Evidence of meeting #59 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 program.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Mike Morrice  Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab
Tracey Ryan  Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

June 4th, 2015 / 9:40 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

What would you recommend to the committee concerning the federal government's role? Some programs are ad hoc and do not have long-term funding. Do you have any recommendations?

9:40 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

Again, that is a very good question.

We would be happy to work on some of the long-term recommendations.

Off the top, looking at where those priorities are—one of the previous members talked about the Great Lakes and the Great Lakes agreement—it's looking at those priorities and providing a longer range. We find, looking at the history of the success of the rural water quality program, that it is human nature that people take some time to make plans. That is probably echoed in business and in the business of agriculture as well.

We need programs that have a longer lifespan so that we can do some planning because we're looking at individuals having to bring the decision-making to make a change in their business, whether that is agriculture or VeriForm. They need to make a business decision and make a business plan, so ensuring that there is a longer timeframe on some of those incentives or cost shares, tax reduction, whatever, seems to suit best for the business. We find that often we need to go and talk to the individuals who are looking for that support, so I think longer range, longer term, allows individuals to make those decisions and to build them into their plan. They may not be ready to implement now, but they will be in three to five years.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you. We're well beyond our time there.

Mr. Choquette, thank you.

Mrs. Ambler, please, you have five minutes.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much to both of you for being here today with very interesting presentations.

I'd like to start, if I might, with the business case you mentioned, Mr. Morrice, and that you emphasized, which I appreciated. It brought me back in time because.... I like the fact you pointed out there. You both pointed out there's a business case for being more environmentally friendly and for taking these items into consideration when a company is doing its business plan and trying to increase its profits.

In fact, when I started working with my father in his small company back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I remember very clearly he refused to buy preprinted notepads with the nice carbon paper and the pink and the yellow sheets underneath. He refused because he said there was nothing wrong with taking a piece of paper where the back side isn't used, and is blank, and cutting that into fours. That was one of my jobs when I was 12, to go through the garbage and make sure there was no unused paper.

That was, of course, before the days of recycling where you would get your paper, your cartons, your glass, and your plastic all picked up. I think older generations often do these things much more naturally than younger people. We've become accustomed to the services being available.

I guess my question is about the level of sophistication. When you go into an office like Ernst and Young, you find they don't have heating problems. They're not losing heat or whatever. What kinds of things are they doing that businesses could do, big or small, to reduce their carbon footprint?

9:45 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

I can share the process any business goes through. In every community, the NGO would create a milestone process of some kind. It starts with establishing some kind of a green team, or a group of employees who are responsible for the environmental performance or impact of the company. Then you go about getting an inventory of some kind of what the current baseline impact is. Then engage a consultant and use the tools and supports to create an action plan. Then understand from a management point of view which items of a payback period are acceptable in that action plan. Then set a target.

To the question about specific programs or projects for each company, that would be in that action plan. Of course it would differ so much between a VeriForm versus an Ernst and Young, or a hospital versus a utility. Typically it's some mix of looking at their fleet and seeing what efficiencies can be found, and looking at energy and starting with conservation. Those of course are the cheapest. They can then move to energy efficiency, then into renewables next and identifying for that particular firm which are the obvious ones, or the low-hanging fruit they ought to look at first, and then prioritizing later ones once they have some money flowing in from those initial projects.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

Do you find some companies, as part of their plan, will take on projects that might not necessarily affect the bottom line? If they get into the groove and they decide that even though it's revenue neutral, or it might even cost them, would they still do it anyway?

9:45 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Absolutely, particularly when they have had some big wins, for instance when there's been some financial windfall from a T5 retrofit. I think it goes to an earlier question we received. All of a sudden, if employees are getting excited about it and are proud of their employer, this is not all about energy savings. There is value to the company in having employees being prouder and excited to work where they do. That has residual benefit. That changes the culture of a business, and then they can look at some things that may have a payback period of seven years that, on day one, the company might not have considered.

After they've had some of those early wins and employees are pumped up, that becomes an option, which then goes back to your questions about incentives. I think your metaphor is a helpful one, where companies can learn how to cut the paper into four. Government can provide programs to make it easier for them to do so and have the recycling programs and infrastructure that make it the norm, which goes to the earlier question.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Mrs. Ambler, your time is up.

We'll move now to Ms. Leslie for five minutes, please.

9:50 a.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to both of you. This has been very interesting. I appreciate your testimony.

Mr. Morrice, I'd like to start with you. You and I have chatted about energy efficiency in the past, and I think I might have mentioned that I was part of the working group that established Efficiency Nova Scotia, which is an arm's-length energy efficiency utility. It's not a not-for-profit. It's not a government agency. It's actually a utility, like a power company, only they reduce the power we're using.

