Environment Committee on April 19th, 2016

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

—so we need to be serious.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

My concern then is that if we spend our billions we still may accomplish nothing because we're not significant. I'm not saying we shouldn't do something. I'm just arguing that perhaps the approach should be to leverage our technology to the substantive contributors.

In my second question, I want to talk about my riding of Sarnia—Lambton, which as you may know has a large number of refineries including Shell and Suncor, which you've talked about, and ExxonMobil as well. We also have NOVA Chemicals, which is looking at doing a billion-dollar polyethylene project all coming from the Marcellus shale gas based on methane. Obviously, for my riding it's a huge concern for them at a time when electricity prices from Ontario are 17¢ a kilowatt hour and they're looking at the cap-and-trade system being brought in, and they're concerned about a second federal price either on carbon or on methane.

Our industry locally is transitioning to the bio-economy so we have BioAmber; we have a bio-refinery from Comet; we have huge innovations in renewable energy and clean tech and we're in the transition phase. My concern is, what will the government do to recognize that these are very tough economic times and we have these multinational companies that have choices about whether to invest there or not. We want to make sure that we don't over-punish them while we're transitioning to the bio-economy.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I totally agree with you. We need to ensure that resources get developed but in a sustainable way. It is challenging. It can be challenging, but what I believe a carbon price does is that it is just a market mechanism that rewards.... It prices what we don't want, which is pollution. If you can reduce the pollution, then it is cheaper. I think that is the proper type of incentive. As I said, I am working with the provinces and territories. I am very interested in hearing from business, their perspective, as well as environmental NGOs, indigenous leaders, and all Canadians, about how we go forward. This is a huge opportunity for Canada.

As I said, today I was in an announcement with—

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you. That's fine.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

—the clean tech industry. Unfortunately, we are going in the wrong direction when it comes to clean tech. We could be a world leader. Those are opportunities as well.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you. I would like to invite you to come to Sarnia, because our Lambton College is a leader in clean tech and there is a lot going on.

I didn't see anything in budget 2016 about Lake Erie. You know that Lake Erie is turning green from algae and is rather in a crisis state. Coming from southwestern Ontario, I am wondering how your government is going to address that crisis.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I will talk in general terms, and then in terms of Lake Erie specifically, I will turn it over to the deputy.

Protecting our waters is really important, our fresh water, and looking at, as you say.... Whether it is algal bloom or other pollutants, we work very closely...including with the United States. It is something I can perhaps get back to you on, or else I'll ask my deputy if he would like to add something.

[Michael Martin, Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

There was a specific commitment in budget 2016 to renew funding for one year for Lake Erie.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I have a quick question on the environmental assessment process. Recognizing that we are looking to make sure that projects move forward, I see that we have added a greenhouse gas emissions assessment of upstream and downstream impacts, which I am used to as a chemical engineer working 32 years with companies like Shell. They have those processes.

However, I didn't see that any criteria for what is acceptable has been established. Has that been established, or is there still no way of judging, once you have all the data, whether it is okay or not?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

When we do environmental assessments, we do assessments based on the science and the facts. That is why it is very important to look at greenhouse gas emissions, both direct and upstream. Clearly, it is a project-by-project approach, and then there is a determination of significance by the environmental assessment agency. Project by project, we will consider what the greenhouse gas emissions are, both upstream and direct, in order to inform my decision.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Cullen, go ahead.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I am going to cede my time to somebody who apparently has some opinion on this matter. Ms. May could ask a few minutes of questions, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

It's over to Ms. May.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

I'd like to say a huge thank you to Nathan Cullen.

Minister, thank you. Again, I want to say that you didn't oversell what you did in Paris. You performed an enormous role in the success of the treaty and getting 1.5 in there.

I want to correct something in your written statement, if you'll forgive me. It is not the greenest budget in Canada's history. You would need to look at the 1993 budget or the 2005 budget for the greenest budgets. You could say this is definitely the greenest budget lately. I want to try to address as many points as I can in the time I have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have three minutes.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

The first one is related to Paris, very directly. As Nathan Cullen mentioned, our current target is still the one that was tabled by the previous government in May of last year. Since the Paris agreement works on the principle of ratcheting up, we know that the aggregate of all targets of all governments, if achieved, takes us to as high as 3.7 degrees Celsius above the global average temperature before the industrial revolution. It is urgent that countries begin removing their INDCs, ratcheting up, and tabling new ones.

I know you are in a tension with what the provinces are willing to take, and what businesses are ready to take, but without federal leadership in tabling a more ambitious target, how do we get other countries to withdraw their INDCs and ratchet up as well? This is my first question: When will you move the old INDC—which you have referred to as the floor—out of the way and start getting us somewhere near a ceiling?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Well, thank you very much. That's kind of you. I appreciate those kind words. I appreciate the fact you were there supporting the government in Paris.

You're absolutely right. The commitments of all governments do not translate to striving below 1.5. They don't, and that's why the ratcheting up mechanism every five years is going to be critical.

In terms of where we will be, and in terms of our international commitment, make no mistake about it, the federal government is going to show leadership on this. I don't think there's any point in putting a new target out and saying, “wow, we're great, we've got an ambitious target”, but once again we don't have a plan to get there.

While six months is not as fast as some would like, I think that is how you move forward in a thoughtful way. As we have heard, different provinces and territories have different challenges and different opportunities. We need to sit down with them and figure out how we can support them.

I've said that our target is a floor and not a ceiling. At the end of six months my job is to provide the Prime Minister with a recommendation.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

I have a very specific question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We have three minutes, and we're out of time. I'm so sorry.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

I was hoping to get a question in about the Southern Strait of Georgia Marine Conservation Area.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

I'm sorry.

We're going to start now on a third round of questioning, to give everybody a chance. I think this a wonderful opportunity, and we can take advantage of our time.

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you again, Minister.

In your previous comments to my questions, you made a bold statement, and I think I'm quoting you correctly, that all premiers endorsed carbon pricing at the summit in Vancouver. If I were to ask Premier Brad Wall whether he agreed with that sentiment, I believe you think he would.

I would challenge the assertion that every single premier has endorsed carbon pricing.

Your comments?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

In the Vancouver declaration, which was agreed to by the provinces and territories, and the federal government—I can find the language—they agreed that carbon pricing is part of the solution.

I am happy—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

With respect, Minister—

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

—to have a robust discussion.