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

10 a.m.

Liberal

Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON

Could you tell us how they're doing that and what it involves?

10 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

This is working with the utility and the municipality to plan out the energy needs of the community and to look at local energy sources that could meet those needs over, I understand, a 10-year to 20-year horizon. It's really been the cornerstone of Guelph's sustainability efforts, which I assume you've been a big part of. I'm not as connected to Guelph specifically, since Guelph is not a member of our network, but should Guelph apply or should there be a community group in Guelph, that would be an example of the kind of thing to which we would say, “Great. This is a group that's ready to engage the private sector because it has a community energy plan in place.”

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON

More specifically what's happening, as you know, is that the Sleeman Centre, which is our huge arena, is generating a tremendous amount of heat. They're now pumping it underground to other local buildings—there are government buildings, and a local church has applied—and they find that in fact it's cheaper for them to tap into the community energy plan, the district energy grid, than to put in, for instance, their own million-dollar furnace.

10:05 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Those are the kinds of things you can get when you are that forward-looking to have the waste of one site becoming the heat of another. With those kinds of stories, if a network like ours operated in Guelph, we'd want to take the folks who were behind a project like that and get them up at the front of the room to share their business case and how they came to it, and to have others follow suit.

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON

Tracey, I have just a quick question. I come from Guelph and of course the Grand River Conservation Authority is managing all the watersheds in and around that area. I'm curious; I have to ask this. I remember when the Navigable Waters Act was changed and a large number of rivers were removed. I think 63 were identified as being protected specifically under the act. I called and asked, because I understand only part of the Grand River and not all of the Grand River is now protected by the Navigable Waters Act. I'm wondering if you have any concerns about the Grand River in relation to the Navigable Waters Act and whether it is in need of greater protection.

10:05 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

Thank you. I'm not going to be able to speak directly to that because that is a little outside my venue. Of course, the Grand always needs more protection and continuing partnerships so I can't speak directly to the removal of that act.

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

I think that the Navigable Waters Act relates to navigation of the Grand River not the actual environmental protection. But Mr. Valeriote, I'm sure, will be applying to Sustainability CoLab to have Guelph be a member very shortly.

We'll move now to Mr. Carrie. At this point, Mr. Carrie is the last member who has his name on the list so if anyone else wants to pose a question please keep your hands ready. We'll be winding up shortly.

Mr. Carrie, you have five minutes.

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to address Mr. Morrice first. As the MP for Oshawa I'm happy that you brought up Durham Sustain Ability and their partnerships with Deer Creek, Durham College, and General Motors. I think this is something that our community benefits from but I think more communities could benefit from those types of arrangements as well.

I believe you mentioned a company called VeriForm. They doubled their profits by investing in green technology: energy efficiency, recycling, and stuff like that. Did the profits come from savings in energy alone or are there other ways that the profits were increased?

10:05 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

The vast majority of the savings were through operational costs of reduced energy usage. I would be pleased to send you a link to provide a full list of the 37 projects I first cited and the specific.... Paul, if he were here, would share about reduced maintenance costs, would get into operational costs. I would defer to Paul.

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Yes, I would love to have that information.

I wanted to get you to expand a little. Mr. Sopuck brought up that perhaps your organizations could work with MPs to see where there is different federal funding because pockets of funding are available. You mentioned SR and ED, and NRC, and that perhaps things could be looked at or interpreted a little differently. Could you expand on those comments that you made earlier?

10:05 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Sure, and it allows me to go back to an earlier question I was hoping to get back to.

There are pockets of funding federally, programs like Canada summer jobs, which NGOs can also apply to, that provide additional support that is very much needed. FedDev would be another example. One of our members, Durham Sustain Ability, is looking at FedDev support. The current challenge is that when an organization like Durham Sustain Ability goes for FedDev's support, their criteria is based purely on the economic benefit. They get in line behind a number of other organizations and programs that are also adding to the economic development or economic potential of their community. The individual profitability of the businesses and the environmental impact are not necessarily considered. It's a much longer line to get into.

Looking at programs like that and having the climate change or sustainability-related impact be a criterion would allow for a group like DSA to say they will have businesses setting targets to reduce their carbon impact. They will also increase their profitability and they will grow the low-carbon economy at the same time. But to only look at one of the three criteria makes it more challenging for a DSA-type group to be successful in that application.