When I was doing that, my role was with the Affordable Energy Coalition. I was there on behalf of low-income Nova Scotians. If you are on welfare in Nova Scotia, you live on about six dollars a day, so if the choice is a $6 CFL light bulb—where you'll save the money eventually—or eating that day, the choice is clear. You're going to eat. With low-income folks there are very particular barriers, but with companies, it's different. There aren't really the same barriers, yet still they're not doing energy efficiency. Ms. Ambler asked if these companies were going to keep doing this. That's valid.

You talked about how they get the taste for it and then off they go. My question to you is: why haven't they done it already? Why do they actually need you? What role do you serve? If it affects the bottom line, why aren't these businesses already knee-deep or neck-deep in energy efficiency?

9:50 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Great question.

There are a myriad of answers to that. The first is having examples to look to and seeing success—and not in a report of a company in some other country, but a peer. It's seeing other peers take a leadership role, which relates back to the question about municipalities. An excellent example of that is where a municipality can be the first to lead and a business can learn from a municipality, so the first one is providing examples.

The second is the connections and networks. In Ontario, for example, there's the save ON energy program, which has some similarities, I understand, with Nova Scotia.... Many businesses might not be aware or could be overwhelmed by the bureaucracy that they perceive to be in place. To host a technical workshop where their conservation demand management person is at the front of the room, who can then walk them through it afterwards, is another removal of a barrier.

Then the third is having a friendly coach or guide to make it easier for you to remove any perceived risks.

Those are all the various barriers that a network of support is designed to reduce to uplift those who are already in the front lines, and then bring others alongside.

9:50 a.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Thanks for that.

I believe businesses need the help of not-for-profits like yours, agencies, or whoever has that expertise, so I appreciate your perspective from the front lines.

My second question is for Ms. Ryan. You talked about the success you've had with companies coming in and wanting to spend a day, whether it's—and I can't remember the examples you used—actually being there, doing the digging, and getting their hands dirty. I really appreciate that.

I wonder, from your perspective, how you balance the desire of these folks who really want to be involved, participate, and put their sweat into your projects, and the fact that they don't actually have expertise. It might actually be better if they just gave you money and then you employ the people with their expertise. But I understand that there's real value in having those folks there on the ground with you, so what's the balance there?

9:50 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

That's a very good question and something we continue to grapple with, because it is balance. We get calls during the tree planting season. We plant over 300,000 trees in our watershed on private land, on our land, and with volunteers. Not all 300,000...with volunteers. It's probably fewer than 30,000, or maybe 10,000, with volunteers. I'm not even sure. It is more planning. It's more work. We would get far more done by just employing our planters.

But there is a huge value to having people involved, engaged, and participating. There is a balance and we are still working that out. On trail maintenance, what are the health and safety regulations? What's the risk management piece? What can those volunteers undertake that is less risk for them but will still get meaningful work done for them and for us? If we're going to spend four days planning to have them complete 100 metres of trail or less, that may not be appropriate. We are working on that internally and having that go on.

Something like Toyota, where they bring their own health and safety people, sit down and plan the job, and then are able to manage it so we're able to match the job to the crew they bring, that's ideal. But we have a lot of other opportunities or people coming to us. We are starting to balance, and we will be working on developing more of a program, so that's good.

9:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you, Ms. Leslie.

Mr. Sopuck, please.

9:55 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

Thank you.

I appreciated both of your testimonies. I will direct my questions, though, to Ms. Ryan, since I represent a rural area and I'm very interested in the issue of watershed conservation.

In terms of your agricultural incentives program, I was very impressed to hear that you prefer the incentive route. Is one of the issues in your watershed in terms of dealing with water quality just one of scale? Like, we know what to do, but are you just not able to affect enough of the landscape to effect the changes that you would like?

9:55 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

That's a very good question. Yes, scale comes into it, definitely.

It's been interesting listening to all the questions today. A lot of it comes down to human nature. The comment has been that we know what to do and we know what the right thing is. Some of the right things are cost neutral or actually will enhance the bottom line. Through putting in wind breaks, for example, farmers can probably get higher yields on the crops in some circumstances, but in others they may see a drop. It's getting the knowledge out and overcoming the barriers.

Some of those barriers are just cultural norms. I speak to a lot of farm groups, or I have in the past. I always like to frame it that no one gets up in the morning and wants to pollute. What they are getting up to do, if it's agriculture, is farm. They are getting up to make a living farming. That's what they know. Often they farm in a way that may or may not impact the environment. Building environmental awareness into it may be just that extra piece that they can't handle at that point in time, either financially or knowledge-based, so we try to bridge that with the incentives and the technical assistance.

