Evidence of meeting #27 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was materials.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
Can there be a point of order on the motion? It's non-dilatory; I'm not going to debate it.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS
I just wanted to point out that Mr. Choquette said it would be fine to do this at the end of the meeting, if people are agreeable to that, rather than suspend mid-meeting.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
So we will move into camera five minutes before the end of the meeting.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
We aren't required to go in camera. We can certainly do it in public. When I was on other committees, we did everything in public.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Mr. Choquette—
As chair of this committee, I want to remind you that we had agreed to the parameter of the study that we're doing. At least I give you credit for consistency; you've done this each time. But we have had an agreement at this committee that we deal with committee business in camera. I just wanted to remind you of that.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
That's fine. I'll carry on with my questions.
How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
4:30 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Very good. Thank you.
I'd like to discuss the polluter-pay principle. Everyone supports it, but not necessarily when it comes to the implementation.
Ms. Leung, you said it would be important to look more closely at the costs associated with air and water pollution.
As part of this study, I am wondering where the federal government could help you and how it could meet your needs.
I think really applying the polluter-pay principle would be one way to put a price on air and water pollution.
Could you share your thoughts on that?
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer and Founder, Emterra Group
Could you please repeat that? I was missing the translation.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
This is for Ms. Leung, but may apply to everyone.
We talked about the importance of the polluter-pay principle. Everyone supports it, but not necessarily how it should be implemented.
As I see it, this principle is really the way to go as far as the federal government's role in municipal waste management is concerned. Otherwise, I can't really see how else it could play an important role.
Ms. Leung, you talked about air and water pollution. You said we should be giving these problems greater consideration and perhaps even be attaching a price to greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Woodworth also said it was important to take greenhouse gases into consideration. Last week, witnesses told us that a price should be attached to carbon and that it would contribute to sustainable development.
I'll let you answer that.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer and Founder, Emterra Group
Certainly I agree with the polluter pay principle. This is first and foremost. Those who do harm or don't do the right thing should pay the consequences.
EPR enshrines that principle because right now some jurisdictions pay 50% of the cost of handling the end-of-life product. Some pay 100%, so I truly endorse what you call polluter pay, but on how to quantify it in dollars and cents, I need to delegate these responsibilities to the learned people who can quantify it and do the numbers. This is my endorsement.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you, Ms. Leung.
We'll move now to Mr. Toet for five minutes, please.
June 5th, 2014 / 4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses today. It has been very helpful.
Ms. Leung, thank you for the shout-out to friendly Manitoba. It's very much appreciated.
Being from Winnipeg, I am somewhat curious. I know Emterra runs the program there. You mentioned the blue box recycling program costing $78 and that the other waste, which I understand Emterra also takes care of in Winnipeg, is more expensive.
Can you give me some idea of the difference we're paying between the blue bin and the regular bin?
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer and Founder, Emterra Group
Right now you will transition from the blue box to the recap program in your city. I do not have a dedicated, exact number. The City of Winnipeg gets close to between $80 to $100 a tonne from us for the recyclables in the curbside program. We help them to process and sell the recyclables and give them back to them that amount. So I would imagine that would pay for the actual physical collection and processing. I understood that the city has some kind of utility charge, but that would include the educational program, the administrative program, and I don't know how that comes about.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Do I have it correct, though, Ms. Leung? Do you actually take care of the waste disposal in Winnipeg also?
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer and Founder, Emterra Group
Yes, we also do the collection of garbage waste as well as yard waste for compost.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
What I'm trying to get at is that you said there was a differentiation in the pricing and costing. Is it more costly to the city for the waste that you're picking up, or is it more costly for the recycling bin, the cart bins?
4:40 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer and Founder, Emterra Group
In terms of just collection, recyclables cost a bit more to collect because they're lightweight. With garbage, you have a lot more and just for collection it is cheaper. But when you integrate the whole cost structure—the cost of disposal, the cost to look after the landfill for 30 years, and all of that together—I believe recycling is cheaper. Again, it depends whether you're going to incorporate today's costs and immediate costs or you take into consideration the external costs. Once you take into consideration external costs, recycling is definitely cheaper.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you.
Mr. Hargreave, I had a question for you. In your opening remarks, you talked about the need for sound data. I was just wondering if you could share with us what detail or what data you would require that is currently not available to you.
4:40 p.m.
Director, Policy, Ontario Waste Management Association
Just really quickly, I'll follow up on Emmie's point. Just so people are aware, in Ontario right now, to ship waste, the tipping fee in Michigan is sub-$10. That just gives you an idea of some of the differential fees for waste versus recycling.
With regard to StatsCan, their data right now looks only at waste that's flowing through waste management companies, so it doesn't take into account waste that flows from a generator potentially directly to a processor. There's a gap in data there, so we don't completely know what's happening to those materials that flow. The data is not very detailed either, so again when you are trying to understand organic waste, that obviously encompasses a lot of different types of organic materials, some that facilities like anaerobic digesters would be much more interested in than a strictly compost facility would be.
So it's about getting in more of the granular information there, and then about trying to get to some of the data that is not being captured right now. A lot of it is being missed, for example, in the case of companies that are sending materials directly to a paper processing mill, let's say. There are materials that go directly from a food processor to be animal feed. Right now none of that data is being captured in the StatsCan data.
