Environment Committee on Jan. 28th, 2008

[John Drexhage]

I will absolutely agree with you in terms of the conservative estimations coming out of the IPCC reports. As a result, one of the very interesting recommendations that came from the national round table last week was how we need to develop our adaptive policy-making within the government. I'm not talking about adapting to the impacts of climate change. I'm talking about the fact that it is very realistic to assume that the clarion call for doing something about climate change, and that we need to do it more and more urgently, will only increase because of these things.

Another thing you need to keep in mind is that all the research that was reflected in the fourth assessment report is, by definition, by its mandate, already two years old. So we haven't been able to take into account the latest evidence that's coming out on this over the last two years.

Six months ago I can remember representative Bigras asking me about two degrees, and I honestly told him that in terms of turning the energy juggernaut, it doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense. That reality still hasn't changed. What has changed is the environmental side of it now. It's becoming clearer and clearer that we are heading into something that none of us are ready for and that we really do have to take this two degrees seriously, and that it does call for huge sacrifices on the part of the Canadian economy. But let's not get fooled. It calls, at the same time—and we have to have all our cards on the table--for the same kinds of commensurate actions by major developing economies, and we have this decade to sort it out.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Is it your sense that in Bali, for example, the reluctance of this government to support strong action was a result of a fundamental unwillingness to believe that the problem is serious and real? It strikes me, when I hear that report.... I'm anxious to hear more about that situation of the coral in the Caribbean, as I said. But if it's true--and you have scientists who have studied it--if they're saying that half the coral in the Caribbean died in 2005 because of the heat, and that it was the hottest year on record, we ought to be damned alarmed about that and scared to death. It ought to cause us to be very anxious and very willing to take action.

I don't see that from this government.

[John Drexhage]

Fair enough, but at the same time.... Far be it for me to be reading the minds of the government or government members, but I think the real reluctance behind it is this whole business of developing and developed country engagements. Why don't we call them at it, then? If in fact the governments are reluctant to take on stronger actions, why not take the lead? In fact one country, South Africa, actually has. Just a couple of weeks ago their ruling party recommended mitigation targets for South Africa. They have taken the first step.

So yes, I think it would be appropriate for Canada and some other countries to also begin taking some steps in the right direction.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I have less than a minute. I'll let it go.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Thank you.

Mr. Bigras.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be sharing my time with Mr. Lussier.

I have two or three questions to ask. My first one is for Mr. Jarvis Lavoie.

Like parliamentarians, you were not invited to participate in the Canadian delegation in Bali. However—I don't know if you know this; if not, I will tell you—others were. I am thinking of the petroleum giant, EnCana Corporation of Calgary. It was invited by the government to join the Canadian delegation.

How do you feel about the fact that parliamentarians, youth and non-profit organizations were not invited to join the Canadian delegation, but that EnCana Corporation of Calgary was?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

This disturbs us and makes us very uncomfortable. I'm going to talk on behalf of Canadian youth in particular. We came up against the lack of openness of this government at the 13th Conference of the Parties in Bali.

It was impossible to meet with the minister. We met the Canadian delegation and that is the only meeting that we were able to obtain. Right from the outset, we got the feeling that we were being put in our place. The attitude was one of condescension and we found it very difficult not to be consulted.

This tells us that there is a problem and that it must be corrected. We also need the help of all of the members of the committee to correct this problem.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Just like you, this disturbs me, but it also worries me because it means that the big oil interests were represented in Bali within the Canadian delegation, whereas parliamentarians were unable to make their voices heard within that same delegation. Those members of civil society whose task is to protect Canada's and Quebec's environmental interests were not represented either. In my opinion, this is very worrisome.

I will move on to my second question. Mr. Henderson, you spoke about the carbon market. We were very happy to read the report of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy which was released last week. It stated that a price had to be set for carbon and that there had to be a carbon market in the form of a tax or a carbon exchange. However, Canada clearly indicated in Bali, in particular, that it did not intend, in the second phase of cuts, to introduce mandatory 25% to 40% reductions of the 1990 level by the year 2020.

You spoke about uncertainty earlier. What is it that creates uncertainty around a future Canadian carbon market? We should remember the declaration made by Mr. Ivo de Boer about a month and a half ago, when he clearly said before the international community that a carbon market could disappear as quickly as it was created.

In looking at the current situation, I note that there is a gap between the European position and the Canadian position. Will this gap not be a drag on the capacity of Canadian businesses to do business on the international market, and more particularly on the European market, which will represent over $70 billion in the course of the next few years?

Will Canada's position and the weakening of Canada's position internationally not mean that Canadian businesses will run the risk of losing important market share?

[Christopher Henderson]

There are three points I'd make in response to your question, briefly.

Should there be a set price for carbon? The price of carbon you can do two ways: you can set a price for carbon, or create a demand for carbon offsets on the basis of a regulatory regime.

Again, my third point was innovation. Therefore, most businesses and most members of the EXCEL Partnership like the idea of a market-based carbon instrument but understand that you have to drive that to some regulatory basis. I also said there needs to be a short term and a long term. So read into that that we have to make a transition from an initial set of regulations, and over time you're going to strengthen those.

