Environment Committee on June 4th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I'd like to call the meeting of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development to order. This is meeting number 79.

We welcome to our committee today the Honourable Peter Kent, Minister of the Environment. Minister Kent, it's great to have you with us. We also have Andrea Lyon and Tony Young with us from the department. We welcome all of you here.

We will give Minister Kent a 10-minute opening statement, followed by questions from committee members in the predetermined order.

Minister Kent, welcome again to our committee. It's always a pleasure to have you here.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Thank you, Chair. It's always a pleasure to visit.

Let me start off by expressing my sincere appreciation for the opportunity to discuss the 2013-2016 draft federal sustainable development strategy.

As you said, I'll begin with a brief statement. I'd like to better introduce to the committee Andrea Lyon, who is my associate deputy minister, and with her is Tony Young, director general of the sustainability directorate and head of the sustainable development office.

We'll be pleased to answer questions after these opening remarks.

Mr. Chair, I'll begin by reflecting for a moment on the origins and evolution of the Federal Sustainable Development Act, back to when the office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development was created in 1995 and amendments to the Auditor General Act required the federal government to prepare and to table individual departmental sustainable development strategies. The first system did not work. It did not deliver the intended results. Successive audits between 1997 and 2008 examined various strategies and their outcomes, but without a government-wide strategy, environmental sustainability issues were often pushed to the margins of federal planning and reporting. There were no common goals or targets and no way to measure federal accomplishments.

Our government took action in 2008, and with all-party support the Federal Sustainable Development Act was passed. Two years later we delivered the federal sustainable development strategy. The FSDS, which today remains very much a work in progress, is achieving the original intent: a strategy that makes environmental decision-making both more transparent and accountable. The FSDS provided Canadians for the first time with a comprehensive picture of actions right across government that contribute to environmental sustainability. This integrated whole-of-government picture was provided, as you know, under four key themes: climate change and air quality, water, nature, and of course, greening our government operations.

The FSDS improves the way the federal government plans for sustainable development, and it addresses weaknesses of the old system that had been noted a number of times by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. The strategy ensures that environmental objectives are a foundational piece in the government's decision-making processes. It does so by incorporating sustainable development planning and reporting into the government's core expenditure planning and reporting system, as well as integrating it into the strategic environmental assessment process.

Effective measurement, monitoring and reporting are crucial not only to track our progress but also to ensure that Canadians can follow and watch these changes. The federal sustainable development strategy has been well received by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, by the environmental organizations, and by the business community. I'm pleased to report that significant progress has been observed in the three-year interval between 2010 to 2013. Departments and agencies now produce annual departmental sustainable development strategies that are integrated into their core planning and reporting processes and are linked to the overarching federal strategy. As part of our ongoing commitment to measurement, monitoring, and reporting, we have issued two progress reports, as you know, and have expanded our suite of environmental indicators that support federal sustainable development strategy reporting.

I'll detail some of the areas in which the 2012 progress report itemizes what I believe is impressive progress. We are reducing greenhouse gas emissions, conserving our natural environment, and ensuring the quality of our air and water. As you know, we have an effective sector-by-sector regulatory approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and we've already taken action on two of Canada's largest sources of emissions: transportation and electricity. By the time 2025-model-year cars hit our roads, it's estimated that vehicles will be consuming 50% less fuel and producing 50% fewer emissions compared to 2008 models.

In the coal-fired electricity sector, Canada is the first country in the world to ban construction of traditional technology coal plants. Emissions from the electricity sector are projected to decline by one-third by 2020, compared to 2005 levels. Fully three-quarters of our electricity is now generated without the emission of greenhouse gases. Canada has an electricity system that is one of the cleanest in the world, and it will get even cleaner.

Our government has also shown that economic growth and environmental stewardship can go hand in hand and are not mutually exclusive. Our 2012 progress report also shows we're making progress with the Great Lakes contaminated sites, the areas of concern, and with protected areas, both terrestrial and marine, across Canada. This brings the total protected areas in Canada to about 10%, or the equivalent of a territory the size of France, Germany, and Austria combined.

These are only some of our achievements to date. I'd now like to turn to the steps we'll be taking to move environmental sustainability forward as indicated in the draft 2013-2016 federal sustainable development strategy, which we released for public consultations in February.

The new strategy outlines an improved framework of sustainable development planning and reporting. It builds on key improvements that we introduced in our 2010 federal sustainable development strategy, but moreover, it underscores our continuing commitment to transparency. Building on the goals and the targets already in place, this new version expands the whole-of-government picture of federal activities aimed at achieving environmental sustainability.

We've expanded the scope of federal actions to include new targets and implementation strategies on climate change adaptation. Great progress has been made in strengthening existing targets, particularly in terms of nutrient loading in the Great Lakes, Lake Simcoe, and Lake Winnipeg, and with actions in regard to marine pollution.