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

Do you want to expand any further on the SR and ED, and NRC stuff or...?

10:10 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Absolutely. NRC is very similar. Sustainable Waterloo Region was successful in receiving funding from IRAP within NRC. This is the industrial research assistance program. Again, they got in line behind other.... Again, the purpose of the program was to ensure more commercialization of technology, so there is room for green tech to be commercialized when businesses like VeriForm are looking at implementing the projects I just spoke to. That was the only time that any of our members have received IRAP funding. If a program like that were to be looked at again and have a piece of the funding separated to have not only the commercialization of tech but also the climate change benefits, then groups like the members in our network would have a much stronger chance of being successful more often in programs like that.

To the earlier question about what kinds of tools we have available, what kind of incentives, you have models of those existing tools that are purely for economic development. To take some of those tools and bring them to an environmental lens as well as the economic lens would allow the government to pair the win-wins we've been talking about throughout this session and prioritize funding for programs that achieve both.

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON

That's why I think this study is so important. We are looking at the partnerships and at how we can bring these two entities together.

As you said, one of your partners was able, by partnering with other industries and companies, to be successful in bringing that extra piece in this way. There was a bit of talk earlier about how these connections are made, how these people come together in an incubator kind of fashion, and whether that is something that could be promoted.

This question is for the both of you. Do you find that you have to reach out and go for these partnerships, or are you starting to see more and more corporations come to you? You mentioned Toyota and GM. How are you finding the transition? Is there a missing link, perhaps, that the government could help out with?

10:10 a.m.

Executive Director and Founder, Sustainability CoLab

Mike Morrice

Absolutely. I'll briefly answer and allow Ms. Ryan to also answer.

It allows me to underscore the point that this is not for any one level of government or any one sector. This needs to be a group effort and very much speaks to some of the other questions we've received.

What we've seen is that programs such as the seven in our network create a fertile ground. With that fertile ground in place, then with a building such as the one I spoke of—a 120,000-square foot, iconic, net energy positive building in Waterloo region—the potential exists for the federal government to support this, because you have 65 businesses that are already part of the program, already understand the business case, and are already seeing the benefits of it. For the most part, the tenants in the space would be members of the regional carbon initiative.

There's huge opportunity for federal government to provide support alongside others, once that fertile ground is in place, as well as to support a program such as carbon 613, which is just getting off the ground.

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you.

Another comment along that vein is that we have Sustainable Development Technology Canada. I don't know whether you're accessing funds through it.

I'm going to give Ms. Ryan a few seconds to respond to Mr. Carrie's question. Then we'll move to the next question.

10:10 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

Thank you.

I think Mr. Morrice has answered it well. Once you have the fertile ground and have a good foundation, you're bringing more people into the room.

Any chance to have sustainable funding to support that network, that partnership, in the ongoing longevity of those programs is important, so bringing the municipal, provincial, and federal levels to the table to support the longer term is really important. We find that with any...the diffusion adoption curve is classic. You get your early adopters, your early majority, and you move through. With the agricultural community and private landowners, we're probably into the big part of the bell curve. We still have some of the later ones to bring into the room, so we're certainly not done our work.

The more we can share stories on success with the support of all members of all levels of government.... It's really important to keep that work going.

Thank you.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

I have a quick follow-up request for Mr. Morrice.

You mentioned a link to an area that specifies all the different ways that VeriForm saved their funds. If you could send that to our clerk, it would be very helpful for possible inclusion in the report.

We'll move to Mr. Woodworth, please, for five minutes.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Ryan, I didn't have much chance to speak with you earlier, so I'd like to direct a few questions to you right now. I have two main areas of interest.

One involves the question of the non-agricultural private sector interface that you have with industries or businesses in the watershed. I understand very clearly that there are companies such as RBC and Toyota and others that adopt what might be described as a philanthropic approach to environmental initiatives, but I wonder also whether the GRCA has any specific work with private sector non-agricultural operations within the watershed to assist operations in sustainable and protective practices for the watershed.

I really don't know whether you have or not, but I'm thinking of aggregate producers, for example, who might have a serious impact on the watershed, depending on their location. There may be others—manufacturers. I'm thinking of Breslube Enterprises, for example. I have no idea whether they're near your watershed.

