Evidence of meeting #57 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 forward.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
10:15 a.m.
A voice
[Inaudible--Editor]
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Well, that's not fair. Let's put it this way. There isn't a deputy minister who doesn't know what moneys they had to give back to the treasury, but I appreciate that you don't want to put it in the public realm.
When I asked Mr. McLean last time what the lapses were, we agreed that the figure was $376 million ending 2013-2014. In response to a question I asked, he gave a fairly detailed response. He said that you've lapsed $376 million over the past four years: $150 million was carried forward in the years to be ultimately spent by the department, $170 million was returned to the fiscal framework, and another $56 million was returned to the fiscal framework.
I'm curious as to what happened with this $150 million that was carried forward. I don't quite understand how you lapsed something, yet you carried forward simultaneously.
10:15 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Finance Branch, Department of the Environment
As part of the expenditure authority we get, voted by Parliament, we are permitted to carry forward unused funds from one fiscal year to the following.
10:15 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Finance Branch, Department of the Environment
It's a lapse that's within the carry-forward amount.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I don't understand that. It's a lapse that's within the carry-forward amount. I don't understand that.
10:15 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
It may be a terminology question. “Lapse” is a commonly used term. Departments are permitted—and this is designed to actually incent good financial management—to carry forward a set amount. Amounts that exceed that set amount lapse and are returned to the fiscal framework, and hence, are not available to the department.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
For a simple layperson's understanding, you didn't actually lapse $376 million. You only lapsed, in effect, $150 million less than $376 million. Is that a fair...?
10:15 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
Yes, of which $56 million was operating.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Okay, that is an explanation which.... I'll look forward to public accounts to find out what the next number is.
Going back to the issue of.... I'm not challenging you on the math but I do look forward to a written response as to what the actual number will be. I'm curious about your level of consultation with the provinces, given that they are in a shared jurisdiction. When you are making up your number for 2030, how do you incorporate the provinces “public commitments” into that number. What does that number total out of the 200 megatonnes that you have to make?
10:15 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
I would take you back to the modelling work we do. One of the reasons why I pause on giving you a specific number is that, again, as I mentioned, when you look at the analytical work—and Canada is I think advanced in this area and is consistent with work done in other advanced jurisdictions—you see that we look at the economy as a whole and the drivers of emissions.
For example, if you look at our 2014 study, which we published last year, you will see a chart that tries to describe the business-as-usual growth and then a scenario of taking into account the measures that provincial and federal governments have in place. We describe those measures in the study: what will the effect be in the face of other things that are going on in the economy as a whole?
Generally, economic growth and population growth are the key drivers of emissions growth. Canada has, in the G-7 context, relatively high population growth and—
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Sorry, but how do you disaggregate the sector-by-sector approach so that it doesn't fall all over...? My friend Colin Carrie says, “Well, the transportation sector...”. That's fine—
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
It's an interesting dialogue, but we're well beyond your time, Mr. McKay.
10:20 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
It's very interesting dialogue. I want to give Mr. Martin an opportunity to respond to the overlap.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
10:20 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
For every federal regulation we bring forward, we publish an impact assessment, which provides—again, based on our analytical work—a very detailed assessment of not only the emissions reductions that will be achieved by the federal measure but their costs and benefits. That's part of all federal regulation. The specifics on any single regulatory initiative are there.
It's important to look at this in the context of an integrated modelling framework, because there are interaction effects. You can do that measure by measure, but it's very important to look at the interaction. When you do the interaction, it's not always easy to point to a single measure and say, “this accounted for x amount.” You have those two points of analysis that I think provide the basis to think it through, but it is vitally important to constantly look at an integrated modelling result when you're looking at emissions projections and the potential impact of any proposed policy measure.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you.
Technically, we'd go back to seven-minute rounds. However, I indicated that we were going to continue with five minutes in the interest of allowing more people to get a question in.
You have five minutes, Mr. Sopuck.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
Sure.
What per cent of the world's greenhouse gases are emitted by Canada?
10:20 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
In our INDC, we quoted the number of 1.6%, which is derived from the World Resources Institute database of global GHG emissions, which is, I think, an acknowledged source for that information.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
In terms of the calculation of our emissions, do we do a net analysis? What I mean by that is, do we count carbon sequestration programs and projects and just the capability of our own environment to sequester carbon?
10:20 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
We do. Under our reporting in the United Nations, we publish every year estimates of emissions for all sources and all sinks. The most recent annual report was published in April.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
What are Canada's greenhouse gas emissions in terms of megatonnes? What's the number again?