Evidence of meeting #110 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was project.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Christine Loth-Bown  Vice-President, Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Terence Hubbard  Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
Brent Parker  Director, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Division, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Catherine Higgens  Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport
Jeff Labonté  Assistant Deputy Minister, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair (Mrs. Deborah Schulte (King—Vaughan, Lib.)) Liberal Deb Schulte

I'm going to bring the meeting to order, if I could, please.

Before I introduce the minister and her panel, I just want to let the committee know that I'm very appreciative that the minister has come back. This will be the second time she is in front of the committee on this bill, Bill C-69, and that's unusual. She's being generous.

I want to make sure the committee appreciates that it is unusual for a minister to come back on one bill. The reason she is back in front of us is that there were issues raised about the need to ask her specific questions relevant to the testimony we heard over the last couple of weeks on Bill C-69, and possibly some amendments may be brought forward. We have seen many. I think we have several hundred to look at.

I usually am very generous, but today I'm going to be very strict. I want to make sure we stay on target with the questions on Bill C-69, because that's what she's here for.

To get started, I'd like to introduce, obviously, the minister.

Thank you very much for coming back in front of us.

We have Jonathan Wilkinson, MP, North Vancouver, and the parliamentary secretary. We have Ron Hallman, president, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency; and Stephen Lucas, deputy minister, Department of the Environment.

I welcome you, and I give you the floor.

Thank you.

11:05 a.m.

Ottawa Centre Ontario

Liberal

Catherine McKenna LiberalMinister of Environment and Climate Change

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would also like to thank the members of the committee.

Thank you to our amazing chair and also to the members of the committee. I really do appreciate all the hard work you do on this committee.

Of course I'm thrilled to be here with Jonathan Wilkinson, who, as you all know, is my parliamentary secretary; Stephen Lucas, who is the deputy minister of Environment and Climate Change; and Ron Hallman, president of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

I want to thank you again for the invitation to return to talk about Bill C-69. I know we all care greatly about how we do environmental assessments and about making sure we rebuild trust in them.

Before I start, I want to recognize that we're on the traditional territory of the Algonquin and Anishinabe peoples. In my job, it is extremely important that we partner with indigenous peoples—our first nations, our Métis, and Inuit peoples—who care greatly about our land, our waters, and our air. I think you will see that reflected in Bill C-69.

First of all, I really appreciate the hard work of all the committee members.

Reviewing a bill that is of interest to so many Canadians is not a small undertaking. I also want to reiterate the values that guided our work in getting to this point and share with you some perspectives from Canadians since my last appearance.

The legislation we introduced earlier this year aims to restore public trust in how the federal government makes decisions about major projects, like mines, pipelines, and hydro dams.

These better rules are designed to protect our environment, improve investor confidence, strengthen our economy, and create good middle-class jobs. They will also make the Canadian energy and resource sectors more competitive. With these better rules, we are working to build on Canada's strong economic growth and historic job numbers.

The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that Canada's major projects are developed in a way that is informed by rigorous science, evidence, and indigenous knowledge. They must also be consistent with Canada's climate plan, protect our rich natural environment, respect the rights of indigenous peoples, and support our economy.

Our priority remains to effectively advance both Canada's economic progress and our environmental responsibilities. These values are at the core of Bill C-69.

Ultimately, we want to restore the trust of Canadians in how major projects are reviewed. There will not always be unanimous views on the outcome of a project decision, but if the process and foundation on which those decisions are made is stronger, trust in the outcomes will be as well.

Bill C-69 was informed by the views and inputs of Canadians. For over 14 months we heard from Canadians from coast to coast to coast on the best ways to improve current environmental and regulatory processes.

I'm very proud of the balanced perspective we were able to achieve in the bill. I'm hoping that this balance also guides you in your work as you review the many submissions you've received and the testimony of witnesses who have appeared before you, each with a different perspective on what will work and where improvements are needed.

Since the bill was introduced in February I've also continued engaging with stakeholders, provinces, indigenous peoples, environmental groups, and citizens from across the country at every opportunity. I wanted to hear the views of those of you directly affected by the bill and explain how the new process would work.

As you know, not all elements of the new system are detailed in legislation. Regulations and policies are required to support and operationalize the legislation. We are currently consulting Canadians on the project list and information and time management regulations. I encourage all Canadians, from indigenous peoples to industry to environmental groups, to provide their input to inform these regulations.

I'd now like to share some of the views I have heard.

Overwhelmingly, Canadians want us to restore public trust in the way the federal government makes decisions about major projects such as mines, pipelines, and hydro dams. When it comes to resource development, you can't get very far if people don't trust the rules and the way governments make decisions. The same goes for companies. They need to know what's expected of them from the start and that the process will be predictable, timely, and evidence-based.

That's why our top priority, with the changes we're proposing, is to increase transparency and rebuild trust.

