Environment Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Warawa, stay on the point.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I will speak on the point of order raised by Ms. Duncan. Actually, her questions were quite broad and we're not on the supplementary estimates, so I find it ironic now that she's trying to stop somebody else from asking questions similar to hers.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Braid, you still have the floor.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I'm sorry, Mr. Minister, I didn't mean to interrupt.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Braid, you have the floor.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, you could just start briefly by describing the commitment to the environment and to your department out of the economic action plan.

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

Thank you.

Having resolved that point of order, Mr. Chairman, I will carry on.

The budget contains very extensive dollars dealing with environmental priorities. Several of these have been mentioned over the course of the morning. There is a $1 billion fund set aside for green infrastructure projects. Those can include projects relating to public transit, waste water management, as we've spoken about, or the generation of sustainable energy, as well as other projects.

Parenthetically, before I leave that, in response to the previous question on waste water, this is an extremely important question, and the essence of what we are saying as a government is that we will regulate. So we'll work with the provinces, but we are speaking of a regulatory framework for the first time in Canada.

In terms of the budget or the action plan, as I said earlier in my comments, a lot of this turns on technology, so a $1 billion fund has been set aside for clean energy research and demonstration projects. This could include carbon capture and storage, but it is not limited to carbon capture and storage. This involves the significant greening of our energy systems. Extensive money--$300 million--has been set aside for the ecoENERGY home retrofit program. This will allow for up to 200,000 Canadian homes to be energy retrofitted.

I think it's important to point out that a lot of this will be driven by green citizens making green consumer choices. All of us, as parliamentarians, have been quite taken, I think, by the response we've seen from individual Canadians who wish to pursue this, to retrofit their homes or to engage in energy-efficient upgrades.

We're advancing the dollars that are being invested in federally contaminated sites. An additional $80 million is being invested, but certain other dollars are being accelerated. We have a far too lengthy list of contaminated sites in our country that have accumulated over the last 100 years, and we'll be accelerating the remediation of those.

Something that's received very little notice, which is included in the action plan, is support for continued work by the department to monitor and obtain information on environmental indicators. That is part of it.

In addition, $1.3 billion has been set aside for retrofits, including energy efficiency retrofits of Canada's social housing stock.

In addition, dollars have been invested in VIA Rail to increase the carriage capacity on the Windsor-Quebec corridor. I think we would all agree that more train transport by Canadians, taking cars off the road, will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In addition, a significant amount--$300 million or thereabouts--is being invested in nuclear with AECL.

There is a lengthy list of efforts that the government is taking on to ensure that our environmental objectives are achieved.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Time has expired.

Minister Prentice, it is after 10 o'clock, and I understand you need to be getting to some other commitments you have today.

Thank you for appearing.

We're going to continue on this round with the department officials. Deputy Minister Ian Shugart is going to stay with us, and I believe Andrew Treusch, an associate deputy minister for Environment Canada, will be joining us.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, committee members. I've enjoyed the exchange.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

While the minister is leaving, so everybody's clear what we're doing today--because the supplemental estimates were reported back yesterday--we're deemed to have dealt with them and reported them.

So even though the topic matter is the estimates, we are meeting under Standing Order 108(2), which reads as follows:

The standing committees...be empowered to study and report on all matters relating to the mandate, management and operation of the department or departments of government which are assigned to them from time to time by the House. In general, the committees shall be severally empowered to review and report on:

(a) the statute law relating to the department assigned to them;

(b) the program and policy objectives of the department and its effectiveness in the implementation of same;

(c) the immediate, medium and long-term expenditure plans and the effectiveness of implementation of same by the department;

(d) an analysis of the relative success of the department, as measured by the results obtained as compared with its stated objectives; and

(e) other matters, relating to the mandate, management, organization or operation of the department, as the committee deems fit.

So we do have a fairly broad base that we can work from today.

Now, we have a number of departmental officials with us. Maybe before we go to the next round, once everybody sits down, I'll ask you to introduce them for us, Deputy Minister.

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

Thank you, Chair.

We have a number of officials from Environment Canada here, but I'd like to introduce my colleagues, Alan Latourelle, Chief Executive Officer of the Canada Parks Agency; and Mr. Peter Sylvester, President of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. With your permission, as members raise different questions I'll invite other officials to join me as necessary.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Ouellet, you have five minutes.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Shugart, last week Mr. Vaughan, the environment commissioner, told us that no department had been much concerned with sustainable development over the past few years. This goes for both Liberals and Conservatives.

It is important to note that new sustainable development legislation was passed in spring, but is still not being applied. Is it not surprising that the environment department does not apply the principle of sustainable development?

[Ian Shugart]

The commissioner did indeed point out deficiencies in the plans of a variety of government departments. However, Parliament has passed new legislation on sustainable development. Under the new legislation, all departments concerned are required to implement strategies, including timetables, targets, and mechanisms to monitor results.

