Environment Committee on Oct. 30th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

I call the meeting to order.

Good morning, colleagues.

I'd like to thank our witnesses for joining us today.

Today's meeting is number 11 of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. It is taking place in a hybrid format and is in public.

We have witness testimony for the full two hours.

For those in person, please follow the health and safety guidelines for using earpieces, as written on the cards on the table.

The committee is resuming its study on the effectiveness, potential improvements and capability of Canada's 2030 emissions reduction plan.

This morning we are meeting with the following witnesses.

As an individual, we have Madame Catherine Potvin, emeritus professor at McGill University, who will be with us by video conference. Good morning, Ms. Potvin.

From the Assembly of First Nations, we have Wendell LaBobe, regional chief, Prince Edward Island, and Graeme Reed, strategic adviser, environment, lands and water. Welcome.

From Oceans North, we have Amy Nugent, associate director, marine climate action, who is with us by video conference.

Each witness has five minutes for their opening remarks.

For witnesses, when you see this yellow card, understand that there is one minute left for your opening remarks or one minute left for your response to questions. When I turn it over, that means the time is up and you'll have to stop talking shortly.

Ms. Potvin, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Catherine Potvin, Emeritus professor, McGill University, As an Individual]

Good morning, and thank you very much for inviting me to appear.

I will focus on two topics today. Let's start with forests, since that's my own research topic.

Globally, we can say and we know quite well that forests capture about a third of the world's carbon emissions. Forests are therefore a great help in the fight against climate change. However, scientists are very concerned about what's called the tipping point—the moment when forests become unable to cope with climate change and start emitting carbon dioxide instead of capturing it.

That leads me to remind members of what happened quite recently in Canada. In 2023, forest fires in Quebec contributed to producing more carbon dioxide than all human activities combined. Forests have thus become an enemy in the fight against climate change rather than an ally. No one will forget the 2024 wildfires, when the town of Jasper, a symbol of our country, burned down to a large extent. This year, in 2025, the forest fires were so intense in the Prairies and in British Columbia that, even in Quebec—and in the Maritimes, I believe—we could barely breathe for several weeks. We're not talking about just a few days.

The situation we find ourselves in this year is no longer the same as it was 10 years ago, in 2015, when Canada signed the Paris Agreement. We are in an extremely perilous situation, and all scientists agree that climate action must be accelerated. Unfortunately, when we look at Canada's emissions trends, we realize that we've reached a plateau: We're not reducing emissions, even though the 2030 plan was very well designed.

Together with a group of colleagues from across Canada, we launched an initiative called Dialogues for a Green Canada, which was formed before the Paris climate conference to suggest potential solutions. We would like to highlight six measures that could help Canada meet its targets—perhaps not by 2030, but at least get us back on track. We believe our proposals reflect the mindset of Canadians and the concerns they've expressed across the country.

In the context of major infrastructure projects, there is an urgent need to facilitate electric interconnection between provinces. Some Canadian provinces produce low-carbon electricity, while others do not. The latter could therefore benefit from exporting electricity from east to west or west to east. It's very important. That electricity could be powered by improved renewable energy production. I would like to point out that Alberta is the province with the greatest solar energy potential in Canada, making it an extremely attractive option. The same holds true for wind energy in the Maritimes.

Canada should also shoulder its responsibilities for rail transportation. We know very well that rail transportation is by far the most efficient mode of transportation for reducing greenhouse gas production and that it falls under federal jurisdiction. Rail interswitching is therefore desirable.

Canadians are currently deeply concerned about the cost of living. We believe Canada should support the changes people are making by helping them live in more energy-efficient homes and drive low-carbon cars. Such support would be achieved through regulation and financial incentives.

Canada must also consider international competition, because it is losing ground on that front. Indigenous leadership should be recognized, because most of the renewable energy initiatives come from our first nations. Investments in national security can also contribute to renewable energy initiatives. Finally, we cannot avoid thinking about justice and equity at this time, because it is Canada's poor who are suffering from the impacts of climate change and are unable to cope with them.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you for your remarks, Ms. Potvin.

Ms. Amy Nugent now has the floor.

You have five minutes.

[Amy Nugent, Associate Director, Marine Climate Action, Oceans North]

Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee, thank you so much for the invitation to appear before you today.

My name is Amy Nugent. As you said, I am here representing Oceans North. We are a Canadian charitable organization that supports marine climate action and marine conservation in partnership with indigenous and coastal communities.

