Environment Committee on April 2nd, 2009

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

That's a very important point. We are aspiring to the highest attainable environmental standards in terms of our tailpipe emission standards.

Sometimes an assumption is made, on the part of people who have not worked through the detail, that the California standards necessarily yield higher environmental benefits when translated to Canada. Shortly after I became the minister, I asked to see the analysis on this fact. While there's certainly opportunity for debate about this, what I've seen technically tells me that because the fleet mix is different—we have a different percentage of trucks versus cars in Canada compared to California—if you apply the California standards in Canada, you don't get better environmental outcomes. In certain circumstances, you could get worse environmental outcomes.

The reason is that the California vehicle mix is, as I recall, 70% cars and 30% trucks. Trucks are essentially a free rider, if you will, under the California standard. When you come to Canada, where we drive a larger percentage of trucks--namely, 60%--you suddenly introduce a variable that the California standard doesn't yield higher outcomes. You have to look quite specifically at each province and the percentage mix.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

We're going to start off our five-minute rounds with Mr. Scarpaleggia.

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

Thank you.

Welcome, Minister.

I had put in a request for information, through Mr. Warawa, for some data on how much the Canadian government has invested in water and waste water treatment over the last few years. Given that we have very limited time, would you be able to table that information?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

I can respond quite quickly to your question.

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

I'd rather get on to something else. Perhaps you could just leave the information with the clerk. I appreciate the efforts you've made to get that information for me.

Also, I had asked your office for briefing notes on the Devils Lake outlet a couple of weeks ago. I still have not received that. I assume it's a bit of an oversight.

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

The Devils Lake note I have requested. It certainly will be available to you quickly. And I will ensure that you receive the sewage treatment infrastructure funding numbers.

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

I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

You said at the beginning that Mr. Obama's climate change plan matches precisely what your government has been proposing. This brings me to the issue of how much money the U.S. government will be raising by selling credits to industry so that those industries that are above their cap can compensate. It is estimated that the U.S. government will raise $300 billion selling credits to industry.

Would you call that a tax?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

I would say, firstly, from the figures I've seen in the Obama budget, that the climate change revenue--as I recall, that's their term in the bill, “climate change revenue”, so you'll have to discuss with them whether they consider it a tax or not--is estimated in the year 2012 to be $78.7 billion.

I've only seen reference to the $300-billion figure as...issues that some economists have taken with the projections in the American budget. They've said it could be double or triple what the President assesses.

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

I'll grant you the $78.7 billion, yes, but that's still money that's being taken out of U.S. industry and going into U.S. government coffers.

In fact, when your party was in opposition, the environment critic at the time, Bob Mills, who chaired this committee very honourably for a number of years after your party came to power, said--at a time when our government wanted to bring in some cap and trade regulations--that any regulation to curb greenhouse gas emissions was a tax. He said that quite clearly.

What I'm getting to, I guess, Minister, is that we're hearing persistent rumours that your government will be launching some attack ads against our leader on the issue of environmental taxes. I'm wondering if you agree with that approach, especially given that all the measures that are being contemplated to improve the environment around the world involve some kind of sacrifice on the part of businesses and consumers.

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

That's a very specific question that I would like to answer, Mr. Chairman, so I will.

What I am struck by, sir, is the incongruity between statements your leader has made about workable, realistic climate change plans and the fact that yesterday in the House of Commons your party supported what I refer to as the “tiddlywink” bill. That's Bill C-311, the bill that was put forward by the NDP.

Frankly, the bill contains unworkable and impractical targets that are completely unachievable in the Canadian context. We know, from the economic analysis that was done, that even in a good economy, the minus 6% by 1990....

I'd like to carry on with my response, Mr. Chairman.

The Kyoto Protocol called for Canada to reduce its targets by 6% from a 1990 base. This legislation calls for a minus 25% reduction. It is completely impractical. It's so impractical that Mr. McGuinty actually suggested that it was fiscally irresponsible because there was no accompanying plan. As he put it, we might as well be sitting at a table with Monopoly money and tiddlywinks.

And so this is the tiddlywink bill. It is completely impractical. Your party has supported it in the House of Commons. You have no idea how this is going to be made. You have been critical of it yourselves.

I think that is something that Canadians will be interested in.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Order.

It is 10 o'clock, Mr. Minister, and I know you have....

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Just before we break, if I could, Mr. Chair--

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Only if it's a point of order.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

It's a point of order. Just for clarification--this is not on anything the minister has said--could the minister respond to the committee and just let us know whether or not there is a North American energy working group?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

That's not a point of order. You can carry on when we get into the next round of questioning.

