It has been a long time coming. The Nation ventured into Hydro-Quebec’s Montreal stronghold to talk to the highest power in the tower — barring the ghost of Premier Bourassa. Normally, this would be an unsettling prospect at best, given the reputation of the utility among Crees. I was about to visit Shiva, the Destroyer, the land drowner, wabineque… well, you get the picture. It was to be an experience.
If Hydro-Quebec President André Caillé stays true to his words, the Crees may be able to rest a little easier these days. Only time will tell, but on the surface, Caillé is a new breed at Hydro-Quebec.
Caillé says he is looking at drastically changing Hydro-Que-bec’s tactics and image for the better.
Caillé is no stranger to changing the standard field operating procedures. Before coming to Hydro-Quebec, he was for 15 years a CEO of Gaz Métropolitain, where he worked to change the image and the way the company did business.
Caillé can still keep an eye on his old company because Hydro-Quebec is a shareholder in Gaz Métropolitain. This is the “integration” that Caillé says is occurring in the energy business. After public hearings the Quebec government concluded, in Caillé’s words, that “essentially Hydro-Quebec is eventually to become a hub in the energy market in North America. That took us to buy a part of Gaz Métropolitain. That explains the changes that are going on.”
Deregulation of electricity is coming, according to Caillé. “It happened in natural gas, it will happen in electricity,” says Caillé. He adds that HQ has been moving in that direction for a couple of years. Caillé points out that Canadians were first to deregulate in natural gas, but admits that Canada is following the path of the United States in deregulating electricity.
Caillé also says that both Ontario and New Brunswick are looking at changes as both want to participate in the new deregulated market. “The evolution doesn’t surprise me at all.”
The Nation: Exactly what does deregulation mean for Quebecers? Are we looking at Independent energy producers In Quebec?
André Caillé: What has been decided in government policy is that projects where the installed capacity is less than 50 Megawatts will not go to HQ. We will be excluded from that market. It will be for independent producers. That has been established.
The government has asked for advice from the Energy Board [Régie de l’énergie] as to whatquantity Hydro-Quebec should buy from independent power producers and at what price.This advice will go to the government because the government has made the request. Thisis another step to implementing government policy.
Windpower will also be by independent power producers.
The position of Hydro-Quebec is very clear. We have no specific limit. We’ve mentioned numbers in the strategic plan as to what we think can be done but it’s going to depend on the Energy Board and the government on how much energy and how much we will pay for it.
There are joint ventures that are proposed with or by Crees. Ouje-Bougoumou Is looking at another sawdust burning plant to create electricity, the excess to sell to you, mlnl-dams by another community etc. How are the plans In these areas and how will they sell to you?
Well, it’s under discussion relative to these projects. I’m aware of three. First we’requite open but we will have to know about the price at which we will be allowed to payand recover from the customers. I think it will be at a price that will make it feasible.We have no problems to discuss them according to the criteria that will be established.We are also prepared to look at coventures in those types of projects as we did in Lac St. Jean. We did that with aproject developed by the community in Lac St. Jean. We’re happy with what we did.
During the Great Whale campaign Hydro-Quebec was pretty much seen as public enemynumber one. Today the Innu are making waves about Churchill Falls concerning(Verniers Tobin and Bouchard. What plans have you made to Improve HQ’s Image with Nativepeoples and Internationally?
As you may be aware, there are three conditions for us to consider a project as a project. Anything else is a potential project.
First of all, the project has to make sense economically; secondly, it has to be environmentally acceptable; and thirdly, it has to be accepted by the communities. If a project does not fit any of those criteria, it isn’t a project.
I was satisfied with what I read in La Presse relative to Churchill Falls Project. The declaration read by Mr. Mackenzie and Mr. Belfour saying
that they will not accept that the project will be done unless there’s a real partnership, it’s acceptable environmentally and there’s an economic benefit in the present and in the future for the local communities. I agree to that. Development has to make sense in a shared perspective.
I think that’s the right way to put it and that’s how Mr. Mackenzie seems to have put it. They are not anti-development but development has to fit. That’s my belief: there is a common ground we will find through discussions.
I’d like to add that Hydro-Quebec has a past and I have been trying here at Hydro-Quebec since my arrival. I wasn’t here during Great Whale, as you know, I am trying to change Hydro-Quebec. I am trying to change the way we do business and that includes changing the way we relate to the local communities.
The first step was to define and express that clearly in our Strategic Plan. The plan must be approved by government, the shareholder. Therefore these criteria that we have just discussed have been agreed to by the shareholder, the government of Quebec. This approval came a month ago so now we have the capability to say that this is not only the view of the managers of Hydro-Quebec, but this is also the view of the Quebec government. I feel secure with that. We can now enter into discussions and serious talks about what are still potential projects. No project has gone from a potential project to a project. Nobody has ever
agreed, not even us, that they fit the three criteria. None of the communities — probably because of the realization that an agreement can only come after discussion, which obviously couldn’t come before the shareholder agreed.
