Jenna Jessop
"Ottawa's endorsement of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty should be reflected in the decisions we make as a City. For me, that means gradually reducing our reliance on fossil fuels while making sure the transition is practical and affordable for residents.
The City can lead by example by moving its own buildings, vehicles and transit toward cleaner energy as infrastructure and equipment are replaced. At the same time, we should be looking for opportunities to grow renewable energy here in Ottawa, including solar and energy storage on City property and supporting responsibly located renewable-energy projects.
We also need to make it easier for residents to make that transition themselves. Better public transit and active transportation can reduce our dependence on cars, while EV charging infrastructure, home energy-efficiency programs and support for technologies like heat pumps can give people more affordable alternatives to fossil fuels.
These choices also need to be considered when we make major long-term investments. If we are building infrastructure that will be around for decades, we should be thinking about whether it moves us toward our climate commitments or locks us into greater fossil-fuel use.
Many of the biggest decisions around energy and fossil-fuel production are outside municipal control, so Ottawa also needs to continue working with the provincial and federal governments. We should focus on the decisions we can make locally while advocating for the funding and broader policy changes needed to make the transition possible."
David Purchase
"Ottawa supported the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2022. I understand what it's trying to accomplish, but I think we need to be realistic about what Ottawa can actually do and what belongs with the federal and provincial governments.
For the City, I would start with our own operations. We already track our emissions, so use that information to figure out where we're wasting energy and where changing something would actually make a difference. If one of our buildings is costing us too much to heat and operate, that's worth looking at. An upgrade that lowers emissions and saves taxpayers money over time makes sense to me.
I don't think we should start throwing out vehicles or equipment that still have years of useful life just to meet a target. Use them, maintain them and replace them when the time comes. At that point, look at what makes sense based on the technology, the cost and how the vehicle is actually used.
I would also want residents to be able to see whether we're making progress. Not another big report that nobody reads. Show what the City changed, what it cost, what we're saving and whether emissions actually went down. If something isn't working, change the approach instead of continuing to spend money on it.
What I don't support is continually shifting more of the responsibility onto individual residents. People still have to heat their homes and get to work. Ottawa should be doing a better job with the things the City itself owns and operates, while pushing the other levels of government to deal with the much larger parts of this issue that fall under their responsibility."
~~
Response in French Provided by the Candidate
"Ottawa a appuyé le Traité de non-prolifération des combustibles fossiles en 2022. Je comprends l'objectif, mais il faut aussi être réalistes sur ce qu'Ottawa peut faire elle-même et ce qui relève plutôt des gouvernements fédéral et provincial.
Je commencerais par les opérations de la Ville. On mesure déjà nos émissions, alors servons-nous de cette information pour voir où on gaspille de l'énergie et où un changement peut vraiment faire une différence. Si un bâtiment municipal coûte trop cher à chauffer ou à faire fonctionner, regardons ce qu'on peut améliorer. Si les travaux réduisent les émissions et permettent aussi d'économiser à long terme, ça a du sens.
Je ne veux pas qu'on commence à remplacer des véhicules ou de l'équipement qui peuvent encore servir pendant plusieurs années simplement pour atteindre une cible. Entretenons-les et utilisons-les jusqu'au moment où ils doivent réellement être remplacés. À ce moment-là, on regarde ce qui existe, combien ça coûte et ce qui répond vraiment aux besoins de la Ville.
Les résidents devraient aussi pouvoir voir si on avance réellement. Pas besoin d'un autre gros rapport que personne ne va lire. Montrons ce qui a changé, combien ça a coûté et si les émissions ont réellement diminué. Si quelque chose ne fonctionne pas, on ajuste notre approche.
Je ne veux surtout pas que la réponse soit de toujours transférer plus de responsabilités aux résidents. Les gens doivent chauffer leur maison et se rendre au travail. Ottawa devrait commencer par mieux gérer ce qui lui appartient, pendant que les autres niveaux de gouvernement s'occupent des décisions beaucoup plus importantes qui relèvent d'eux."