Environment Committee on Nov. 28th, 2013

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, it's a great honour to have you here before our committee. We watched with interest your work in Poland. You certainly did our government proud there.

In that international forum, they focused on long-term projects, years of negotiations. To follow up on my colleague's question, what are we doing to promote immediate action on climate change?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Canada is the leading member of the Climate and Clean Air Coalition. To be a part of the CCAC, you have to have a plan in place to reduce black carbon and methane.

In fact, Canada is a co-founder and lead partner. It's a voluntary international framework for concrete actions to reduce short-lived climate pollutants. The great thing about the CCAC is that it's a lead in promoting a culture of countries constantly debating with one other. It is promoting action, as opposed to just talking about it.

In the 19 months that the CCAC has been in place, it has seen remarkable progress. It has grown from six to over 70 partners, including countries, UN organizations, and non-governmental organizations.

There are currently 10 action-oriented initiatives under the CCAC. Canada is an active partner in this work and is leading the development and implementation of initiatives in agriculture, solid waste, and heavy-duty diesel vehicles and engines.

I'm also proud that Canada is the top contributor to the CCAC, having delivered $13 million in support of developing and implementing the initiatives.

Canada is receiving recognition and praise for its leadership of the CCAC. Canadians should be proud of that. We are moving this initiative forward and establishing an organization that is action-oriented, as opposed to just talking about it. The commitment is there from over 70 partners now taking action on this initiative.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

I really appreciate, Minister, your distinction between talking about the environment and actually doing something about specific environmental issues and generating real and meaningful results.

Regarding our domestic actions in Canada, we've taken a number of actions to curb emissions—all emissions—and also to improve air quality. Can you elaborate on some of the programs and on the progress that has happened to date?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you for that question.

We will continue to pursue the sector-by-sector regulatory approach. That will allow us to protect both the environment and the economy. We're not taking a one-size-fits-all approach. Instead, we're tailoring our approaches to what makes sense for each sector. We are continuing to make good progress and are already seeing some positive results.

Regulations are in place in the two areas I mentioned in my opening remarks: transportation and electricity. As a result of the current and proposed greenhouse gas regulations for cars and trucks, the 2025 cars and light trucks will emit about half the amount of greenhouse gases of 2008, and new regulations for the 2018 model year heavy-duty vehicles will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 23%.

For electricity, we finalized the regulations to address carbon dioxide and coal-fired electricity in September 2012. The stringent performance standards for new and end-of-life units will come into force on July 1, 2015. That makes Canada the first country to effectively ban the construction of traditional coal units. In fact, the first 21 years of these regulations are expected to result in a cumulative reduction in greenhouse gases of about 214 megatonnes, which is equivalent to 2.6 million personal vehicles being removed from the roads per year.

As well, in the Speech from the Throne, we confirmed that we're moving forward, working with the provinces, to deal with reducing emissions from the oil and gas sector.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Yes, and I think that work is bearing fruit. In my own research on environmental indicators, all air quality environmental indicators are improving in Canada, and that is a remarkable legacy.

Regarding the most recent Speech from the Throne, in your opening remarks you also talked about the national conservation plan, something this committee is very interested in. Can you update us on the status of the national conservation plan?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

First of all, I would like to thank the committee for all the hard work on this file. This is a topic of particular interest to many of you here. I can assure you that the hard work of the last couple of studies that have looked at conservation has been very informative.

As you know, a national conservation plan is a priority of our government. We have been engaging with our partners and stakeholders to develop the plan.

As you rightly pointed out, the most recent Speech from the Throne reiterated as well the government's commitment to developing the national conservation plan. As stated in budget 2013, further details will be announced in the coming year.

The plan will articulate a national vision for conservation and build on existing successes while fostering new and innovative approaches and partnerships. It will focus on our collective efforts and promote stewardship and encourage on-the-ground actions to conserve Canada's ecosystem. Efforts will be focused on conserving the ecosystem, including stewardship actions on working landscapes, reconnecting Canadians with nature, and restoring the degraded areas.

This is an exciting initiative. I hope to make an announcement moving this forward in the not too distant future.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Mr. Sopuck.

We'll move now to Mr. McKay for seven minutes.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Minister.

I tend to focus my questions primarily out of the Public Accounts of Canada, volume II, page 8.6 and thereafter.

I'm just going to ask a whole series of questions, because I have only seven minutes and I'd like answers, and I'm perfectly prepared to accept written answers.

The first, page 8.6, under vote 1, you have total authorities of $768 million, and you lapse $43 million; you have $60 million, and you lapse $14 million; you have $171 million and you lapse $67 million. So out of a total budget of $1.1 billion, you lapse $125 million, roughly 10% of your budget. That seems to be an extraordinary amount of moneys given back to the treasury, which calls into question whether the original budget presentations are accurate and what it is that members of Parliament are voting on when they receive budgets from your department.

The second question comes from page 8.9, the top line, “Climate change and clean air”. Total authorities available are $240 million; authorities used in the current year $157 million, and that also comes out in your documents on November 28.