To rebuild this trust, we are creating better rules. The bill incorporates a number of transparency measures, from making more information available to the public to specifying factors to be considered in decision-making to clearly communicating the reasons behind decisions. Canadians and stakeholders have noted the importance of public participation and accessible, transparent information. This bill helps everyone understand and participate more fully in the process.

Stakeholders have told us that rebuilding trust requires clarity about what will be considered in assessments and in making decisions.

Bill C-69 restores robust oversight and thorough impact assessments that take into consideration not only the negative environmental effects of a project, but also the environmental, economic, health and social impacts.

Impact assessments will also consider how projects are consistent with our environmental obligations and climate change commitments, including with the Paris Agreement. A big part of this is better understanding the broader environment outside of individual project reviews. Some stakeholders were wondering if the government will ever conduct strategic or regional assessments, given this is possible under current legislation.

We will soon launch a public engagement process on our first-ever strategic assessment on climate change, which will provide guidance on how to consider greenhouse gas emissions in individual project reviews.

We also heard from companies that they are looking for more clarity and certainty about the process.

The proposed legislation provides a clear, timely process so that project proponents know what's expected of them and when. A predictable and timely process is key to getting good projects built and encouraging investment in Canada.

I also heard that companies need to know how the transition to the new system will work. Industry associations and companies with projects in the system would like clear rules and indications of which assessments currently under way would continue under former legislation and which would be subject to the new impact assessment act.

Legislated timelines will also provide regulatory certainty and ensure that the process is both faster and more efficient. We've heard from industry, indigenous peoples, and environmental groups that it's important that there is enough time to carefully consider science, evidence, and indigenous traditional knowledge. That's why this bill provides a predictable, time-bound process, from early planning through to the decision, to ensure that companies know what to expect and when, and that they are not held up in an impact assessment process.

With a goal of one project, one review, we will coordinate with provinces, territories, and indigenous jurisdictions to reduce red tape for companies and avoid duplication of efforts in reviewing proposed projects. The new impact assessment agency of Canada will work with other bodies, such as the Canadian energy regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, and the offshore boards to conduct reviews that will integrate both the impact assessment process and regulatory review requirements.

The new legislation also provides the offshore boards with a greater role in project reviews, which is consistent with other life-cycle regulators.

I also heard from many indigenous organizations that it is important that their rights are recognized and respected, and that we work in partnership from the outset.

This is exactly what Bill C-69 will accomplish.

I want to highlight that the bill makes it mandatory to consider indigenous knowledge, when provided, alongside science and other evidence. It also provides protection of that knowledge to build the trust needed to share such information. We will also increase the funding available to support indigenous participation and capacity development related to assessing and monitoring the impacts of projects.

Another significant advancement under this bill will be that indigenous jurisdictions will have greater opportunities to exercise powers and duties under the new impact assessment act. My discussions with indigenous peoples have confirmed to me how important this is, as is our commitment to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

I look forward to the end result of this committee's work to consider ways to strengthen the bill even further. Better rules will restore confidence that good projects can move forward in a responsible, timely and transparent way, while also protecting our environment and building a stronger economy for Canadians.

Thank you again for inviting me, and for the important work you are doing.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Thank you very much, Minister.

Before I go to questions, I want to recognize some new faces around the table. I would like to welcome MP Sylvie Boucher. We have Ms. May and Madame Pauzé. Welcome back. We have James Maloney, chair of the natural resources committee; Kim Rudd, parliamentary secretary to Jim Carr; and Sean Fraser. We have lots of new faces at the table.

We will start with James Maloney, please, for the first question.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

James Maloney Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for allowing me to be here and for giving me time.

I'm sharing my time with Mr. Fraser, so I'll try to get right to the point.

Minister, thank you again for being here today. As the chair has pointed out, I'm here as chair of natural resources because of the importance that the proposed changes in Bill C-69 have to stakeholders.

In my capacity sitting on that committee, we hear from stakeholders on a regular basis. I meet with them regularly. These are stakeholders, NGOs, organizations, and one of the issues that comes up time and time again is this issue of restoring trust and certainty, which you talked about. Timelines, predictability, and schedules on these projects have been major stumbling blocks, and have led to a lack of confidence. They are very interested in Bill C-69 for that reason.

I know you have consulted with the stakeholders along the way. We've heard from many of them after the bill came out in this committee.

I am wondering if you could shed some more light on the background and how you see Bill C-69 addressing these concerns and restoring that trust.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your hard work on the natural resources committee.

It's important that we rebuild trust, and included in that is providing certainty to proponents. We know we need to make sure we're making decisions based on good science, on evidence, and on traditional knowledge. We also know that we need to provide certainty to proponents about how the system works.

In terms of the timelines, which I think is a really important point—I have heard the comment that providing certainty on timelines is important—we've done two things. One, on the front end, we've said we need better early planning and engagement, because if you can address concerns and problems, hear from communities and from indigenous peoples, you can work with provinces to align timelines with them. We have the principle of one project, one review, and if you can figure out the permitting process, you will get to a better spot when you get into the system. Early planning and engagement create more efficiency on the back end.