It's a scale piece. It's an ability to reach everyone. Not everyone goes to the farm meetings or reads the farm press. It's interesting that still, after 15 years of having a rural water quality program, some landowners are surprised that they could get funding for something. Some are very expensive. Proper and adequate manure storage can be hundreds of thousands of dollars. We're putting a $25,000 grant towards that. That may be something that they plan for. We then try to assist them with ensuring that it does address the water quality impacts they may have and with building in nutrient management.

9:55 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

Are you familiar with the pilot projects in Ontario that go under the name alternative land use services, or ALUS?

9:55 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

That's a good question. Yes, we're very familiar with ALUS. Actually, our program predates it coming in.

We do offer incentives. Our program is actually very similar to ALUS in that it was designed by farmers. We brought in a steering committee. We had over 30 people around the table when we designed the project with our municipalities. Most of those were farmers. They set the incentives. They set the program and provided us with a lot of planning.

Prior to that—ALUS was not a term when we formed the rural water quality program—we actually talked about performance incentives. For planting trees, we provide landowners with a payment for that land taken out of production where they plant the trees for up to three years. But we call it a performance incentive, not compensation. We're not compensating for lost agriculture. We're looking at it from a multi-functional agricultural point of view.

10 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

Yes. That's the right term.

I gather you would like to see Canadian agricultural policy include an ALUS-like program or an incentive program. I'll just leave that there, because I'm sure you'd agree with that, and I don't have much time left.

I'd like to skip to your fisheries management program. Are you familiar with the recreational fisheries conservation partnerships program that our government has, and have you accessed that program for your fisheries habitat work?

10 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

Oh, good question; we may have, yes. We have accessed some federal dollars for our fisheries management. I'm not sure exactly which program, because it's not in my direct area.

10 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

That would be the one, the RFCPP.

Again, just for your information, I would strongly recommend that perhaps we need to have a meeting with some local MPs and you, because I think the number of granting programs that our government has put in place through the national conservation plan would fit your watershed to a T. There's the wetland restoration program and the habitat stewardship program. Of course there's the North American waterfowl management plan, and the Nature Conservancy's natural area conservation program.

Just on that last point, has the Nature Conservancy been active in your watershed in purchasing critical habitats?

10 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

Yes, we partner with them.

10 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

I think I'm done. Thank you very much.

10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

I'd like to just follow up on a comment Mr. Sopuck made. I just want to acknowledge the work that Grand River Conservation Authority has done with elected officials at all levels— federal, provincial, and municipal—who have been participating in tours organized by the local chapter of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture. These educational opportunities are golden. If you could pick up on Mr. Sopuck's idea of including information for the different levels of government and institutions regarding the funding pockets that are available, I think those would be a great use of our time.

Mr. Valeriote, welcome to our committee.

10 a.m.

Liberal

Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON

Thank you, Mr. Albrecht.

Michael and Tracey, I haven't had the benefit of your presentations. I'm only picking up on some of the questions that have been asked, but Michael, I'm going to start with you.

We've all experienced our own engagement in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in our footprint. I have 41 panels on a building in a FIT program and the return is great. I argue with those around me from time to time who think that I'm getting a real deal, but I remind them that I paid for the infrastructure. That's what taxpayers don't understand, that the people who put panels on their houses pay for the infrastructure and that relieves the taxpayer of the cost for that infrastructure and the maintenance of it. But my own personal experience is fantastic.

There's a company in Guelph called Skyline, a real estate investment trust, which owns well over $1 billion in property across Canada. When they buy an apartment building they immediately change the light bulbs, the toilets, the appliances. They drive the cost of utilities down. When you have a greater net income that's capitalized, of course the value of your buildings goes up tremendously. The value of their buildings has gone up by millions of dollars just by the application of what you spoke of, the business model.

I'm asking you specifically. You're near Guelph, and you've probably heard of the community energy plan, which morphed into the district energy plan. I don't know if you talked about that today, but could you tell us about the district energy plan, rather than having me tell us about it, and what it's accomplishing?

10 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Sure, and I'll relate it to an earlier question. We are not currently based in Guelph, so I'm by no means an expert in their community energy plan. However, community energy plans are another example of a tool that municipalities have to demonstrate leadership, to plan, and to engage businesses, the private sector, in reducing their environmental impact, increasing their profitability, and growing a low-carbon economy. I think it's another example of a local tool that is needed to have the kind of planning that would achieve a lot of the goals we've been talking about throughout this session.