Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on Feb. 8th, 2007

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think your comments said one thing, and now Mr. Dion...when he speaks to these issues, all you can hear is a beeping sound like a truck backing up. We want to see economic growth in this country.

Ralph Goodale, when he was Minister of Natural Resources—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Can you answer one of my questions, though--just one?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

You had your chance to speak and now I get my chance.

Mr. Goodale spoke with great joy about the capacity of the Canadian economy to sell oil into the United States. I have all the quotes here. Mr. McGuinty is nodding his head. Last time he said my quotes were wrong. I got up and gave all the references and they were all correct.

Mr. Goodale spoke very passionately about the desire—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Targets 2012, targets 2050, targets 2020--what are they?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We will be coming out in short order with our industrial targets and they will be significant.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Okay, we'll cut it off there.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming today.

I want to confirm with you, Minister, that indeed Mr. Boyd did give some testimony, and one of his items of testimony was the grading of the Liberal performance over the last 13 years: he gave them a big, fat F. I also want to confirm that he was not aware of how Bill C-30 expands the government's powers, more particularly, that it includes indoor air and other things.

I've asked the clerk to send on to him the deck that gives him that information so he'll be better informed in the future.

Minister, I know we've talked several times, and you know I'm from the oil sands region. I've lived there for 38 years. I know it might be a bit of a surprise to you, but my children live there, they breathe the air, they drink the water, and all my friends and family are there. Even the oil sands workers themselves, their families are there, and we're very concerned about water and air quality across Canada.

In talking to them, which I've been doing for two or three years now, ever since I had this job, the biggest concern they have had is the mixed signals coming from the Liberal government. They've spent billions on scrubbers, they've spent billions on water monitoring and air monitoring, but they have had no clear signal. What they have wanted and what they have told me is they want to know where the government wants them to go in the future. So I applaud you, for the people of Fort McMurray and for the industries there, on your initiatives.

My first question is in relation to cleaning up the legacy of polluted sites that we have across the country. I know that initially one of the first announcements this government came out with was on the Sydney tar ponds cleanup, which is a great initiative, but we have tens of thousands of other sites across Canada like that. I'm wondering, since it does apply to so many Canadians and so many Canadians are worried about it, can you give us some idea if your initiatives are going to be including some segment of cleaning up sites across Canada, like you did more recently this month?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

That is certainly something that has my attention.

I will be meeting later today with the mayor of Hamilton. I'm told the second hottest spot is the Hamilton Harbour, near the two steel mills. That certainly causes me great concern. It's something that has my active attention.

My big focus has been on Bill C-30, climate change and clean air, because I think Canadians are telling us they want action on that. They don't want to hear talk; they want to see action.

I think we need to demonstrate that this Parliament can get the job done. Given that it's a minority Parliament, everyone is going to get their first choice of public policies. If we work together, we can come up with a realistic, concrete plan that will deliver for Canadians.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Excellent.

I was surprised, quite frankly, when I had the first read of Bill C-30 and looked at the multi-functional approach we have. I mean, we have possible legislation for a domestic trading system; tools to accomplish practical reductions, even with indoor air; and air monitoring for the first time, across Canada, which is a fantastic initiative.

What tool in our bag of Bill C-30 tools do you believe to be the most effective for reaching our goal of cleaner air and less greenhouse gas emissions?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

This certainly has my active attention. I hope we'll be able to come forward in short order--in the next month or two--with specific proposals, not just on the industrial targets, but the consequences if you don't meet them. There's another bill in the House, from Mr. Rodriguez, which doesn't have a lot of consequences.

I believe that compliance mechanisms are important. We're looking at various proposals, and we'll come aboard in short order. We want them, though, to have some teeth and to deal with the challenge we have on the graph in front of us.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Excellent.

I know one of your proudest achievements is that you passed the Federal Accountability Act--the toughest anti-corruption legislation in the history of Canada. Now you're cleaning up Canada's environment.

What do you find to be the biggest challenge in your new role as Minister of Environment, especially regarding your mandate from the Prime Minister on Bill C-30?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think the big challenge is going to be working with people in different political parties. I learned with the Federal Accountability Act that you could separate the politics from the public policy. For example, I think we had a good working relationship with Stephen Owen, who came forward with clear proposals and ideas. In working with Mr. Martin, the NDP, and with Mr. Sauvageau, I think there was a commitment to get a job done. I think we were able to deliver for Canadians.

If this was a great accomplishment for this Parliament, to see a substantive act passed last year on the Federal Accountability Act, and we could repeat that this year with the Clean Air Act, it would be an accomplishment. For all of us, regardless of what region or political background we come from, it would be a clear demonstration that we could make a minority Parliament work.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

We'll cut it off there.

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I would just remind folks to go through the chair when it's appropriate.

Mr. Lussier, you have five minutes.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you minister, and welcome.

You initially ruled out the possibility of having a carbon tax, and by extension the possibility of having a polluter-pay policy. You then ruled out the possibility of having an international carbon exchange, and as a result, there will be no global emissions credit trading.