Two, our bill proposes stricter timeline management and fewer stops of the legislative clock. I think it's important to point out that we're shortening legislated timelines for the impact assessment phase for agency-led assessments from 365 to 300 days. Timelines for panel-led assessments would be reduced from 720 days to 600 days, which is from 24 to 20 months. The timelines for non-designated projects reviewed by life-cycle regulators would be reduced from 450 to 300 days.

Let me emphasize that the reason we are able to do that is that a lot of the hard work and engagement will be done on the front end, which will lead to more certainty and structured timelines on the back end so that we can get to better decisions.

Thank you.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

Thank you very much, Minister.

It's a natural segue from Mr. Maloney's questions to the topic I'd like to hit on.

As a starting point, in my view, we have to determine what level of environmental protection our laws are going to provide before we get into what projects are going to be approved. While we're putting in timelines and rules that ensure investor certainty, I also want to flag that this bill is very important in building public confidence in our environmental laws. Can you tell me how this bill is going to enhance public confidence so that Canadians know that while these projects that grow our economy get off the ground, our environmental laws are not going to be compromised?

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON

Thank you very much, because obviously that's a critical point. The whole reason we're doing this is that it was a commitment made by our government to Canadians that we would rebuild the trust in the system that was sorely lost under the previous government. There was a sense that decisions were not being made based on science and evidence, but on politics. There wasn't proper consultation with communities, nor engagement with indigenous peoples, which didn't help get projects going ahead.

In our new system, the proposed system, the idea is that you make decisions based on science and indigenous knowledge and facts. That's critically important. We are committed to evidence-based decision-making, so you need to have that as part of it. We've also put forward that only a single agency would do environmental assessment. It would be the impact assessment agency of Canada. We think this is much better because that will make sure a clear process is followed all the time. It will also help with efficiency.

We believe there needs to be earlier public engagement as well as partnership with indigenous people. The early engagement process is critically important. We've moved to a sustainability task, so we're looking at how we can look at a variety of factors, not just environmental factors but factors that would look at the impact on indigenous peoples and also the economic benefits of a project and the health impacts. We think that is how you can rebuild Canadians' trust, how you can show you're listening to Canadians, and how you can provide better certainty for proponents.

In the end we also want to make sure, when we make decisions, that there's transparency, so we will now have reasons for decisions. Previously, a press release would announce the decision, and we believe that Canadians are entitled to understand on what basis the government would make sometimes quite challenging decisions, and what science, evidence, and knowledge they were based on.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

Madam Chair, is there any time remaining?

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

No.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

Okay. Thank you very much.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

You had seconds, but I don't think it's worth starting another question round.

Mr. Fast.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Thank you very much.

Minister, welcome back to our committee.

I want to focus on proposed subsection 22(1) of the bill, which reads, “The impact assessment of a designated project must take into account the following factors”. Here's one of the factors: “the extent to which the effects of the designated project hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada's ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change”.

Minister, would you agree with me that one of those commitments is the targets we set in the Paris Agreement, yes or no?

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON

Thank you very much.

We've been clear that when we do environmental assessments, we need to be taking into account our climate change plan and our commitments.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Okay. Thank you.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON

I would indicate that the Conservatives have also supported the Paris Agreement. That's a good step.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

We have. Thank you for putting that on the record.

Would you agree with me that the success of the different tools you're using under the pan-Canadian framework on climate change will drive how close we get to our Paris targets?

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Catherine McKenna Liberal Ottawa Centre, ON

I'm not entirely sure I understand the question. Do we have a plan so that we can do what everyone in Parliament voted for, which was to meet our international commitments? The answer to that is yes.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

All right. One of those tools that you're using is a national carbon price. Is that correct?

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I'm going to interrupt. I know you brought it specifically to the act that we're studying. However, we are delving into not the act but we are delving into the pan-Canadian framework, not the bill.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

We're talking about the pan-Canadian framework on climate change that the government brought forward.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Can you relate that back to the bill?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

The minister has already indicated that there are a number of tools she is using under that framework to allow Canada to meet its Paris emissions targets. The section I quoted says that a project will be evaluated taking into account the impacts that the project will have on our Paris Agreement targets and other commitments.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I understand that and I appreciate that, but you were delving into actually—

May 3rd, 2018 / 11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

I am going to be delving into the carbon tax. This government has not been transparent about what the carbon tax means for Canadians. The carbon tax is an essential element of the pan-Canadian framework on climate change. In fact, her officials have said it's a foundational element of that plan.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I don't deny that it's an essential element, but it's not an essential element in studying this bill. That's what I'm trying to give us the air time to do, to ask the minister questions specific to the bill that we're studying today.

I know we have a great relationship and I know that we have good respect. I would just like you to make sure that we're delving into the aspects of the bill that's on the table today.