Environment Committee on June 4th, 2013

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I have met and spent some time, but not as much time as I would like, with Minister Blanchet. We didn't get into the specifics in this area, but we did share common objectives and common outcomes.

The provinces, like the federal government, like departments within the federal government, have their own set of protocols and approaches, but we share the same ultimate outcomes and objectives both in sustainable development and in good governance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

You have 10 seconds, Ms. Leslie.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I'd like to know where energy efficiency fits into all of this.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Energy efficiency is critically important. As you know, budget 2013, which I hope your party and the opposition will support, devotes a significant investment to energy efficiency and renewable energy particularly.

As I have said, the subsidies to the carbon sector have been all but eliminated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Leslie.

Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Just before I begin with the minister, I want to take the opportunity to invite Ms. Leslie to join me on the fisheries committee some day where she will learn that indeed we do still protect fish habitat in Canada—

[An hon. member]

Hear, hear!

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

—and the notion that we don't is one of the biggest fish stories I've heard yet at this committee.

Having said that, Minister, I was interested, first of all, in Ms. Rempel's line of questioning regarding the issue of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. I wondered if, in the context of the federal sustainable development strategy, you could give us an update on what measures you've found in terms of either a Canadian increase or reduction in greenhouse gases since the federal sustainable development strategy was entered into. How does that compare with economic growth in our country?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you, and thank you for catching up on that one unanswered part of the question from Ms. Leslie with regard to fish habitat. Of course, fish habitat is still protected by our government and across departments.

We have seen a levelling-off of GHG emissions. Since 2005 we've seen a reduction of just over 8% of GHGs. Part of this, to be fair, is attributable to the recession and decreased industrial activity, manufacturing activity, but at the same time, we have seen economic growth of almost 5%.

What we have seen and what we will continue to track very carefully, and it will inform our climate change regulatory process, is a separation between economic growth and growth in GHG emissions. That is key to achieving both a viable mitigation strategy and at the same time protecting the economy, because economic prosperity, of course, enables greater environmental responsibility and the benefits of good environmental governance.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you. Of course, the reality is that climate change is having an impact in Canada; there's no question about that. The government recognizes it and understands it. We need to deal with measures to adapt to that. This, I think, also has to be done in the context of the federal sustainable development strategy.

I wonder if you could tell us what investments the government has made and is making in relation to climate change adaptation.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

As you know, last year in the budget we committed just under $150 million specifically to climate change adaptation, and that's spread across departments. I don't want to read too many lists today, but in this $150 million allotted over five years, for example, $30 million goes to Environment Canada's climate change prediction and scenarios program, and $16 million goes to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans aquatic change, climate change adaptation. Parks Canada is receiving money. Health Canada is receiving almost $10 million for heat alert and response systems. There is an investment in the north. Natural Resources Canada has allocated $35 million of this amount towards enhancing competitiveness in climate change programs.

Then, of course, this year, in budget 2013—and I can't miss this opportunity to again encourage the opposition parties' support for the budget—we have allocated almost a quarter of a billion dollars to the Meteorological Service of Canada to improve, to renovate, and to expand our ability to forecast and to deal with the significant impact of climate change, particularly in the north, and also to be able to more closely forecast extreme weather occurrences for the benefit of small communities, which until now have been more or less in the larger picture.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

Another area I want to ask you about, in a more general sense regarding the federal sustainable development strategy, relates to some of the reports that the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development provided between 1997 and 2008, before our government introduced the federal sustainable development strategy. I wonder if you could tell us what progress has been made since 2010 in terms of the transparency of environmental decision-making.

Related to that, you mentioned there was going to be an expansion of indicators. I assume you're talking about the CESI, the Canadian environmental sustainability indicators. I wonder if you could give us more detail on that, please, if there is time.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

First of all, you're quite right. As I remarked, between 1995 and the time our government coincidentally took power, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development regularly commented on the lack of coherent reporting across government, between various departments. Also, there have been a number of comments since, not only by the commissioner, who has just left the office, but from others, with regard to the lack of socio-economic considerations and measurement in the sustainable development area.

If I could, I'd like to remind folks that the act's purpose, as written in law, is to:

...provide the legal framework for developing and implementing a Federal Sustainable Development Strategy that will make environmental decision-making more transparent and accountable to Parliament.

We're focusing on environmental decision-making in government, but of course, in making those decisions, there are, again across 27 departments, benefits and ramifications that touch on both the social and the economic benefits of a responsible sustainable development strategy. Of course, the classic definition of sustainable development sits on three pillars of not only the environment, but also the social and economic considerations.

What we have done in increasing the number of indicators with the proposed 2013 to 2016 period, is to, among other things, broaden the measurement of benefits, under the Department of Health, for example—

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Could we have a quick wrap-up. We're a little over time.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

That pretty much....

I would invite all in this room and Canadians at large to visit the website and to take a close look at the strategy and the improvements. It is a work in progress. It will continue to improve as we go through each three-year period.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Mr. Kent.

Thank you, Mr. Woodworth.

We'll move now to Ms. Duncan, for seven minutes.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the minister. We appreciate your being here.

First, I want to pick up on a few things. The oil and gas sector is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. It has been seven years since the government came to power and we still don't have those regulations. We did hear last time that perhaps it would be spring 2013....

Yes, there's been the investment in climate impacts and adaptation, and I believe the figure is $148 million. But there was a cut to the climate impacts and adaptation group, which had many Nobel Prize-winning scientists as members. They did world-leading research. That needs to be said.

Given the government's emphasis in the document on air quality, could you explain why ARQX, a group that was about monitoring air quality, was eliminated? Also, for the stack monitoring program, Environment Canada's own officials expressed concern that they now lack the knowledge and capabilities.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I would respectfully disagree. As you know, Environment Canada, like all other departments and agencies, has addressed deficit reduction. We have, for the most part, maintained our abilities to address the core responsibilities certainly within Environment Canada.

With regard to air quality and improvements in air quality, as I just remarked, not only are we regulating GHGs, but we've just entered the first stage of improving.... Canada already has some of the cleanest air in the world, and we are working with the provinces and territories to improve our ambient air quality standards to even lower levels than in the United States. We're working now and over the next year or so we will be working on the base level industrial emissions to attack the sulphur oxides and the nitrogen oxides, which will enable us to engage with the Americans, and perhaps in those areas create a new agreement not unlike the acid rain treaty, which has been so effective for both health and climate.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Minister. I appreciate that, but I come back to your own officials' expressed concern.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Not to me.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Since you talked about the United States, this year Lake Huron and Lake Michigan hit their lowest January water levels since record keeping began in 1918, following more than a decade of below normal rain and snowfall, and higher temperatures that increase evaporation. On the release of the commission's recent report, Lana Pollack, the U.S. co-chair of the International Joint Commission on the Great Lakes commented, “We have always depended on good collaboration with agencies in both the governments. When those agencies get cut, we feel it, the lakes feel it.”

There's been an 11% cut. How many IJC commissioners does Canada currently have?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

First of all, again, I would disagree. You cannot link effective deficit reduction with Great Lakes water levels.

With regard to the commissioners—

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

How many commissioners?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

We have three. There is one vacancy at the moment.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

That's what I wanted to know. When will that vacancy be filled?