantive efforts to help those people immediately meet their basic needs, including the cost of power, but also to set them up long term so that they do not find themselves continuously in this situation.
THE CHAIR: MLA Burns.
RICK BURNS: Just going back to Nova Scotia Power and continuing our conversation. We talked about some of the feedback and about the customer process around recovering from the cybersecurity breach. I’m wondering - there are some folks in situations where they’re not comfortable with online, with digital, with understanding what may have been leaked and what the impact is on them. When I think of some of the customers - I guess elderly folks - where they may travel to the bank to make payments and stuff: What are you doing to support customers who are vulnerable and uncomfortable with the situation of not knowing what information is missing and are not wanting to pay their bills online or through banking?
Are you helping accommodate them, to give them other options to make them feel comfortable when they’re making a payment that their banking information and their cyberdata is not at risk?
THE CHAIR: Mr. Lanteigne.
CHRIS LANTEIGNE: I think we should maybe first talk about payments. For customers - and I believe we talked about this in - not in this committee in November, but in the June Public Accounts Committee. The way most customers actually pay their bills is through their bank, whether it’s online at the bank or over the phone, even, through the bank.
If anyone was asking me what I would recommend, I would say that’s a great way to do it. When that information comes to Nova Scotia Power even, it’s very limited in the data we get. It’s the customer’s name, the amount they paid, and their Nova Scotia Power account number - none of the banking information is sent from the bank to us. That’s the first recommendation, that that’s a good way to do it.
If customers do want to choose to pay in other ways, we still accept cheques. Customers can do that.
I think the other piece for us is that we do know that the situation - electric bills can always cause questions, even setting aside the past year. Our customer care team definitely wants to help customers. We talk to thousands of customers every day. If they have questions about their bill, we want to help walk them through it. We want to make sure that they understand how the bill works, but also, if they have a balance, what options are available to them.
You’re right, we obviously encourage people to check out what we have online and leverage MyAccount to view their bills and make payments. But if customers still want that option of reaching out and talking to us, that’s what our customer care team is there for.
THE CHAIR: MLA Fadare.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Thank you, Chair. How many minutes do we have left? Just curious.
THE CHAIR: Six minutes and 30 seconds.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Okay. I want to go back to OSD. Funnily enough, I once worked with OSD, so I know the executive director.
I want to ask a question around the situation around people facing utility disconnection. What does the typical response look like? I’m hoping that you’re able to walk the committee through what that looks like, because we’ve heard today that there are a lot of people who are in those scenarios and those situations. What are the typical tools that OSD has at their present disposal that helps with utility costs before it becomes a tipping problem or situation for households or for individuals?
[2:45 p.m.]
THE CHAIR: Mr. Egerton.
FRAZER EGERTON: Thank you very much for your question. You’ll hold me to account to my honesty, because you know the department will.
I’ll start with a slight non-answer. There’s no single pathway, because the situations people find themselves in are going to be different. We have 35,000 people who are on income assistance. We have another 6,000 or so within the Disability Support Program. Across the province, across genders, everything else - there’s a significant difference in people’s experiences there.
Firstly, I would say there have been those efforts I spoke to before about trying to improve the predictability and the amount of money that flows to people who find themselves clients or participants of our department. If a situation arose pertaining to particular extenuating circumstances with the ability to afford their power, their first port of call would be to contact, in the case of IA, a caseworker, or in the case of DSP, a care coordinator.
It’s easy for me to say from a position of Haligonian head office, but these are the bread and butter of the department. These are the people who work day in and day out to improve the lives of these 40,000 people. They would first of all help them with - the department has diversion funding, it has special needs, it has funding and supports available in those extenuating circumstances. If they were not eligible or if they were not suitable for that funding, that caseworker or that care coordinator would work with service providers or would work with Nova Scotia Power. They would act as navigators to the types of supports that might exist outside the department.
My colleagues on my right have referenced a lot that Energy has, but there’s also Service Nova Scotia, the federal government, and the service providers who provide supports. They would be very well equipped to help them navigate that system, avail themselves of the supports that are available, and also, if necessary, help communicate with entities such as Nova Scotia Power to ensure that, literally, the lights stay on.
ADEGOKE FADARE: Thank you so much for the answer. I just wanted to ask this because in Clayton Park West, we have a lot of rentals, right? A lot of people who often don’t have control over a lot of these situations and heating problems.
I’m just wondering: How does OSD support vulnerable Nova Scotians in a context of not being left behind, both in terms of disability support and long-term solutions? As in, how do you intercede? How do you help? I get a lot of people coming to my office, and a lot of them are in all kinds of dire scenarios or situations. I’m just wondering, how do you support the most vulnerable in terms of long-term solutions, and also, that nobody’s left behind?
FRAZER EGERTON: Genuinely, if this is repetition or not answering the question, it’s not deliberate. You can steer me in the right direction.
I’d repeat the fact that we have about 4 percent of Nova Scotians who interact with OSD. If you think about our poverty rate in the province being roughly 11.5 percent at the last measure, you’re looking at about a third of people who fall below the poverty line as interacting with the department. We would work with other departments to try and bolster the supports that might be available to clients who are above the income assistance threshold, but we would not have a direct mandate over those.
