Environment Committee on March 22nd, 2007

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

The initiatives we came forward with in the budget, the rebate for a hybrid or for an E85 ethanol car or van, certainly were not the first. This idea was from the Green Budget Coalition, a number of environmental groups that came forward to the government with the idea, and we said yes.

They're doing it in Manitoba. Gary Doer's NDP government is doing it in Manitoba. I think it's done in British Columbia as well, by the Liberal government there. And my only view is that, again rowing together, we can really get some steam behind our actions if we can pile on. So hopefully in Manitoba they'll have twice the incentive because the federal and provincial governments are working together.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

There's another $36 million for old vehicles under the scrap-it program.

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

Yes, I think the scrap-it program was again an idea brought forward by the Green Budget Coalition and the Clean Air Foundation. It is actually provides quick and immediate gratification for reducing greenhouse gases.

When we met with the auto industry and the union, in some of the meetings, the Canadian Auto Workers' president, Buzz Hargrove, told me it takes 37 new cars built today to equal the emissions of one car from 25 years ago. We can have a program that will assist in getting those old cars off the road, and that will encourage and provide an incentive for that type of behaviour.

Some in the industry are already doing it through the car heaven program, and GM has signed on. The Clean Air Foundation has some great ideas, which they're already doing now, on what we can do to partner with them so that we don't have to reinvent the wheel and we can go farther and faster.

Of course, the great benefit is that you get twin benefits for greenhouse gases and air pollutants, which represents the integrated approach that we like.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Thank you, Mr. Warawa.

Mr. Godfrey, for five minutes, in the second round.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you.

Welcome, Minister.

We're here this morning to talk about the environmental record of the Conservative government for the first year. We're using the mechanism of supplementary estimates to do so.

Mr. Warawa has suggested this has been a splendid record of 13 months, but I can't help making this observation before I ask my first question. Every time you suggest that you've only had 70 days to do something, it rather suggests that your predecessor didn't do much in all of the preceding days before the last 70.

Let me go to my question about the Canada Emissions Reductions Incentives Agency.

In your opening comments, you criticized the previous Liberal government for not making money available and not spending it. Last year this agency had available to it $25 million for the purchase of domestic credits generated in Canada by an offset system and $25 million for international credits generated in other countries that are parties to the Kyoto Protocol. In the spirit of vigorous spending and vigorous activity over the last 13 months, for each of the $25 million, how much money has been spent?

[Basia Ruta]

Mr. Chair, with regard to that particular agency, if that was the question, the decision of the government was to not spend any money. Essentially the whole organization was being wound down. We discussed this at the standing committee in October of last year.

The reason they're presented in the estimates is to provide a crosswalk, if you like, of what would have been spent had there been permission to go forward, but there was no permission.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

To summarize then, $50 million was set aside to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or to purchase credits, and no money was spent.

This brings me, Minister, to your general view on purchasing international emissions. In an interview you gave this week at the G8, I understand that you now seem to be changing your mind. Let me quite directly ask directly this question. Will Canada now participate in an international emissions trading system?

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

No.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

It will not.

What were you trying to say?

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

I think there are three different ideas, two are emissions based and one is non-emissions based.

One, I think the Russian hot air credits, which I've spoken extensively about, are not good enough for Canada.

Two, I have concerns about international trading. By taking taxpayers dollars, in the end we'd deal with the one challenge of greenhouse gas reductions and not the twin challenges of reducing smog and pollution, which I have concerns about. As well, Canada would be left behind in the green economy if all of our money went offshore. I prefer the same airshed.

I suppose the third area that could be related, but not quite as much, is the clean development mechanism that some people have asked me to consider. I've agreed to look at it, and I have looked at it. Only a very small number of megatonnes around the world are available in the ODA 2012 figure, and it really doesn't offer much for Canada.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

You're not ruling that out.

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

I wouldn't rule it out. Mr. Layton spoke to me about this and asked me to consider it a number of months ago, and I said I would, but I haven't reached a conclusion on it.

The CDM would represent more of a foreign aid approach, where there would be a noble public policy. If a different agricultural process in an African country could yield a reduction of greenhouse gases but also provide better agricultural output, that would have its own—It wouldn't be ODA-able, and it wouldn't come through CIDA, obviously.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I just want to be clear, because you always seem to return to these hot air credits. Yet the Commissioner of the Environment reports that in the 2005 plan the federal government acknowledged this and specified that it would recognize only green credits, requiring that all proceeds from the sale of surplus credits be reinvested in emission reduction activities. In other words, the previous government ruled out specifically the purchase of Russian hot air credits.

Why is it that you keep going on about something that was never planned in the first place?

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

Well, Canada signed the Kyoto Protocol. You voted for it, sir, and it specifically contemplated that. Canada's signature—

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

We explicitly said we would not do so, and you keep repeating it.

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

Your signature was explicitly on the document that said you wanted to do it. If you didn't agree with it, why did you sign it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Thank you, Mr. Godfrey.

We'll go on to Mr. Harvey, please.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

I find it unfortunate that we lost 22 minutes at the beginning of the meeting in an attempt to limit debate on this issue, and here we are, discussing all kinds of issues other than that which was to be our topic. That being said, I will mainly endeavour to ask questions and to listen to the answers given.

I was surprised to learn that the final amount spent by the previous Liberal government was 512 million dollars in the best year. Did I get it right?

[Basia Ruta]

More specifically, in 2005-2006, the expenditures relating to climate change initiatives amounted to approximately 512 million dollars.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Was that the best or the worst year?

[Basia Ruta]

We did not do an analysis for all of the previous years, but we did do one for the last three years. In 2005-2006, the amount was of 512 million dollars and it involved approximately four programs aimed at emissions, reductions for climate change, incentives for wind energy and partnerships. All of that is included in the estimates.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

I was also surprised to hear the minister remark upon the fact that certain provincial premiers are saying that this is the first time that they have seen a single dollar. Is that the case? Is this the first time that they are seeing money come from the federal government for the environment?

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

I made an announcement in Winnipeg alongside the Premier of Manitoba, who is not really a Conservative. A reporter asked him if all that was being announced simply amounted to the recycling of old programs, etc. His response was that he had never received a single dollar from previous governments. Those were his comments.

I also made an announcement the other day in the company of another premier, and he said the same thing, in other words that he was very happy because he had never received anything whatsoever from the federal government.

This served to underscore this Government's commitment to ensuring that there will be a much more open federalism in areas of shared jurisdiction between the federal government and the provinces. This is working in Manitoba, in Quebec, everywhere. This is working very well in my province. In fact, premier McGuinty was very pleased to be getting all of this money.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

What is the amount that is really being invested in the environment?

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

I'll preface the comments and I'll ask the ADM to respond.

The Environment, capital E, is a department; the environment, small e, is an important responsibility that is shared across the board, particularly with the Department of Health, the Department of Transport, Parks Canada, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. It's also with Infrastructure, when we look at public transit. It's also with Natural Resources, which plays a huge role—obviously energy and the environment have a huge correlation. I can go on. It's incredible. Fisheries and Oceans obviously has a very strong environmental mandate, as does Agriculture.