Environment Committee on April 2nd, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Could we have a brief response, please?

[Cynthia Wright]

We don't have a fixed date for the introduction of regulations. We're still working on the analysis of what kinds of regulations could be developed that would be appropriate to the nature of the risk.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

Madam Duncan is next.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Shugart, we had a presentation by the enforcement officers on the increase in the number of enforcement officers across Canada.

Given the scale of industrial development in northern Alberta, the problem we're having with migratory birds in the tar sands area, and the fact that we have an international obligation, I was a little stunned to see that no enforcement officers were being posted to northern Alberta. Why aren't new enforcement officers, or any enforcement officers, being posted to northern Alberta?

[Ian Shugart]

The mechanism of posting in any particular geographic location shouldn't be taken as a proxy or a representative coverage of any particular area of the environment where enforcement action is going to be required. I think the action that the enforcement branch and the prosecution service has taken with respect to the Syncrude plant indicates that when enforcement action is required anywhere, the distribution of resources in a particular area is not an obstacle. We have assigned in all provinces and territories the 50% increase in enforcement capability across the country. I don't know the formula today; we have those figures. Those officers are available and we frequently move them around in order to respond to situations that may be required. Sometimes that is seasonal, sometimes that is based on intelligence or events that are reported. It's a highly mobile operation, as required.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I'm wondering if you have been directed, and if you are including moneys in your budget, to engage the Canadian public in the Canada-U.S. clean energy climate change dialogue.

[Ian Shugart]

I would say that we have not gotten that far. There have been substantial funds dedicated to consultation in the regulatory process. But with respect to the clean energy dialogue specifically, we haven't gotten that far.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

I'm hearing from the public that there's substantial delay in the preparation, approval, and implementation of management plans under the endangered species act. Can you advise the committee on whether the delay is due to budget shortages? What is the blockage? For example, the woodland caribou plan is already two years overdue, according to the legislation.

[Ian Shugart]

I'll invite Cynthia to comment on that.

[Cynthia Wright]

A lot of the recovery strategies, as I explained when I was before the committee on species at risk, are being led by provinces. For Environment Canada, it's around 70% of the terrestrial species that are being led by provinces. So the capacity issue and the workload is not solely a federal government issue. There's that challenge.

The second challenge I mentioned is just having more understanding of the nature of the recovery strategies and how to do them. We spend a lot of time investing in our processes and procedures. We've now made progress on that so that the pace of recovery strategies is more rapid than it has been in the past.

There's also some technical scientific knowledge, as we explained to the committee, that a lot of the species.... While there's enough knowledge to give an assessment of the status, we lack the knowledge that is required for the specifics of determining appropriate recovery goals and how to achieve those recovery goals.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Warawa, last question.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I first want to touch on a couple of comments that have already been made around the table, and then ask some questions regarding the examination and evaluation of different greenhouse gas mitigating programs.

Mr. Trudeau was asking about CCS. That's very important technology. Yvo de Boer was at the GLOBE International conference. There were a number of different countries represented, or international partners in the fight against climate change, and we spent half a day on CCS. In that half day, there was a lot of science. The importance of developed countries investing in that technology was clearly spelled out, so that there would be commercial pilot projects able to demonstrate it's doable—and we have the science to show it is doable, and we can commercialize it through pilot projects.

Canada and Alberta have committed over $3 billion, and the United States almost $3.5 billion. There is also France, Japan, England, and all of those countries. But Canada is one of the leaders in this technology, and also in the commitment to create these pilot projects. As more and more countries participate in this, the cost to commercialize it drops dramatically—and again, Canada has made those commitments. It might be something this committee would like to spend a meeting on and to call in some world experts on. A lot of it could be done through video conferencing.

Regarding regulations, we have heard about the importance of harmonizing regulations in these changing economic times, and with changing technologies. If you create regulations just to create regulations—and there are regulations all over the world—it would be counterproductive. You must have regulations that are in harmony with where the world is going, and you must have regulations that are effective. Therefore, we have the clean energy dialogue, and we are working within the international community on that.

It is also important to invest in the IMF, and Canada has increased our investment to that institution. So again, we've taken strong leadership there to create these transferable technologies.

Now, as for my question for the officials, we've heard questions regarding the evaluation of the different programs. So my question is do we examine the economic costs and benefits of proposed greenhouse gas-mitigating programs and other environmental initiatives?

[Ian Shugart]

Yes, Chair, we certainly do that in the department, although I would say the nature of the evaluation depends very much on the subject matter. In fact, all across the government, there is a requirement to evaluate the environmental costs and benefits of actions by government.

We have the privilege, I guess, of being in a position where if we develop policy advice, and it's accepted by the government and it's good environmental policy, the net benefit to the environment is going to be pretty clear. But we do in fact go through that discipline of providing government with the analysis within the context of the information and data available.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you. The time has expired.

I want to thank all of the officials for appearing today on the main estimates. I think the committee received a lot of useful information from the presentation by the minister, and from the subsequent questions.

There is some homework that we tasked you with, and we do ask that it be submitted back to committee in an expeditious manner. You are dismissed. Again, thank you.

Committee, we do have one motion to deal with and future business.

Mr. Bigras, you did give notice of motion. If you wish to table that motion, please do.

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

Thank you Mr. Chair.

I would like to table a motion. My motion reads as follows:

That the Minister of the Environment table before the committee the documents underlying Canada's position presented at the Bonn Climate Change Talks, from March 29 to April 8, 2009.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

We have it on the floor.

Is there any discussion?

Monsieur Bigras.

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

Mr. Chair, an important conference on climate change is currently being held in Bonn. This is a conference in preparation for the Copenhagen conference. The government must show transparency. Many countries around the world have done so by publishing their position on their website. Canada should show transparency and table all the documents underlying the position it will be defending in Bonn this week.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Good.

We'll go to Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Chair, I have no problem with the request from this committee. I think it's good that the committee is in the loop and being edified as to what's happening internationally. In that thought, then, I think it would be good....

Canada participated at the GLOBE International conference, which was in Washington, D.C. I've just come back from there. Congressman Ed Markey was there, and he tabled his bill. There was a statement position that was negotiated with all the countries, our international partners, including the United States and China, the two big emitters.

I'd like to provide that if the committee would also like to have that information. It was a statement made, and it included Canada's commitment to carbon capture and storage. I'd be glad to also provide that for the edification of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you, Mr. Warawa.

I have Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Trudeau.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

I appreciate Mr. Warawa's offer to table documents from a meeting convened by a non-governmental organization, but what Monsieur Bigras is seeking here, and what we're supporting strongly, is something else. Japan's already announced its targets. The European Union has a 125-plus-page plan already out there for 26 nation-states to observe and react to. We need something here.

What happened at the GLOBE meeting has nothing to do with the official process going forward in Bonn. It's not an intergovernmental working group. It's a non-governmental group.

I'd like to move a friendly amendment to this motion so that it actually includes, in terms of documentation, any analysis the government is either putting forward or relying upon. We have no idea, absolutely zero idea, where we stand, Mr. Chair, on this most important process under the UNFCCC. We got nothing from the minister this morning, not a shred of what our position's going to be. It's extremely important.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Let me get the....

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

It's just to add the words “and analysis”.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Is that after “documents”?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Yes, sir.