With the longest coastline in the world, an exclusive economic zone of six million square kilometres and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence sea system linking the Atlantic Ocean to North America's industrial heartland, Canada's prosperity has always been tied to the sea. It's only natural to build upon that strength as we consider climate competitiveness today.

The communities Oceans North works with and in are also some of the most immediately impacted by climate change. From changing migration patterns for sea mammals and harvesting patterns for hunters to the 133 small craft harbours that sustained damage from hurricane Fiona in 2022, coastal and indigenous communities are at the face of exposure to climate change, as well as the loss of livelihoods that it threatens.

As I am sure the committee has heard over the last weeks, the emissions reduction plan was very far from perfect, but sector-specific pathways are essential for reducing emissions and supporting the long-term economic security and prosperity of Canada, including our coastal communities.

That said, the ERP contained few specific actions to support energy transition in the marine sector. It did, however, commit to developing a national marine climate action plan. It has yet to happen, so there is an opportunity now for members of this committee to call for actions and investment to support Canada's marine industries to commercialize and scale up zero-emission energy, fuels and technologies.

First, globally, ports increasingly are recognized as critical economic and energy infrastructure. The Government of Canada's projects of national interest list rightly highlights the need for port investments that expand the port of Montreal at Contrecoeur and address offshore wind in Nova Scotia and northern port development at Grays Bay in the western Arctic.

Let's be clear. This moment demands a lot more than expanding capacity only or supporting fossil fuel exports. The next round of nation-building investments must align port modernization with the clean energy transition.

Modern electrified ports are multipliers. They connect offshore wind to the grid, enable energy storage, connect rail and road transport, facilitate electrified cargo handling and support supply chains for zero-emission marine fuels. By designing ports as hubs for clean energy and fuels, we can maximize the value of federal infrastructure spending and create lasting economic opportunities.

Globally, our competitors are moving fast. China, the EU and India are electrifying ports to capture cleaner trade. The Global Maritime Forum projects that demand for hydrogen-derived shipping fuels like e-methanol and e-ammonia will exceed 500 million tonnes by 2040—a $1-trillion market and a large-scale job creator. If Canada does not act, our ports risk becoming destinations for the most polluting ships, and we will lose associated innovation opportunities in emerging clean fuel supply chains.

At a smaller scale, we have an immense and immediate opportunity to electrify fleets of ferries and workboats across the country. Electric vessels save money on fuel and maintenance, albeit today they are more expensive up front. They are quieter for workers. They also virtually eliminate air pollution for local communities, thereby improving human health significantly. These boats—fishing boats, tugs, tour boats, and pilot and Coast Guard vessels—can be designed, built, maintained and operated locally, supporting local economies.

Canada is well positioned for this opportunity today. We have abundant wind and solar resources, as my colleague just outlined. We have skilled workers and world-class ports. By embedding electrification, marine clean tech and zero-emission fuel infrastructure into our climate actions, Canada will both reduce emissions and support economic growth.

Thanks so much. I, of course, welcome your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much, Ms. Nugent.

Now the floor will go to the Assembly of First Nations for five minutes.

Mr. LaBobe, you have the floor.

[Wendell LaBobe, Regional Chief, Prince Edward Island, Assembly of First Nations]

Good morning. My name is Wendell LaBobe. I'm the P.E.I. regional chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

I'd like to acknowledge that we are here on the unceded, unsurrendered territory of the Algonquin nation. Thank you to the committee for the invitation to appear here today.

The AFN works on the basis of direction from the first nations in assembly, which has provided clear direction that urgent, transformative and rights-based climate action cannot be sidelined during efforts to advance economic security and competitiveness.

It is a shame that first nations voices cannot be here to contribute to this important study. The committee must hear directly from first nations rights holders, which includes extending the study.

To prepare for this appearance, we developed a technical submission outlining eight recommendations. In the interest of time, I'd like to speak to three broad themes capturing our recommendations: one, taking urgent, transformative action in line with our AFN national climate strategy; two, upholding free, prior and informed consent and the minimum standards of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and three, shifting to a new transformational approach rooted in mutual reciprocity between people and the land.

First, with regard to urgent and transformative climate action, in 2023, the first nations in assembly reaffirmed their declaration of a first nations climate emergency and endorsed the AFN national climate strategy. The AFN national climate strategy calls on the government to work with first nations to implement self-determined climate priorities, identifying seven priority areas and the concept of a first nations climate lens.