As leaders in this area, we accept that responsibility. At present, we are focusing on planning this approach across all government departments, including the environment department. We are now engaged in internal consultations, as well as consultations with outside organizations.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Why have you not yet done that? There is already legislation on sustainable development, so how is it you have done nothing more than this? You have been in your position for three years now, yet you have done nothing when it comes to sustainable development.

[Ian Shugart]

I will answer that question in English.

In our view, it would be overstating the judgment that nothing has been done in departments. Faults were found with the specificity and rigour with which commitments were set out. In our view, everything the Department of the Environment does is oriented to sustainable development. When we are managing our protected areas, pursuing the chemical management plan, and so on, our approach to that philosophically is within the concept of environmental integrity and sustainable development. It is true that the commissioner has pointed out--and indeed this was the nature of the debate in the House, in this committee, and in Parliament--that the legislative framework that was in place needed to be made stronger and much more rigorous to require specific commitments with timelines. We welcome that obligation and will work within that framework.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

You say that you do have a philosophy of sustainable development. A while ago, when he appeared, the minister gave an example of the renovations that will be done to buildings, in particular housing units, in complete compliance with the principles of energy efficiency. Yet, energy efficiency is only one small aspect of sustainable development.

You have a policy whereby you give people money to encourage them to do renovations, but you do not include the principles of sustainable development. So, don't come here and tell me that you have a philosophy of sustainable development if you do not follow it in your programs.

[Ian Shugart]

Mr. Chairman, I completely agree that the notion of sustainable development is far broader than a number of specific measures to solve an environmental problem. All the departments will have to agree to adopt this concept of sustainable development so that a social and economic approach can be implemented that is in keeping with the objectives of sustainable development. It is an ongoing requirement.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask a short question.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Time has expired.

Monsieur Calkins.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Thank you, Chair, and I want to thank the folks from the department for being here today. We appreciate that.

I also want to thank my colleague, Ms. Duncan, for bringing forward the great work the Province of Alberta has done in looking at mercury. They've also done some wonderful things, I'm sure you're aware, with the Water for Life strategies, and also the land-use framework they're using to make sure the environment there is well looked after. Not to mention that Alberta was the first province to move forward with greenhouse gas emission standards. So it's wonderful that our province is doing such great work and that we have so many Albertans here today represented in this committee, including our minister.

One of the things I want to ask about is an area of particular interest to me. I spent much of my previous time before Parliament working for Alberta Environment and also for Parks Canada, and one of the things that's near and dear to my heart, of course, and near and dear to the hearts of many Canadians, is our national parks system and our historic sites and our marine conservation areas. So I would like to get more clarification from the department on the initiatives that have been going forward and the plan for our national parks. The plan that was brought forward previously was quite ambitious in the creation of new parks and so on, but what specifically can you tell this committee about where that work has progressed? I know we've seen expansions of the Nahanni; we've talked about the freshwater area at Lake Superior.

Could you expand on this a bit and let this committee know what's being done to preserve eco-sensitive areas of the Canadian environment?

[Ian Shugart]

Mr. Chair, I'll invite Alan Latourelle to take that question.

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

Thank you very much for the question.

I think a lot of work has been done over the last several years in terms of achieving conservation gains through Parks Canada--work on the expansion of the Nahanni, the east arm of Great Slave Lake, the marine conservation area in Lake Superior.

We're still working on about eight other files across the country, Mealy Mountains, for example, in Newfoundland and Labrador, Lowlands in Manitoba. So we still have a fairly aggressive expansion program to complete the national park system. The objective is to represent each of the 39 natural regions in Canada, and we are still proceeding on that track.

Over the next few years we are looking forward to bringing home several of these initiatives, but that also includes the marine conservation area programs. For example, in British Columbia, we're working on the Gulf Islands area in the Strait, in terms of moving ahead with a national marine conservation area there, and also in Gwaii Haanas.

So we are committed as an agency to deliver on those commitments, and a lot of progress has been made, but still a lot needs to be done.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

A couple of parks I don't think have full park status yet, so I guess my question is going to be quite specific. When it comes to Grasslands, it's not fully established as a national park, nor is the park out on the west side of Vancouver Island where the West Coast Trail...Pacific Rim, that's correct.

One of the things that is of concern to me is how long some of these things have taken, because I don't believe they've achieved full park status yet. Can you enlighten this committee as to the progress on those two particular areas?

[Alan Latourelle]

In terms of understanding the processes, we do respect aboriginal rights, for example. As part of our park establishment process, there are two key steps. One, when there are still outstanding land claims for any given park, we bring a proposal forward for cabinet and then for parliamentary consideration for national park reserve status. So, for example, the Pacific Rim National Park Reserve has national park reserve status; the Canada National Parks Act applies fully. Once all the outstanding land claims are resolved, it moves to national park status. So that's the case in the Pacific Rim.

In other parks where we have a longer-term objective, and Grasslands is a good example where we're still proceeding with major acquisitions, once we have a sufficient amount of land that we want to bring forward for national park status purposes, then we would bring that legislative proposal to the government and then to the House.