At the same time, it's important to note that new and more specific targets will be added to reflect decisions made since the draft strategy was released in February. For example, the new Canadian ambient air quality standards published by Environment Canada and Health Canada are more stringent than current U.S. standards for particulate matter and ground-level ozone, two pollutants of concern to human health and of course the major components of smog.

We'll turn next in the clean air area to development of new industrial emissions regulations of pollutants such as nitrogen and sulphur oxides along with the provinces and territories as part of the new air quality management system. Of course data generated through our partnership with Alberta on oil sands monitoring will continue to be collected and posted on our new Web portal.

We've also expanded the range of indicators to track progress on the strategies, goals, and targets. As a matter of fact, since our first strategy, we have increased the number of indicators to some 36 targets in the 2012 progress report. Work is now under way to increase the number of indicators to more than 40 for better measurement and reporting under the 2013-2016 strategy. Furthermore, it aligns with sustainable development commitments with various departmental performance reporting.

In addition, it builds on the progress we've made in the greening government operations in the areas of real property, fleet, procurement, and general office operations. This new strategy has also been expanded to include clean air agenda reporting commitments, water agreements with Ontario and Manitoba, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, of course, our commitment to a national conservation plan, and Canada's domestic response to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

At the same time it continues to support the integration of sustainable development into our decision-making process through strategic environmental assessments and green procurement.

Now we're asking for the people's input, including from this committee.

As you know, the public consultations process on the draft federal sustainable development strategy is currently under way. We are also engaging a wide range of stakeholders including the Sustainable Development Advisory Council and the interim Commissioner of the Environment, who will be speaking to you about some of his observations on the draft strategy a little later this morning. As with the case with the 2010 strategy, the commissioner's comments will contribute along with input from other consultations into the final strategy to be released this fall.

In response we've received over 40,000 visits to the FSDS website, and we expect substantial input from Canadians as the consultation period draws to a close in mid-June. The final strategy, as you know, will be tabled in Parliament in the fall, greatly informed by the feedback we receive from this committee and from other interventions.

Mr. Chair, I'd like to close by emphasizing that Canada has a very good story to tell regarding our efforts to promote sustainable development at both the domestic and international levels.

We are making concrete progress across the full range of environmental priorities identified in the strategy. The federal government's innovative approach is bringing more transparency and more accountability to environmental decision-making. We are also strengthening sustainable development, which will benefit Canadians today and well into the future.

Mr. Chair, I thank you for this opportunity to speak, and I'd be delighted to field questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Minister Kent. Thank you for being so meticulous in honouring the time commitment. That's helpful to our committee. You're right on time.

We're going to move to the round of questions. We're going to begin with Ms. Rempel.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister Kent, for being here today.

One of the issues that has been coming up in one of the studies we're looking at is the effect of climate change on habitat conservation. We've been talking quite a bit about changing landscapes, etc. This is something the government is concerned about. You started to speak to the fact that the FSDS has mitigating climate change as one of its goals.

Could you speak about some of the progress we've made as a government on this issue?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Biodiversity and conservation of wildlife and habitat are responsibilities shared by the federal government, the provinces and territories, other departments within the federal government, and all Canadians. Protection of ecologically valuable areas and the stewardship of working landscapes is the key to preserving both habitat and the wild species that occupy the various spaces across Canada. We are working on this. We remain committed to the aspirational goals of protecting and preserving spaces of land in each of the more than three dozen distinct natural areas across this great country, east to west and south to north. At the moment we are working to expand not only our terrestrial protected spaces, but also our marine protected areas. While we have been encouraged by some organizations to do more in a shorter timeframe, the reality is that because of the consultations required with the provinces, territories, and first nations, and because of the regular election cycles, we have been proceeding deliberately. Parks Canada, for example, has four major marine protected areas. We're working on three more now, including Lancaster Sound—the “Serengeti of the Arctic”—and we will continue working in that direction in the years ahead.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

Great.

Going back to my question, perhaps you could elaborate on some of the efforts our government has made to mitigate climate change, including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

We're addressing the mitigation of climate change through our sector-by-sector regulatory approach. As you know, colleagues have frequently asked questions in this regard in the House. With the regulations completed to date, and with actions taken by the provinces and municipalities, and by individual Canadians in terms of better use of thermostats, for example, we are just over halfway to achieving the reductions we have set as a target by 2020. The work is not done. We have several major emitting sectors yet to address. Oil and gas is next. Then there are other major emitters, such as the cement industry, the steel industry, and residential and commercial buildings. We will continue working our way around the pie chart.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

One of the criticisms we often get on television panels, here in committee, and from my opposition colleagues is that we're not doing enough in this area. Since you've done a lot of work in this area, could you speak about how our progress compares internationally? What is Canada's track record on this?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

It compares very well internationally. I just completed a swing across Europe to four capitals: London, Paris, Brussels, and Berlin. In fact, our actions, although not widely reported in Europe, compare very well to those of the Europeans.