How do you work with them, if at all?

10:15 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

That's a very good question. Primarily, we don't offer programs for more industry-based projects. Those tend to be through the province or the federal government or the municipal government, and not-for-profits like Sustainable Waterloo Region. But we do work with those locations where they have land holdings where they may want to do tree planting, for example, so a program like Trees for Guelph, which is a not-for-profit that we work very closely with. Actually, we supply the staff member, so we more or less are the agency that operationalizes their vision. They are working with local businesses in Guelph that happen to have property. In many of those industrial developments they have areas where they can plant trees, or vice versa, provide some funds and then we work with Trees for Guelph to plant trees in school areas with schoolchildren. Again, there's a nice connection between local business, local community, quality of life.

There's a similar relationship in Brantford where we have Earth Week, and we have a few really key individuals in Brantford who are working with, again, the businesses in Brantford, very many of them industrial. There's a new industrial park and we're working with them on a long-term project. I think it's a 100-acre forest, and we're planting with funds provided by the local businesses, which also participate, again, in the volunteer events and support that. We don't go into energy saving or water saving. We work with things like source protection. We've done some work with businesses through source protection, but the venue that we're working with tends to be more land-based in those instances.

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

That leads to my next question. I'd like to hear a little bit more about the rural water quality program. In particular, I'm interested in knowing how actively or passively are the farmers participating. Is it just a case where they are given money and things happen, or do they put their own money in? Do they put their own efforts into it as well? Can you help me on that?

10:15 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

I certainly can. It's a very good question.

No, actually, for every dollar that's provided as a cost share there are at least two or three dollars—I think it's up to about three dollars now—that is provided by the landowner. That funding, though, because we don't parcel it out, may actually come from a federally supported program like the environmental farm plan in the past, so through the agricultural programming. What we're doing then is matching the dollars so that we're not duplicating efforts but we're providing assistance.

In those cases the landowner is providing either sweat equity, so if they're building a fence they can receive up to 100% to keep their livestock out of water or wetlands or other sensitive habitat areas. If they're the ones doing the construction, we will supply through the program, if it meets all of the requirements, 100% of the funds for the capital cost. Therefore, the landowner is putting in their sweat equity. If they're having it built by a local fencing company, it's 75%. We have a variety of different cost shares, and they range from a lower amount to up to 100%, depending on what that best management practice is and its value.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Very good.

You mentioned also something that surprised me that I hadn't really heard about before, and that is legacy phosphorus. I took that to mean that there is a residue of phosphorus that's accumulated over the years from past farming, but I'm not really sure. Can you expand a little bit on that, please?

10:20 a.m.

Manager, Environmental Education and Restoration, Grand River Conservation Authority

Tracey Ryan

Yes. Again, with the scientific community and the researchers finding more and more things that are answering some of our questions, phosphorus gets tied up.... There are different forms of phosphorus. We have soluble and insoluble, and it will get tied up in the sediments so that if they are sitting in the riverbank or in the bottom sediment in some of the wetlands, certain conditions will flush them through. It's very difficult to monitor and to do cause and effect. You do a planting, and a buffer, and a nutrient management plan, and A, B, C, and D on the upper headwaters. How do you measure or monitor that impact? We're finding it is difficult, so again, we turn back to the work being done by researchers, either on the plot scale or on the field scale, and have to extrapolate.

You'll see the success stories with the Grand River through our water management plan, and those sorts of things, where we can identify some of our sub-basins that are improving when you look at the nutrient index or areas where we have anecdotal evidence from the farmers who say, there were never fish and they're now seeing fish. We have a group that's actually putting trout back in the Conestoga River below the dam, because we have the cold water coming out of the dam at Conestoga, and with some work that's been done in the upstream that area will support trout now.

We have some success stories. There are other areas that may not be quite so successful where we have more work to do.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you, Mr. Woodworth.

Thank you to both of our witnesses: Ms. Ryan, for being with us by video; and Mr. Morrice, here in person. Thank you for the work you've done.

I think quite clearly that the committee has made progress today on the actual mandate of this study on how the private sector in Canada is showing leadership by partnering with not-for-profit organizations to undertake local environmental initiatives. On that note, I'm going to declare this meeting adjourned and thank you again for your time and input.

The meeting is adjourned.