The minister, I know, has to leave. He has a 10 o'clock appointment.

I'll allow you to depart, Minister. I appreciate your coming.

We'll continue on with our rounds with the deputy minister.

Mr. Shugart, if you wish to call anyone to the table to assist you, you're more than welcome to.

Again, thank you, Mr. Minister.

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you members of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

If you are ready to continue on with the rounds, Deputy Minister, I'd appreciate that.

Mr. Warawa, you're next in the cycle, so I'll turn the floor over to you for five minutes.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I'll wait until the officials get sitting down.

[Ian Shugart, Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment]

In the interests of time, Mr. Chairman, I wonder if while that is happening I could introduce my colleagues to the committee.

With me today is Peter Sylvester, CEO of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. You've met before. Also here today is Alan Latourelle,

who is the director general of the Parks Canada Agency. He has had this position for quite some time already.

Cynthia Wright is the assistant deputy minister of the environmental stewardship branch. Cynthia, in her branch, has a large number of the programs and the regulatory activity in the department. Mike Beale is the associate ADM in that same branch, heavily involved in our climate change policy.

I also have other colleagues here, Mr. Chairman, and I'll perhaps draw on them as the committee has questions.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Warawa, I'll start the clock now.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is going to be regarding parks and what is happening in parks, because the minister is responsible for Environment and Parks Canada. But before I ask the question specifically on parks, I want to share with the committee the following.

I also just came back from Washington, D.C. I was with GLOBE International. They shared the importance of harmonizing standards. There are so many different standards internationally that it will be impossible to achieve a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without harmonizing standards. That's exactly what we're seeing happen with the clean energy dialogue ongoing with the United States and also the announcements that we've heard even yesterday and this morning from the minister elaborating on the commitment to harmonize our standards for vehicle efficiency.

Mr. Chair, they also shared the importance of the smart electricity grid. They went on and talked about transformative technologies like carbon capture and storage, renewable fuel standards, including cellulosic ethanol, energy efficiencies and nuclear, and on and on. I was so proud to represent Canada, because that is exactly the direction we're going in, and they were very optimistic. Even China was at the table when Mr. Ouellet was in Berlin with me.

So this is now two years later. We met in Washington, D.C. with GLOBE International. Unfortunately, the tiddlywink bill is going in a totally different direction and is out of date. Internationally, we're moving together, harmonizing standards and coming up with very stringent targets, which include the major emitters. Of course, the tiddlywink bill does not include China and major emitters.

My question is regarding parks. Of course, when we became the government, within weeks we, along with the Province of British Columbia, announced our commitment to the Great Bear Rainforest and the Nahanni National Park Reserve. We have made a strong commitment to parks right across the country. Also, in Quebec there has been a lot of work in parks.

Mr. Shugart, or maybe Alan, could you share with us what is happening in the budget specifically regarding commitments to parks?

[Alan Latourelle, Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency]

This is one of the most challenging but also exciting periods for Parks Canada. As you may know, 2011 will be the centennial of Parks Canada, the world's first national park organization. In the next few years, we will be investing $75 million, as announced in the recent budget, to upgrade the national historic sites owned by Parks Canada. We will also be working with third-party, non-profit organizations, which are represented in 400 communities across Canada.

At the same time, we are moving to implement the infrastructure program to ensure that our visitor and campground facilities are brought up to a reasonable standards and contribute to the tourism industry in Canada. I think this is a great opportunity for us as an agency. It's not only about fixing infrastructure. In the new park program, we're continuing dialogues and partnerships with aboriginal communities, local communities, stakeholder groups, and other partners. In places like the Nahanni expansion, we're still working with the Dehcho and other partners. It is the same with the Manitoba Lowlands and across Canada. So we have several new parks that we're working on.

Finally, we are working not just to expand our program or our existing parks, but also to protect the parks we have. Over the last few years, we have put in place an ecological integrity monitoring program, which is internationally regarded as one of the best of its kind. Over the next four to five years, our objective will be to focus on restoration of ecosystems in our national parks.

Thank you.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

In Quebec, the minister made recent announcements. Could you elaborate?

[Alan Latourelle]

Over the last few weeks, there were several announcements made in Quebec. One is the Canal Lachine in Montreal. It's an important asset for Parks Canada and for the community of Montreal. We're working in partnership with the City of Montreal to revitalize the canal. It was a $10-million investment, and the minister announced it a few weeks ago. We're working with them to define a clear path forward and to try, in partnership, to put our money together to have a better effect in the long term. At the same time, we are working in places like Parc national de Forillon, where we're investing $7 million in ecological restoration and camping facilities.