With the current focus on economic security and competitiveness, the government is at risk of backsliding on its climate commitments and on its commitments to reconciliation. This is a serous concern, given the state of climate emergency we are currently facing and Canada's history of making and then missing emissions reduction targets.

The year 2024 was the warmest on record, and it was the first calendar year that the average global temperature exceeded by 1.5°C its pre-industrial level. The government's new climate competitiveness strategy is being developed behind closed doors to focus on outcomes, not objectives, and technological solutions. This not only represents a shift away from the existing targets, but also neglects the long-standing call from first nations that climate policy must be done in direct partnership with first nations rights and title holders.

Second, because of free, prior and informed consent and the minimum standards of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the government has an obligation to work directly and in full partnership with first nations rights and title holders to implement first nations' climate priorities, including the development of emissions reduction plans. This is enshrined by our rights protected in section 35 of the Constitution.

Despite the intentions, direct engagement with first nations did not occur in the development of the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, the 2030 emissions reduction plan and the setting of the updated 2035 emissions reduction target. This concerning trend continues as the next iteration of federal climate policy and climate competitiveness strategy advances while first nations sit on the sidelines.

Crown governments cannot make decisions in the national interest without first nations directly at the table. Such an approach is incompatible with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, which clearly state that Canada must consult and co-operate with first nations to obtain their free, prior and informed consent.

Finally, we have the third theme: a transformational approach that includes first nations knowledge systems.

Over the last eight years, AFN has been working with first nations to develop the concept of a first nations climate lens. This concept has clear applicability to net-zero conversations, more specifically to emissions reduction plans, in three ways. First, net zero must not be interpreted as the end goal but be conceptualized as the process leading to a just, equitable and resilient future for our future generations founded on first nations' right to self-determination. Second, it challenges the mitigation dichotomy rampant in climate discussions by focusing on the complex and multi-dimensional nature of first nations climate solutions. Third, it shifts our focus towards the interrelationship between the three Cs—colonialism, capitalism and carbon—centring on an approach rooted in relationships that value the nexus of people, land and our mutual reciprocity. From this perspective, it's not just a global shift and movement away from the status quo but rather a revitalization of our value systems, value systems that connect to the land and nature laws that govern our interactions with all creation.

Canada is at a crossroads. The magnitude of the climate crisis requires a transformational shift in the approach that Canada and the world take to address the climate crisis. Instead of doubling down on the approach of climate competitiveness that invests in the same technological and market-based system that created this problem to begin with, we must see great potential for this committee to apply a first nations climate lens to the implementation of Canada's 2030 emissions reduction plan and all of Canada's climate policy going forward.

In closing, first nations' solutions could reframe the conversation and lead to transformative—

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you, Mr. LaBobe.

Thank you to all of the witnesses for their opening remarks.

We will now start with the Conservative Party and Mr. Ross for six minutes.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

My first question goes to Mr. LaBobe.

I read your document that you submitted to the environment committee. Thank you for that. It's very well written and very clear.

Prior to white contact, first nations did not have hospitals, highways, schools, medicine, phones, computers or even money, for that matter, so I'm quite interested to hear what the Assembly of First Nations means by saying that we have to return to the land. Can you expand on what that actually means?

[Graeme Reed, Strategic Adviser, Environment, Lands and Water, Assembly of First Nations]

I'll start. Meegwetch for the question.

That specific point comes from how we've worked to conceptualize a first nations climate lens, and ultimately from the problem that elders and knowledge-keepers have identified as the root causes driving the climate crisis we're faced with.

In that regard, what they say is that we're experiencing an imbalanced relationship with the natural world. What the centre of that—

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I get the high-level discussion.

The quality of life that's been afforded to all Canadians, not just aboriginals, is based on energy as a fundamental component. For returning to the land, I just want to know whether we're talking about the houses we dwell in, for example, or maybe the energy source. What specifically are we talking about by saying, “Let's return to the land”?

[Graeme Reed]

I think we're both talking in the practical of how we ensure that our energy systems, our health systems and our housing systems are efficient and responsive to the world around us. We're also talking in the conceptual about how we shift our mentalities toward really thinking about fulfilling our relationship to the natural world.