In your new Image you’ve stated that If a community doesn’t want a project It could Just say no. How would a community go about saying yes or no? What specifically would be the good way to say yes or no?
It isn’t for the president of Hydro-Quebec to give the response for local communities. It’s not for me to define how and for what reason a community should say yes or no. It’s for them and it will be done through negotiations.
Of course, we at the table will value the positive impact on the social, environmentaland economic aspects of the project. We will also, and I have to be clear on that, willidentify and mitigate negative impacts. An example of this is that there are sometrappers in the communities that are impacted more than other trappers. That isobvious if you are talking about flooding an area where the people were trapping thenit’s obvious this will change the way they were living. So we will have to play thatrole, not only to move forward and say this is all positive, we want to be
critical and we want to be responsible to ourselves too.
So there is the positive and the negative and how to mitigate the negative is certainly a question that will be there.
For instance, in the North Shore, while it’s not in the Cree territory there are other nations there, I have told our people that we will not be satisfied with the way we have approached environmental issues in the past. Hydro-Quebec was saying that we have made all these studies demonstrating the impact and coming out with a few mitigations. Now we will still do that but we will go further. That is what I said to my people. Not only will the impact on the salmon river be zero but we will not be satisfied with zero, we want a positive impact. Where there is salmon there will be more salmon. Where there used to be salmon but there are none we today we will reintroduce salmon.
This is a cultural change here, let me tell you, with our engineers. I’ve heard the argument “we just have to prove we have no impact.” I said we have to prove that we have a positive impact and that’s different. Then we can do a lot. I have in mind a river where there wasn’t many salmon this summer where there would have been much more if what we had in mind would have been built. Of course, there’s nothing so we are not capable of doing anything. With us there will be more salmon, not less but more.
That is in the Innu territory, of course, as you know. But the same will apply in all territories. So there may have been environmental resources that have disappeared. For instance I was made aware of the plight of the landlocked seal. These are the sort of environmental issues I like to work on. We are not only trying just to mitigate the negative but are also trying to create the positive here at Hydro-Quebec.
At present the Megiscane River, even though It Is on Cree land and the Impacts will be felt throughout the Cree territory there is no review happening under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, would you care to explain why?
We sent a letter to Coon Come explaining, first of all, the Megiscane concept is just a concept at this stage. It involves a number of nations. It’s far from clear at this stage to tell how all these communities view this potential project and how that can be reconciled. Secondly environmental procedures have to be respected as far as we look at it. Mr. Coon Come’s letter made that pretty clear and as a promoter we’ll certainly try and implement the measures that are in place there. I think the approach here has to be one of harmonization. There have been discussions of harmonization of different environmental legislation’s and due processes. There are going to be areas elsewhere where harmonization has to be achieved. At this stage it’s still far from clear that Megiscane can really go beyond the conceptual stage. That’s why we decided to stop everything in regards to Megiscane. It’s a non-project as far as Hydro-Quebec is concerned. It has been stopped until such time as things become clear in terms of the view of the communities and the economics. The economics are beginning to look marginal at best.
Some non-Cree Native communities have looked at this project positively, as I understood?
Again there are some communities that we have been in contact with have looked at this project in a positive way. The general perspective is that this may be something worth discussing. What is not clear at this stage is whether the economics are there and who is involved and how we can structure that involvement. In that sense it doesn’t make sense to be out there making a bunch of studies which really should involve the partners. It’s another change for Hydro-Quebec that the notion that environmental and mitigation studies have to be dealt with the people who are going to be involved. Not at the end of the process but at the start of the process. So we have to find out who’s involved.
That’s another change. Not only do we view our future as economic partners with local communities, but we want them to be involved as developers in the environmental process. So in this case I understood the Cree are saying that we have to start with the convention [the James Bay Agreement]. That’s want we come to discuss. We cannot say that the convention does not apply here because obviously the convention applies wherever there is an impact on the territory. That I made clear with the Grand Chief.
I also informed him that the economics are marginal for the Megiscane at this time. Frankly I hope that we can find a way to make the project more attractive economically because if it isn’t attractive to us economically than it won’t be for our partners either. So we are talking about a non-project. The attitude here is, let’s try to make it economical. I’m informed that this won’t be easy so it may very well mean that this remains a non-project. If that changes we will have to discuss it with all the First Nations, including the Cree Nation, on what type of review process to adopt. With the Cree I am convinced we will start application of the convention as it is.
Another concern of the Crees Is Eastmaln Project that Is being studied by Hydro-Quebecand the Rupert River as well.
