Environment Committee on Nov. 29th, 2007

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

This is what the Montreal stock exchange told you?

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

Yes. I met with them three times. There was a very professional team, with a lot of experience in derived products. The city of Montreal has done a great deal of work on the environment, internationally. It has done very good work.

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

But will your visit to Bali not create problems, create uncertainty that will destabilize the clean development mechanism? The mechanism would be destabilized by your decision to force China, India and the U.S. to take part in—

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

I hope that, for the next period... If we want a protocol that generates real results, we need major emitters to take responsibility for their emissions.

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

Are you talking about the post-2012 period?

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

The periods from 2012 to 2020, and from 2020 to 2050.

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

You are not considering imposing targets for 2008 to 2012 on China and India.

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

We are talking about extending targets beyond 2012. The extension of measures beyond 2012 will be a priority in Bali.

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

How much time do I have left?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Mr. Lussier, thank you for reminding me that your time is up.

Mr. Harvey.

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

Mr. Minister, thank you for being here today.

I would like slide no 2 to be projected please.

Earlier on, the Bloc Québecois challenged the precision of the Australian statistics. I did some research at the Library of Parliament. I will quote some extracts from document PRB 07-04F, Electricity production in China: Prospects and global environmental effects. My friends across the way will no doubt appreciate it.

Pollution arising in China also affects Canada. A scientific study released in March 2007 showed that storms over the Pacific Ocean - the water mass that influences the climate on the west coast - are becoming more violent because of sulphur dioxide and particulate emissions from the large industrial polluters in the region, notably China and India. In addition, up to 50% of the mercury found in the Arctic may be windborne from Asia. Mercury enters the food chain, posing a threat to human health and to the wildlife of the Far North. Lastly, it is important to note that China, largely because of its dependence on electricity generated by coal-fired power plants, will become the biggest emitter of CO2 in the world by 2010, surpassing the United States. CO2 emissions attributable to coal-fired plants in China are increasing at an alarming rate and have now reached over 2,200 megatonnes (Mt) per year. [...]

Nowadays, we are no longer talking in terms of megatonnes, but in teratonnes.

According to the IEA reference scenario, China will account for 39% of increased global CO2 emissions between 2004 and 2030 as emissions from its coal-fired plants rise from 2,269 Mt in 2004 to 5,450 Mt in 2030. For purposes of comparison, Canadian greenhouse gas emissions in 2004 totalled 758 Mt. Some analysts maintain that if China and other emerging industrial economies do not succeed in controlling their greenhouse gas emissions, catastrophic climate change will become inevitable.

The figure shows the evolution of emissions from coal-fired power plants in China. With the 2,300 new plants that China is planning to build by 2020, the next spike will be approximately here, whereas Canada's, which is very small, will be down at the bottom.

Can you comment on this chart and say if this does indeed represent part of the policy that you and the Prime Minister are trying to implement in the industrialized countries? I think this relates directly to your chart.

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

Your Library of Parliament report emphasized the importance of everyone acting. In my opinion, we must also stress the importance of greenhouse gas reduction technologies, which already exist and which work.

Last week, I was in Weyburn, in Saskatchewan, and I saw concrete examples like carbon sequestration in the earth. This very significant technology can help not only Canada, the United States and other countries, but also big countries like China and India. Technology and ingenuity must be applied not only in Canada, but everywhere in the world. In some countries, there are more opportunities for using this kind of technology. This works in the Canadian west and in other regions of the world, and for example in certain areas in China.

Therefore, during the next meeting in Bali, talking about the importance of technology and working with the other countries will be a priority for us. We will promote these technologies and work with other countries, like at the AP7, where the forum was launched in Washington in September.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Harvey. Unfortunately, your five minutes are up.

Mr. Scarpaleggia.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Welcome, Minister.

Previous to today you seemed to be saying that we can't have aggressive targets if countries like the United States and China are not part of the Kyoto process, because production will shift offshore and greenhouse gas emissions will not change globally. Is that a correct understanding of the logic of that statement?

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

No. I said that if leadership means going first, that's why the Government of Canada has established a goal of an absolute reduction of 20% of greenhouse gas emissions in this country. What we want to ensure, though, is that we are tackling the problem, which is rising GHG emissions worldwide. They are rising. We have to stabilize them and then get them to go down.

What I don't want to see as a result of our efforts in Canada is coal-fired electricity generation being imported from the United States and thus no effect being had. What I don't want to see is Canadian companies buying steel from Chinese companies rather than producing it here, and having greenhouse gases continue to go up.

We need everyone on board. We need everyone with their oar in the water, and we need to be rowing together.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Isn't that another way of saying that our targets will be set at the lowest common denominator?

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

Not at all.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Okay.

You talked about push-back from public servants with respect to decisions by the former Liberal government to sign Kyoto. One could say that there has probably been push-back from public servants at Environment Canada to some of your statements or predictions. For example, in the National Post on August 22, Mike De Souza talked about a four-page briefing note to the minister that said nothing to support the minister's warnings that Bill C-288 could lead to massive job losses, rising energy prices, a recession, and so and so forth. That is just one example.

I am wondering what your officials tell you when all kinds of third parties, such as the Pembina Institute, the World Wildlife Fund, the National Energy Board, the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, and UNDP, come out with statements like the C.D. Howe did, which is that government is likely to miss its 2020 emissions target by almost 200 megatonnes, or when the Deutsche Bank says that the Canadian government has materially overstated the costs of Canada's compliance with Kyoto, etc. There must be a push-back inside the department then, isn't there?

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

I haven't had push-back from inside the department. I think the department has always demonstrated great professionalism toward me, as Minister of the Environment.

I think you're making some of this up, sir. You talk about a report from the United Nations Environment Programme. We have some comments from the press spokesman for the executive director. I've tabled--

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I said the UNDP, the United Nations Development Programme.

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

I thought you said the UNEP.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I'm sorry, maybe I mispronounced. But I'm certainly not making up the C.D. Howe Institute, the Pembina Institute, the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy. At some point your own public servants must have to comment on these reports. If they are that professional, I can't see them saying this is all fluff, Minister.

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

If there is any thought that the industrial regulatory strategy will account for the full 20%, then that would be the case. But we've never said that. What we have said is that this is one part of Canada's plan with respect to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is the biggest part, but we are working on an enhanced cap-A standard, moving to a mandatory section in the auto transportation sector. We want to move in conjunction with the federal government of the United States. The auto sector is very important in my province. My premier, Dalton McGuinty, doesn't want us to adopt the California auto standards. We are working with the United States on a raise in standards to something we hope will be approximate to that by 2017.

Those numbers aren't equated in any of the studies you've mentioned, nor are the significant number of projects we're supporting with $1.5 billion of funds to the provinces.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Mr. Chair, with any time I have left, I would like to--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

You have 20 seconds for a comment. You cannot share with Mr. Godfrey.