I made the point when I was in Berlin and I was asked about coal-fired electricity that it represents barely 17% of Canada's 2% of annual greenhouse gas emissions, and that we are the first country in the world to effectively ban the building of any new traditional technology coal-fired generating units.

I asked my German audience at the Adenauer institute what Germany was doing, and I observed that I'd seen barges loaded with coal on the Rhine River. Their answer was that they have to protect their steel industry.

I think Canadians can be well satisfied that we're doing our part.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

On that note, you're talking about the development of regulations in this area. You sort of alluded to the fact that there is an economic impact. Can you talk about how the economic impact has been factored into the regulatory approach and how this contrasts with some of the other approaches that have been suggested?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

As the government makes clear at every occasion, we are trying to balance our activity both in mitigation as well as in adaptation to ensure that we not only protect the environment and work towards greater environmental sustainability, but at the same time protect what is still a very fragile economic recovery.

Environment Canada is essentially a regulatory department. With regard to climate change regulation, as each set of regulations is completed, we do a cost-benefit analysis to look at exactly the achievable mitigation outcomes as well as the benefits to health, to the economy, and of course to climate change mitigation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Ms. Rempel. We'll move next to Ms. Leslie.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Minister.

I want to thank you for your recent willingness to come to our committee fairly often. We look forward to seeing you in a couple of weeks as well for the report on plans and priorities.

I'm going to jump right in. On page 7 there's a little sidebar talking about our international reputation. It says that the federal sustainable development strategy “is helping to advance Canada's international trade agenda by providing a comprehensive expression of Canada's commitments to the environment and sustainable development to our trading partners.”

I want to ask you a question about this. I've raised this issue in the House and publicly about the damage to our international reputation, because Canada isn't being perceived as really holding up our end of the bargain on the environment. I'm thinking in particular of the fact that we no longer protect fish habitat in this country, and that we have a completely new environmental assessment regime. Perhaps the most problematic point for our international partners is the fact that we continue to subsidize the oil and gas industry with $1.3 billion per year.

Why do these oil and gas subsidies still exist, and how do they fit into the government's sustainable development strategy?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Indeed there are misperceptions abroad about what we are doing in Canada. There's no question we need to communicate better in the international community on our actions and goals.

I must tell you that with regard to colleagues in the Major Economies Forum, in the G-20, and in the broader family of nations, there is recognition that Canada is working effectively, particularly on climate change, not only inside the UN framework where our fast-start financing—$1.2 billion over the past three years—is beginning to show great benefit, but also outside the UN framework in terms of working with like-minded countries—the “coalition of the working” as some of my colleagues have described it—the Climate and Clean Air Coalition. We're addressing things like methane, black carbon, and other—

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

What about the subsidies?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

With regard to the subsidies, as you know, Canada led at the G-20 in making a commitment to reduce subsidies to the oil and gas sector. At the moment the only subsidies that go to that sector are with regard to climate change mitigation, to CCS, carbon capture and sequestration.

The oil and gas sector pays exactly the same corporate tax as other industrial sectors and, as I said, the phasing out of the original subsidies is now almost complete.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I would disagree with you on some of those points.

Is there a commitment from government to eliminate those subsidies?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Absolutely. That is Canada's commitment with our international partners.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

The last time you were here speaking to us about the estimates, you said that looking at the sector-by-sector approach the government is enacting with regard to greenhouse gas emissions, that the oil and gas sector was next. You have said this publicly a number of times.

When you were here on the estimates you said that we should expect those regulations mid-year. I would argue it's now mid-year. I'm wondering if you can give us an update.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I won't quibble. We're not quite mid-year, but we are getting close. As we're in delicate final work right now, I think it would be premature to discuss any specifics.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Will we have them by the end of the year?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I intend to have them well before the end of the year.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

That is good news. As you know, my colleague Pierre Jacob, who is the member for Brome—Missisquoi, introduced a bill on sustainable development.

Would you and the government support a bill that would require a mandatory review of proposed acts and regulations in order to ensure that they do not conflict with the objectives of the Federal Sustainable Development Act?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Sure. I'm glad to address that.

Certainly the objective of your colleague's bill is worthy. I will not support it because it adds a level of bureaucracy and redundant oversight, which I'm quite convinced is unnecessary given the ability of our government today through the FSDS, through the sustainable development office, to ensure that all departments and all legislation falls within the parameters of sustainable development.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Did you consult Quebec? There is a system there comparable to the one being proposed in the bill. Each piece of legislation and each policy is scrutinized to ensure that it contains a sustainable development component.