What we have again is a potential project; it’s not a project. In
order for this to become anything it’s important to understand how we are coming to these projects. This is an idea, this is a potential project or a conceptual project at this time. What needs to be done before it becomes a project is that we need to have discussions with our potential partners. So that’s what’s going on now, we are still at the level of a potential project. First of all, the people have to be informed before they can say they want to be partners in something. Then they will make their decision and define their interest. If the interest is positive then we will sit together and develop how we will study this project, including the environmental impacts, together. Then there’s review process, the same one that’s in the convention.
What we are saying in relation to the Rupert is that in the past EM I [Eastmain], as was discussed in the past, is a project that economically doesn’t make sense. So as far as we’re concerned, it’s a non-project. We’re not going to build something that’s going to cost 6 cents a kilowatt-hour when criteria says 2-2.5 cents. The only way to change this is to find some way to improve the overall economics while being environmentally sensitive and justifiable. We’ll then present this to the First Nations and see if they think this is worth pursuing. We’re in that phase where the Nations have asked for information and we’re responding to these requests by providing the best information we have at this stage — while realizing it’s very preliminary and conceptual. The Rupert’s partial diversion is only a suggestion that will lead to discussions. At some point we will know if they want to advance this to another stage. It might be that this is something that doesn’t make sense to the Nations. Then we’ll go on and do something else.
I know you have visited some communities. By the time this Is In print, you’ll have visited Mlstisslnl. Is this pert of the Information process?
First of all, I like very much to meet with the people because Hydro-Quebec is there. That will already be a good reason. Secondly, I’ve been invited. And thirdly, what we’ve done in Eastmain is to give information at the annual assembly of the community. So that’s what we are doing. Of course, I do not expect that people will define their interest during the day. We are willing to do this at other places if we are invited to do so.
That’s a change from previous Hydro-Quebec administrations.
I’m telling you that we are changing the culture here. We are in the process of cultural change. Along the way what I fear is that the attitude of the past will resurface because there are 20,000 employees here. I correct the path every time I see the past attitude coming back. I think the new direction is understood as I took a lot of time going around the company meeting with our employees. I said we are changing, you were doing this and now do this. It’s not the same thing and I expect you to change. Now a cultural change is a long process and I am going to have to go around and do it again. I am planning to do it this fall. Yes, this type of issue will be discussed. We’ll be saying this was the Hydro-Quebec approach, it’s not to critique the past, but this was
the Hydro-Quebec approach and it’s not the same now. I’m going to make it clear, otherwise out in the field people will act as if nothing has changed. It could still happen because people make mistakes and we will correct it as we go along.
In the Cree world they have seen some of the changes and remarked that this was not done this way in the past. The new approaches now allow the First Nations to look at things differently. Hopefully, we will evolve together in this process and make this a much more co-operative process. A collaborative process. With a respectful, good faith approach perhaps there can be successes. No guarantees, but we can hope for them.
In the US there are various energy conservation measures, like the giving away or subsidizing of energy-efficient llghtbulbs, showerheads and whatnot What measures are Hydro-Quebec taking In this area?
After the public consultation the government had in 1994-95 a decision was made and established in Quebec policy to put in place an energy conservation office. It has the responsibility to develop programs and to establish how those programs should be financed. This was the situation before I arrived here so it’s not a matter for Hydro-Quebec or its president to subscribe to or not. All I can say is I accepted the job knowing this was the case.
What I said is that we have no limits. If you out yourself in the seat of the president of Hydro-Quebec, after having in many forms and times in those public hearings I don’t think that there is anyone around who has suggested that we limit ourselves. They never set any threshold where we should stop doing energy efficiency. I am prepared to do as much as we can. I thought we’d get applauded by the environmentalists but that didn’t happen. I’m not saying that we have no limits but we have to know how much it costs. We have to know if it costs more than our actual costs. I may have lost the applause there. We have to know how we will recuperate these costs. If it costs the same thing as the 2.8 cents that exists then the answer to Hydro-Quebec is no limit. Now I know many of those programs may cost more than three cents a kilowatt-hour. If that is the case then it would not be reasonable and I know it wouldn’t be responsible for somebody who is responsible for the management of this organization to say this is a cost I will forget.
Unfortunately, as you know the costs of turning our head is not sufficient. You have to look at the impact. I think we will come to that position of no limits and the recuperation program. I’m engaged in freezing the tariffs until the year 2002. We will respect that.
la there any message you would like to give the Creea on behalf of Hydro-Quebec?
Yes. I would like to say I look forward to doing projects with the communities. Projectsthey will be happy to participate in. I think that is one of the challenges we want toachieve In our objectives. We want to find or establish a way to work with people whowill be happy to work with Hydro-Quebec.