The challenge for business obviously has been in a competitive context: how do you do that across economies, especially with other countries? That's why some aspects of the sectoral targets in the Bali discussions were useful. So we do need a carbon market, and we do need a market to drive carbon offsets. I would suggest that pegging a price is not the most effective way. It's not as innovative as you would get if you created a demand for carbon offsets by having some manner of regulatory regime that changes over time and really recognizes that capital stock investment has to take place.

In terms of the trading regime, and if we don't do this, do we have a barrier to trade relative to other economies that are acting under the protocol, such as in Europe, I don't think so, in the short term. I can't see how it will evolve. But the reality is that businesses would rather have clarity for capital investment, and business is global; therefore, business would rather have us keep pace with a global movement to act, rather than stand back.

So I would say an open market is better, with more innovation, and drive it with the regimes that you create. Just make sure that they recognize competitive realities too.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Monsieur Lussier, you have about four minutes.

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

Mr. Henderson, I would like to continue in the same vein. Among the businesses you represent today, there are oil companies and large corporations such as Alcan. How do you manage all of these businesses in light of the fact that the target date of 1990 was changed to 2006? Some businesses in your group made very big efforts from 1990 to 2006 and these will disappear.

How do you manage that with your partners?

[Christopher Henderson]

It's a good question. As I said in my opening remarks, we're not a lobbying organization; the companies represent their own positions. But from a learning standpoint of sustainability, we can say that having clarity and acting sooner makes better sense because you can do the right things in terms of investment.

I can tell you that seven years ago, when we were looking at the credit for the early action regime, our companies asked to be given credit for acting early, but that went by the way-boards. That's not going to be on the table.

We're less concerned about how the market affects individual companies than about creating a market where all companies can be innovative. A company with major emissions, like in the oil and gas sector, is going to have a certain target regime, but certain opportunities are inherent in that too. If we crave clarity in the market and allow companies to be innovative, innovative things will happen, carbon sequestration being one example.

So we don't necessarily see how one company is acting versus another; we're just saying let's all be innovative.

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

Very well, but Alcan made considerable efforts and reduced its emissions by perhaps 18%. In my view, it should have accumulated credits. The businesses that increased their greenhouse gas emissions have no credit and owe a debt to society.

How do you manage these two partners in your organization?

[Christopher Henderson]

I understand, but we have a problem because...

how do you look at the flow of emissions over time? What is the nature of the baseline? How do you bank credits if you get them? It's a very tricky situation.

A company like Alcan clearly says they should receive credit for this. I understand that and personally would support that. The reality is that we have to figure out--as Wayne Gretzky says--where the puck is going, versus where the puck has been.

So we're tending to focus now on creating a market and a go-forward future.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Bevington, please.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's been an interesting discussion and I thank you, witnesses, for coming here today. We heard of many of these things attached to the Bali conference, and certainly from the youth delegation.

When you said you couldn't meet with the minister, how did you ask for a meeting with the minister?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

We had an outreach group. We were broken up into groups. I can personally testify to having asked the minister at a cocktail reception whether or not he would meet with Canadian youth. He refused, with a grin on his face that pretty much told me there was no chance of that whatsoever, on the basis that he said one youth had come up to him and been very unpleasant. We've not been able to identify that youth, and there are 32 of us. That was about it. That was about a week and a half into the conference, and we had been trying and trying.

Different members of the delegation had been sending e-mail. We couldn't even submit a petition with more than 60,000 signatures to the minister, let alone have a meeting with him. He wouldn't even take a piece of paper with 60,000 names on it. So I don't know how better to describe our relations with the minister's office.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So did you come up with another strategy to get your point of view across at the conference?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

We had multiple strategies to begin with. We had media strategies that involved creative actions, making placards, getting out where there would be cameras and trying to frame the messaging of what we wanted to see happen at the conference. So we used the media.

We also had meetings with the international youth delegations. We were dealing with Australians, Americans, people from Europe and Africa, and the Indonesians. We were talking to members of official delegations from other countries. I told you we met with the ministers of the environment from the United Kingdom and three Canadians provinces. We were doing the best we could to use all strategies.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So I think it would be safe to say that in failing to meet with you, the minister probably was negligent in gaining an ally, moving forward, and presenting a stronger Canadian position. Would you say that was the end result of what happened there?

[Olivier Jarvis Lavoie]

Yes, he did. He reinforced a very negative image of his commitment to youth--at the very least--and to climate change in general.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay, thanks.

Mr. Henderson, you talk about a number of things in here. One of the things you said last spring is that you met on Parliament Hill with the environment minister, the deputy ministers from five departments, and the opposition leader. Did you attempt to meet with the other two parties on Parliament Hill?

[Christopher Henderson]

We might have. I'll have to check the record. We had them here for one day. We packed it in and then went from--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

It didn't seem all that important to you to meet with two parties that represent about 30% of the voting population?