On “Threats to Canadians and their environment from pollution are minimized”, you're spending upwards of $70 million less than the authorities have granted to you. When you add in “Substances and waste management” and “Compliance promotion and enforcement”, all of those budgets take a hit as well. You have total authorities available of $375 million, you spent $278 million, so $100 million less than you have authority for.

Also on page 8.9, “Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency”, you have $32 million available to you and you've only spent $27 million.

I have several other questions.

Over to 8.12, you have total authorities available there of $4.7 million for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. You've used $1.9 million, almost $2 million, and you've lapsed $2.7 million. Again, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency is a pretty important agency and you've walked away from the better end of half of their budget.

On 8.13, “Water resources, Regulatory services”, you have $163,000 available for water resources, and none of them have been used.

Also on page 8.13, under “Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, External revenues, Environmental assessment services”, you have available, $7.4 million and you've only used $2.2 million.

All of that indicates a substantial number of lapses certainly in areas of significance to Canadians. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency is an important agency and a $5 million lapse on a budget of $8 million is a substantial lapse.

Possibly all of these have explanations. On the documentation that's before the committee it's not readily apparent what these explanations might be, so I'll leave those questions with you.

My final question has to do with your oil and gas regulations, and in response to Ms. Leslie's question, you say you're working on with the provinces.

Do you expect a decision will be made before or after President Obama makes the decision on Keystone?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you.

On your last question, the greenhouse gas emissions that I made reference to, when we're ready we will present that. We want to get this right for Canada, and when I'm ready to release that information, that will be released publicly. Again, we have to work with the provinces and the territories on any of these initiatives.

To answer the first question—

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

With the greatest respect, Minister, that doesn't respond to what is a fairly significant economic decision for Canada. A significant economic decision is going to be made by President Obama as to whether to allow Keystone. If Keystone doesn't occur, there will be a whole ripple effect throughout the industry, and it's largely determined by the fact that we have no GHG emission regulations. So it's a little late in the day to say we're going to continue to work with our provincial partners.

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Partnership with the provinces is an essential part. We cannot move forward in any of these without working with the provinces or territories on any initiatives of this nature.

As I said earlier, we want to get this right for Canada. This is for Canada. We want to get it right for Canada, and once I'm ready to present that, I will present that, but at this point in time it's premature to comment further on what the timing of this will be. Again, we have to work with the provinces.

To go back to the very first question you asked related to public accounts at Environment Canada for the 2012-13 areas where there are lapses, the $125.6 million that lapsed consisted of the $68 million in grants and contributions, which was a surplus, of which $62.5 million was funding that we had made available to Sustainable Development Technology Canada and they were not able to spend it or use it. The balance of the $43 million in operating and $14.2 million in capital are surpluses that have been approved by the Treasury Board to transfer from one fiscal year to the next fiscal year.

In regard to the other questions, I'm going to pass on to Mr. Hamilton to respond.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

In light of the time and the limited time we have with the minister, could we make a note of that and possibly Mr. McKay could come back to that with Mr. Hamilton in the second part of our meeting?

Are you comfortable with that?

[Bob Hamilton]

It's in your hands. I'm happy to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I do want to give each member equal time.

We're going to move on now to Monsieur Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madam Minister, thank you very much for being here.

My first question is about the Green Climate Fund. According to the Copenhagen target, which is a weak one, you agreed to contribute to the tune of $400 million. Are you going to increase that amount in the coming years?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Is that on the Fast-start funding?

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Yes.

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

We have delivered our commitment of the $1.2 billion. This is the largest contribution we have made. The grants have been provided in many cases.

In terms of the outcome of the next climate agreement for 2015, it's premature to comment on what that will be.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Forgive the interruption, Madam Minister, but my question was actually about—

if you are going to send more money now, this year and next year. Is there going to be more money?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

In terms of our commitment, we remain committed to that $1.2 billion.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

That is strange, because, in the negotiations that are now underway, they are saying that it is very important to invest more money in developing countries and poor countries.

Let me move to another matter. According to the Public Accounts of Canada, tabled on October 31, the Government of Canada's environmental deficit increased by more than 27% over last year. There is also an increase in almost $2.2 billion for nuclear liability. The environmental deficit now represents more than 9% of the payables and the accumulated deficit is $10.6 billion. That is a huge amount and it has been increasing steadily since 2006. In fact, since 2006, the increase has been 80%, which is a quite staggering statistic.

How do you explain that increase in the environmental deficit? What steps are you going to take to stop the increase in order that there can be some justice between generations. It would be irresponsible to leave this environmental deficit to future generations.

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

On the first comment you made, I just want to put this out for the record. The discussions related to a new agreement will be determined in 2015 on a new climate agreement for Canada. That's for the record.

In terms of your secondary questions relating to the nuclear liability, that is better referred to Minister Oliver. Minister Oliver should be addressing that question, as opposed to me.

Thank you.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Ms. Aglukkaq, yesterday, the Green Budget Coalition issued its four priorities. Could you tell me your impression of those priorities? Are you going to follow up on them?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

I have yet to receive that report.

Thank you.