Environment Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2009

[Mike Beale]

With the federal standards that President Obama has recently set out in September, which California has deemed to be equivalent to their own standards.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

There have been areas and states that have regulated tailpipe emissions for a long time now. We're still not there, and the clock is ticking.

Is there anything that we have done over the past few years that has actually been implemented that is moving us towards reaching that 20% reduction target?

[Mike Beale]

As I said, these regulations are under development.

Another example is the biofuel regulations, which are currently under development.

Another concrete example of actions that have already been triggered is some of the funding for the clean energy projects that Natural Resources Canada has been leading, and some recent announcements this summer of investments in carbon capture and storage projects, which are expected to lead to real and verifiable reductions as early as 2015.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you very much. Your time has expired.

Mr. Braid, you have the floor.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity not to close today. My arm was starting to get sore, as the closer.

I thank all of our officials for being here this afternoon.

I wonder if I could start with a question from the supplementary estimates. There is an amount of $184,000, I believe, with respect to funding for the environmental damages fund. I have a couple of questions with respect to that amount and the fund itself.

Could you start by clarifying what the $184,000 funding is for? Could you update us and clarify whether this is the new Bill C-16 version of the fund that is now in effect here? Third, have any fines been assessed under Bill C-16 as of this point?

[Cynthia Wright]

I can take that, Mr. Chair.

As the member is aware, with regard to the environmental damages fund more acts will now require payment into that fund when Bill C-16 is brought into force. We're aiming to bring that part of Bill C-16 into force in the spring of 2010. That will bring into force the changing of the actual fines and direction into the environmental damages fund, and some of the other measures that were passed as part of Bill C-16. The part that is yet to come is the part dealing with the creation of the alternative measures, which is another piece of legislation that has to be developed as part of that.

With respect to the funds that are in the supplementary estimates, there are some pieces of legislation that already direct funds into the environmental damages fund, notably under the Migratory Birds Convention Act. It's an authority that can be used under other acts, but the Migratory Birds Convention Act does direct to that fund.

This fund under supplementary estimates (B) is primarily for staffing people to improve the management of the fund. With the increase in fines and more acts using the environmental damages fund, we expect to have a larger fund to manage. This is to put the people in place and make sure they're trained to manage contribution agreements and to do marketing and awareness about it.

We're already doing a lot of work, not only with our own staff enforcement officers but with the judiciary in raising their awareness so that they are aware of what's coming in terms in higher fines and the direction into the environmental damages fund. The $150,000 is mostly directed at people and the training of those people.

This is a four-year funding and it will be ongoing past the four years at about a half-million dollars. The first four years is about $1.6 million. This is the beginning, for hiring the people, training them, etc. We'll be adding more people as we get to the ongoing level at about a half-million dollars.

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

Thank you very much, Ms. Wright, for that update, and for the progress that is being made with respect to that fund.

Just above that line item, again in supplementary estimates (B), is about $230,000 for funding related to the assessment, management, and remediation of federal contaminated sites.

Could you please provide me with a bit of background on that particular line item? Does that flow from a commitment from the economic action plan?

[Basia Ruta]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Indeed it does flow from the economic action plan as one of the activities. This $230,000 item is really a net amount. The actual amount that we're putting forward in an accelerated manner amounts to about $2.2 million. The economic action plan did accelerate work in this whole area of contaminated sites, but we had already been receiving funding to do work on contaminated sites for a few years previously.

As the minister mentioned in his opening address, we had an estimate for reductions to work in some areas, so the $230,000 is the net amount going towards this fiscal year.

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

On the same topic, could you provide a little clarity on how those reductions arose?

[Basia Ruta]

Every year, any federal departments that have had lands or units contaminated can access certain funding that has been put aside. Several years ago, there was about $3.5 billion, I think, set aside for the cleanup of contaminated sites. There's a process whereby you put an estimate in the plan, and it goes through criteria and scrutiny. These forecasts and estimates are updated based on certain work that's done to understand whether or not the timing and the costs are appropriate.

