Environment committee  In fact, Canada just received an award from the Climate Scorecard, which rated us and gave us a score of 70% for what we've been doing on climate change. We're not perfect, and some are ahead of us, but we've certainly come a long way from where we used to be pre-2015. You've spoken about the cost of climate change. We've seen the insured cost of climate change go from an average of $400 million per year in Canada to about $2 billion.

Environment committee  It's clear that the only scenario where opposing climate action makes sense is if you don't believe that climate change will have real costs. However, the evidence is staring us in the face. Could you share with the committee the consequences of not taking action to address climate change by putting a price on pollution?

Environment committee  I also thank our friendly officials for being with us to answer important questions about the fundamental issue of fighting climate change. I am very happy to be here today to replace my colleague. In Longueuil, people are very concerned about fighting climate change. I will remind you that in 2019, my riding was the one where the Green Party obtained the highest rating in Quebec: 12%.

Environment committee  It is very clear, according to the science, that we've entered the era of climate change and that we have to play both offence and defence. We have to play offence in the sense that we have to put in place everything we can to reduce, as rapidly as possible, carbon pollution in Canada and around the world.

Environment committee  It will make it possible to achieve one-third of Canada's emissions reduction by 2030. Every day, Canadians see the costly impacts of climate change, from droughts and wildfires to flooding and atmospheric rivers. Climate change costs Canadian households an average of $720 a year, and that is set to rise, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, to $2,000 a year per household by 2050.

Environment committee  I'll be the first one to recognize that it is complex, and you want simple answers. I'm sorry. There's no simple answer when it comes to climate change or modelling.

Environment committee  Based on anything one can find in the literature, building additional fossil fuel infrastructure will increase emissions. The International Energy Agency says so. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says so. Putting public money into building the Trans Mountain expansion—this is the point about the U.S. Department of State analysis—particularly when the price of West Texas Intermediate is low, will actually increase emissions.

Environment committee  I've done some research and read some pretty interesting reports that have come out from international organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. These reports looked at how much Canada would need to invest in technology to be able to meet its targets without using carbon pricing.

Environment committee  He recommended: To improve the effectiveness of carbon pricing and the stringency of provincial or territorial large-emitter programs, Environment and Climate Change Canada should assess, on the basis of federal modelling, whether each provincial or territorial system is sufficiently stringent in that it would be expected to lead to reductions that correspond, at a minimum, to the projected emission reductions that would result from the application of the federal backstop system, and report publicly on the results of their analysis.

Environment committee  I don't know what you officials think about that. This progressive government says it wants to take action on climate change and develops an ambitious carbon pricing plan. It raises the price to try to get results, but at the same time, it continues to encourage the oil industry. We are talking about 116 million tonnes of greenhouse gases that will have to be eliminated, because they are going to be produced.

Environment committee  If you layer on top of that the cap on oil and gas emissions, these are clearly efforts to ensure that oil and gas does not pose an existential threat to the ability to achieve our climate change targets.

Environment committee  If you go to the Canada Post website, you can track where your parcel is and if it's being delivered. Why can't Environment and Climate Change Canada post on its website the complete carbon tax model that it has been using, so that Canadians, members of Parliament and everyone can see how far along we are in terms of reducing our emissions and how much of that is attributable to the carbon tax?

Environment committee  The way the modelling community tends to work is.... Obviously, there are different models out there. Let's talk specifically about climate change. What the modelling community is trying to do is work together to ensure that, despite the fact we are using different models—I mean, there aren't 15 of them out there, but there are some—we understand what the underlying elements are of each of those models so that, when different people use different models, we can at least agree on what goes into the models.

Environment committee  I knew you before you entered politics, and I know this is an issue you are committed to. However, you're not in the right country to be Minister of Environment and Climate Change. You're in a country where oil production carries on. You can come up with all kinds of strategies, but the fact remains that oil and gas accounts for 31% of Canada's overall greenhouse gas emissions, up from 28%.

Environment committee  Then I will continue with my next question. In particular, when you're looking at the cost of climate change, there's a lot of talk about not being able to estimate accurately what's going to happen, so we don't always see that balance. We know what it's going to cost—we can look at the price on pollution—but we aren't always able to estimate what it will cost if we don't take action.