For instance, on this specific question, as we have put in our submissions, part of the desire that first nations have brought to this conversation is bringing up the living standard that first nations experience to be like the rest of Canadians' through—

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Chief, that's not the context. Maybe we're on different wavelengths here. I see returning to the land as meaning walking away from the 21st-century conveniences that have this standard of living, unless I'm misunderstanding the term “return to the land”.

Let's be clear. Before white contact, we were talking about fire as a major energy source for our cooking and heating. Is that the kind of context we're talking about?

[Graeme Reed]

No. I don't think in any of the conversations we've had with first nations that the interest is to completely separate from society. It's rather to ask how we can draw on first nations' knowledge systems to build systems that fulfill both of the obligations—those connected to the land and those ensuring that first nations have appropriate access to all of the other services that Canadians have more broadly, which we know doesn't occur currently. That's why we've emphasized closing the infrastructure gap. Part of this is about ensuring first nations' living standards are equal to those of the rest of Canadians.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Okay, good. Thank you for that.

The new Carney government started out with a promise to “build, baby, build” in response to Trump's pressure on Canada. It led to a number of different initiatives coming out, so I assume the presentation forwarded to us by the Assembly of First Nations is talking about putting limits on the build program for oil and gas projects, for example.

[Graeme Reed]

In the specific context of Bill C-5 and the overall objectives of Prime Minister Carney, our interest is very much to ensure that first nations have the authority and jurisdiction to make decisions on their lands and territories. That doesn't necessarily say we're prejudging a decision that first nations should make. Rather, we're saying that big projects need to be done with the full consultation—free, prior and informed consent—of first nations themselves.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

In the context of the emissions cap that might or might not be imposed—I'm reading through your document here; forgive me—it seems to me that the Assembly of First Nations is not terribly enthused with the emissions standards that will be proposed by the federal government. Am I correct in saying that?

[Graeme Reed]

I would broadly say, with the specific resolution 36/2023, first nations in assembly have reaffirmed a specific target, including a 60% reduction by 2030 and net zero by 2050. Our priority is to ensure that the action led by the federal government is reflective of the first nations in assembly call.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

That can vary by rights and title holders and treaty holders across Canada, who might not agree with that perspective, with or without federal policy. What do you say to the first nations that say an emissions cap will limit their economic future in terms of oil and gas projects?

[Graeme Reed]

I don't think we are trying to make a specific determination on how first nations are deciding what happens on their lands and in their territories. Really, the priority of self-determination is that first nations can make those decisions.

Our objective is very much to make sure there is sufficient action federally so that the impacts that first nations are facing don't continue to accelerate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thanks, Mr. Reed.

Go ahead, Mr. St‑Pierre.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Professor Potvin, at the end of 2024, you decided to leave the Quebec government's Advisory Committee on Climate Change. Can you explain the committee's role and why you decided to leave it?

[Catherine Potvin]

The role of the Advisory Committee on Climate Change is to advise the Quebec Ministry of the Environment on the way forward. I left because I was uncomfortable with the committee's timid approach.

When I left, I indicated that the situation was extremely urgent. The 2023 wildfires really traumatized me, because I could see and feel our fears materializing in terms of the climate tipping point. My job is to help people understand that we're headed for a tragedy, so I would have liked the committee to be bolder and more innovative in their thinking. Right now, we need to muster all of our efforts and imagination to get through this together.

My departure was a very personal decision. I fulfilled my mandate by staying for my three-year tenure. I decided not to continue.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

An article published in Le Devoir on October 8, 2024, quotes you as follows: “What we were trying to say—politely—is that Quebec's emissions reduction is practically nil.”

First, can you find that article and provide it to the committee? Second, please explain to us why Quebec's reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is practically nil.

[Catherine Potvin]

You're a Canadian committee, so I'll say that in Quebec—as across Canada—we have a major transportation problem. We're not relinquishing our love of the car, even though transportation is our second-largest source of greenhouse gases.

In both Quebec and Canada, we would expect governments to have meaningful regulations, ban combustion engines in the near future and ban advertising for cars. Yes, these ads sell a certain freedom and a way of life. However, it was done with cigarettes. Humphrey Bogart with his cigarette was encouraging people to smoke, and they realized that selling cigarettes was very bad and they were able to take some innovative steps. That's not being done, however, in the transportation sector—whether in Quebec or in Canada. Yet it must be done, and we are counting on you.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Since you're from Quebec, I'd like your opinion on the third link project. Would this project be a positive step towards reducing Quebec's greenhouse gas emissions?