The $8-million reduction was an updated estimate of what was required to do work relative to one site, which would have to be deferred for a number of reasons, so it had to be removed from our funding base for this year.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Watson, you're the closer.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll advise you up front that I don't have very many questions. If I have any balance of time remaining, I'll be sharing that with Mr. Woodworth.

I think my colleague referenced the economic action plan.

Ms. Ruta, how much funding did Environment Canada get under the economic action plan?

[Basia Ruta]

We're not big players under the economic action plan, but over two years—2009-2010 and 2010-2011—if these supplementary estimates get approved, there will be about $36 million. That would deal with the Canadian environmental sustainability indicators program. There'd be about $6.2 million coming to Environment Canada, with about $3 million more going to two other departments.

For the federal contaminated sites, as I just mentioned, the $2.2 million would be before we put in the offsetting reduction. Modernizing federal laboratories would get about $13.7 million over two years. You have an item in the supplementary estimates that brings you up to about $6.4 million for this year, and that really targets six of our labs. Promoting energy development in the north has about $10.4 million, and through supplementary estimates (A) we already received funding of about $4 million. This is the next instalment for this year.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

With supplementary estimates (B), how much funding does Environment Canada have cumulatively this year? I think we've just gone from two-year numbers. What do we have coming up?

[Basia Ruta]

In terms of our overall funding, that would place us at about $1.1 billion, which is similar to the total supply that we received last year. This is with supplementary estimates (B). Again, supplementary estimates (C) have not come by. There may be some other technical adjustments, but we seem to be relatively on the same level.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Okay.

Mr. Chair, if I may, I'll give the rest of my time to Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Watson.

My researchers came across a website that dealt with the opportunity for commercial enterprises to register carbon offsets on an early basis. The website even went so far as to say that projects might be eligible as early as January 2010.

I'm curious to know if that was a preliminary website, or if that in fact is up and running. If it is not, will it be? Will this offset system play into the ultimate cap and trade system, which we're aiming to develop?

[Mike Beale]

Mr. Chair, I can take that question.

The offset system is really an important complementary mechanism for our cap and trade approach. The minister, in the summer, announced that he is moving forward with an offset system. He published two of three remaining guides that will set out the rules of that system.

We invited public comments, and those comments were received in the late summer. We're currently briefing the minister on the content. He will then decide on the final rules of the system.

The offset system works as a way of generating reductions from sectors that would be outside the regulations. So it's a way of achieving reductions in sectors such as agriculture, or in municipal landfill sites.

Yes, we will have...once the system has been fully implemented, which will likely be at some point in 2010. An investor will be able to bring forward a project, register that project, indicate the amount of emissions reductions that is expected to generate, and then, once those reductions have been verified by an independent verifier, the minister will issue credits to that project developer. Those credits will have value, and the project developer will then be able to sell those credits on the open marketplace. It's really a market-based way of achieving reductions that will contribute to our 2020 target.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

That's an excellent part of our government's plan to reduce greenhouse gases, and I'm very glad that we heard about it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you, Mr. Woodworth. Time has just expired.

I want to thank all the witnesses for coming.

As you know, we've now considered the estimates. I don't see us having another meeting on this before it's deemed to be reported back because of our ongoing work on Bill C-311 next week....

Order! Order, guys; come on.

What I'd like to do is call the votes that are before us for consideration. You have the documents in front of you.

ENVIRONMENT

Department

Vote 1b—Operating expenditures..........$25,497,566

Vote 5b—Capital expenditures..........$8,451,500

Vote 10b—The grants listed in the Estimates and contributions..........$1,257,625

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

Vote 15b—Program expenditures..........$215,250

Parks Canada Agency

Vote 25b—Program expenditures..........$3,008,979

(Votes 1b, 5b, 10b, 15b, and 25b agreed to on division)

Shall the chair report votes 1b, 5b, 10b, 15b, and 25b, under Environment, to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Okay.

I have a notice of motion from Mr. Scarpaleggia.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I would like to give notice that I will be presenting a motion on Tuesday--namely, that the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development extend sitting hours in order to ensure completion of clause-by-clause on Bill C-311 before the deadline for reporting the bill back to the House.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

We'll consider that on Tuesday.

With that, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

So moved.