Evidence of meeting #6 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 million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Well, I hope someone will take into consideration the suggestion from the farmers. You never know.
12:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
Sorry, I didn't address that. I do recall that.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
We do have lots of straw being produced in Canada. It could perhaps be stored nearby.
12:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
I do recall that coming up in the gulf. I don't know of anybody who's picked up that ball and run with it. But let us go back. There will be a number of areas where we have to follow up, respond, and I'll see if anything's been done on that front.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Okay, thank you very much.
We're going to move now to Mr. McKay.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I'll look forward to next year's allocation in your budget for straw.
I want to go back to a question raised by a colleague to Mr. Hallman, with respect to in situ. As I understand it, the federal government has withdrawn from any in situ environmental reviews, but in situ is three times more intensive on GHGs than is open-pit mining. So I don't quite understand the reasoning of the government, which says that we're going to leave it to a provincial regulatory authority rather than a federal regulatory authority. Air crosses provincial and international boundaries, and since when does the federal government no longer have authority with respect to in situ emissions from that kind of mining operation?
12:25 p.m.
President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
I think, Mr. Chair, the point with respect to the project list is that it focuses on those major projects that have the greatest potential for significant adverse environmental effects related to the project. That's not to say that the federal government writ large doesn't have an interest in and responsibility for GHGs, but it's not handled on a project-specific basis through the EA process. There's other work that Environment Canada conducts.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Virtually all of the projects, with the exception of the last announcement with Suncor, are in situ, and the effect of what you are saying is that we're just going to walk away from this and leave it to Alberta. Is that it?
12:25 p.m.
President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
I would not characterize it that way.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
You do have legal authority, though. If you wish to use your authority, you have it. I think we can establish that. Is that agreed?
12:25 p.m.
President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
The minister has authority under the act.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
She has the ability. So what's the thinking behind the choice not to exercise it?
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
As you'll find in O'Brien and Bosc, we cannot ask officials to predict what the minister is thinking or ask them for their advice on policy in regard to the minister's decisions. I think Mr. McKay is well over that line.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you, Mr. Storseth.
Proceed on technical questions, not on policy and politics.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
The authority is there. The choice has been made by the government to withdraw its authority in in situ mines. Do I have my facts right?
12:30 p.m.
President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
What I can say is that in situ was not on the project list before and it continues not to be.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
And will never be, in spite of the fact that this will be the greatest growth area of Alberta crude in the foreseeable future.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Again, Mr. McKay, you've asked the question and the question was answered. It never was there; it's not on now.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
The second question has to do with the partial response I got to my first question in the previous round. It has to do with the $67 million that's lapsed. Out of the $125 million that's lapsed, the $67 million that's lapsed is gone money. Is that correct?
12:30 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
Yes. I'll just walk you through it quickly. Of the $125 million that lapsed, $68 million was grants and contributions. Of that, $62.5 million was allocated to Sustainable Development Technology Canada to fund work they were doing that they couldn't use. So that money is gone.