But what about the fact that interprovincial trading would be possible if a carbon exchange was set up in Montreal? Do you have a timeframe for this? Is that still included in your plans? Are there any regulations currently being drafted concerning the much-talked-about domestic carbon exchange?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We're not looking at a carbon tax. I know one of the leaders in the Liberal Party has proposed that. That doesn't mean we don't embrace the idea of “polluter pays”. We think we can achieve that through compliance mechanisms. I think that is important. That's certainly something I hear.

One of the concerns I had with the previous Liberal government's plan is that the public purse would pick up the difference of anything more than $15 for a tonne of carbon. There was nothing in the fiscal framework, so it would be a huge contingent liability for Canadian taxpayers. I don't agree with that. That would violate the notion of “polluter pays”.

We are not looking at an international carbon market. I am very open to a domestic carbon market, and I know there is a considerable interest in Montreal on that.

The real answer to your question is yes, we are open to hearing your ideas.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Do you have a timeframe for the implementation of a Montreal-based market? Would it be in 1 year, in 10 years?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

The notice given to industry on regulations states that it will be implemented in a couple of years. So we'll have to set up a regulatory monitoring system for industry. We don't have much time.

We will come forward in short order, certainly in the next month or two, with our specific short-term targets for industry. We think it's important. With that, we'll have to obviously come forward with some proposals with respect to compliance mechanisms, and one of them could include a domestic trading system. I know Montreal has spoken with great interest, as has Toronto, as have other areas. Certainly, we'll be coming forward with something like that in short order.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Would you agree that many companies in Quebec have made an ongoing effort to reduce greenhouse gases, and are eligible for carbon credits? Since those companies are ready to trade carbon credits, financial opportunities will be missed over the next few weeks and months. If we wait two more years before establishing a carbon exchange in Montreal, those companies will continue to operate in a climate of uncertainty.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Certainly the notion of credit for early action is something that is before us. Mr. Cullen, from the NDP, has raised this issue. Some sectors have led on this issue more than others. So credit for early action is certainly something that's in front of us.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Baird, here I have a report published by the Fraser Institute, which states that the priority is dealing with greenhouse gases, not air quality. Are you aware that the target of reducing pollutants... Here, I have the results for four major cities: Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Vancouver. Ambient air in those cities is acceptable; it meets the standards. So, why is it so urgent that we undermine the greenhouse gas issue by introducing air quality as a factor? Are we on the wrong track in targeting air quality? The global priority is to deal with greenhouse gases, to deal with climate change. I am linking climate change to the use of fossil fuels, therefore—

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I also consider reducing greenhouse gases in Canada a priority. That is very important. But I'm also listening to the needs of Canadians in my riding and in all parts of the country, to whom air quality is also an important issue. We understand that global warming is the predominant global environmental issue, and we accept responsibility to take tangible action here in Canada.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

[Editor's Note: Inaudible ] wants to reduce its dependence on gasoline?

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

We'll move to Mr. Manning for five, please.

[Fabian Manning, Conservative, Avalon, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome here with us this morning, Minister.

Minister, the lack of inaction in reaching the Kyoto targets is a concern. There were targets for 2008 and 2012. We have the leader of the opposition stating recently that we could not meet those targets. Still, we had a motion before the House the other night to meet the targets. I'm just trying to find out how we're planning to spend billions of dollars in Russia to buy our way out of meeting our Kyoto targets right here in Canada.

What's the government's plan when it comes to dealing with these hot air credits?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I don't support spending money on hot air credits in Russia, where no greenhouse gas emissions will actually be reduced. It would just be credit for past actions. I think Canadians want us to take real actions here at home to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

When we take an integrated approach, we can hit two birds with one stone. That would mean that we could both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and deliver cleaner air. That's a huge priority for a parent with an asthmatic child or for the elderly.

I represent a lot of senior citizens, and on some days they can't go out of their homes because of the air quality in this city. I'm the youngest member of the cabinet, but when I was first elected we didn't have smog days in Ottawa. Ten or twelve years ago we had pretty clean air, but increasingly we're having problems. I think Canadians want to take action on both.

I used the example of the coal-fired generating station at Lakeview. By closing it down, we were able to make a substantive reduction in greenhouse gases, and at the same time and for the same amount of money we were able to reduce pollution—NOx and SOx, smog. That gives a greater benefit to human health.

So why not take the integrated approach here in Canada, where we can deal with the number one global problem with the environment and the number one domestic health problem with respect to the environment? It just makes sense.

Now, some people will continue to support spending billions of dollars of taxpayers' money abroad. They can have that field to themselves. I don't think it's one that Canadians support. They'd like to see an integrated approach.

I think you are very right, Mr. Manning, when you talk about how cynical the public is. They've heard a lot of talk for a lot of years on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they've seen nothing delivered—nothing. If you look at the chart up there, nothing. If you look at the actions in place in the last 10 years, nothing.

This is not a new issue. This is an issue that was first defined in Rio de Janeiro at the Earth Summit when Jean Charest was the Minister of the Environment and Brian Mulroney was the Prime Minister. But nothing happened—nothing.

I agree totally with the deputy leader of the Liberal Party when he said to the former environment minister that we didn't get it done; Canada didn't get it done. But what Canadians want to see are results. They want to see specific action that's realistic and attainable.

I think in the course of the next two months the government will do its part, and this committee has to accept its responsibility as well. We look forward to delivering for Canadians.