In terms of those who do fall within income assistance or with the Disability Support Program, most pertinently. I point again to the sort of long-term supports that we have introduced - the department has introduced. It probably warrants repetition - the linking of income assistance to CPI, so at least people are not falling behind significantly. The investments in the Disability Support Program are significant and allow those 6,000 participants to increasingly live a life of their own choosing in their communities.
I point again to those generational shifts that the department has undertaken - programs like improvements to Nova Scotia Child Benefit, programs like Path, and supports such as the School Lunch Program, which is not directly an OSD mandate but one that OSD was intimately involved in establishing. Those are things that are aimed at creating the conditions to allow people to meet their basic needs more readily, including things such as power.
THE CHAIR: We have 14 seconds remaining. I am going to take the liberty of moving to closing remarks. Any of the witnesses who would like to make closing remarks, I ask to make them brief because we’ve only got nine minutes left.
I’m going to go to Mr. de Vreede. Do you have any comments you’d like to make?
Mr. de Vreede.
LEON DE VREEDE: The reality that we face in my community is that it seems like there’s a lot of talk coming from higher levels of government. What we desperately need to see are real solutions that play out at the local level.
There are solutions that are already being tested that are at the edges of the type of programming that is taking place at Efficiency Nova Scotia - that we are supporting that organization and building on and constructing additional pathways and supports on the local level. They don’t add 5 percent, 6 percent, or 8 percent to the impact and benefit of those programs; they add 10 percent, 20 percent, 40 percent, or 80 percent of impact. That is enabled through program integration.
We are seeing some of those results because one of the biggest challenges that especially low-income and vulnerable residents have is that they fall off the bandwagon. They don’t make it through programs. The ability to support residents to make it all the way through programs and to make sure that they’re accessible, that their needs are taken into consideration, and that they are trauma informed - those are the types of solutions that will help Nova Scotia’s most vulnerable.
I second the honourable Derek Mombourquette’s points about the need to lean into efficiency programs. They are incredibly powerful. They deliver enormous results on the local level while also looking for broader structural solutions. Believe me, if there were broader solutions available, people at the municipal level would not have to work so hard to look after our residents because there would be provincial and other supports in place that could apply more equally to everyone rather than that being a patchwork of local programs.
Thank you for your time today.
THE CHAIR: Any further closing remarks?
Mr. Benjamin.
CHRIS BENJAMIN: It’s interesting that the title of the topic we’re doing today is “Energy Pricing.” None of us talked that much about pricing because the issues run much deeper than pricing, although that is an issue.
My focus and a lot of my work has been on energy poverty. Perhaps you wonder why someone from the Ecology Action Centre is focused on that. Part of the reason is that it’s a justice issue, and I care about that, but the solution for sustainability, which is our mandate, aligns nicely with the solution for energy poverty.
There is a solution, and to the fact that two out of five Nova Scotian households can’t afford their energy, it stresses them. It causes them serious problems, where they’re making sacrifices - two out of every five. It’s higher in Cape Breton. It’s astronomical in Eskasoni. Something has to be done about this.
We have proposed a solution - we as in everyone at this table - as part of the Energy Poverty Task Force. It’s an affordable solution that the government can afford - $50 million are the most recent estimates. That’s very reasonable and it would also decrease over time, thanks to the efficiency component of the program that reduces a household’s energy use and thus brings their bill down so that they’re no longer in energy poverty and no longer reliant on the on-bill discount.
It’s a problem that is very solvable. There is a solution. It’s on your table. I think the people struggling with energy poverty beg of the Province to implement that solution. Thank you.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Gifford.
BRIAN GIFFORD: I’d like to support what Chris just said. I won’t repeat it, but I think it’s really important that the Energy Poverty Task Force recommendations get taken seriously. I like the suggestion that came up during the meeting that we meet with the current Minister of Energy - the Premier. We will try to do that and encourage him to take those proposals seriously.
I just wanted to make a couple of other comments. One of them is that there was talk about efficiency first in the power system, but I note that in the current contract between Nova Scotia Power and EfficiencyOne that has just been introduced for review by the Energy Board, there is no increase in efficiency spending. That’s my understanding, and that, I think, is a problem.
Finally, I’d just like to refer back to my comment about the gas plants in Pictou County. My understanding is that because they are gas plants and not batteries, they are going to be very expensive, and they will affect power rates over 20 to 30 years. We should reconsider that.
THE CHAIR: Thank you. Any additional comments or closing remarks? If not, I will thank all the witnesses, and we will move on quickly to committee business.
The first discussion is reference to a letter that we received from HRC Innovations requesting to appear, along with various supporting documents, regarding Cannabis Excise Reform. Is there any discussion? I see no discussion.
Secondly, the next discussion point here on the order: Mr. Bill Curry sent the committee a letter regarding the Department of Natural Resources’ Integrated Resource Management system. We’ve all had that document. Is there any discussion on that? No discussion there.
Nova Scotia Power responded to a letter sent by the committee following their appearance on November 25th to discuss the review of Nova Scotia Power. Do we have any discussion on that? All right.
Our next meeting is May 26th. The topic is Impact of the Nova Scotia Loyal Program. Witnesses will be the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Growth and Development, and the Department of Service Nova Scotia.
Seeing no further business, I adjourn this meeting.
[The committee adjourned at 2:59 p.m.]
