Environment Committee on June 2nd, 2016

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Yes, but has that number changed in 20 years?

[Lori MacDonald]

Yes, it has changed in terms of where we were with respect to.... In 1995 we had only three disasters that exceeded—

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

No, has the 500 number changed? Was it 200, has it gone up, or has it changed?

[Lori MacDonald]

Yes, it's a trend going up, so as an example, we're at 1 billion at this time.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Okay, I get it. Thank you.

Going to Ms. Gelfand, we're glad to have you here.

Having been an executive of the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association, representing cities, our mantra was, “That's our money; it's not yours. It comes from our taxpayers; give it back”.

So when we look at this, we look at it as our money, not yours. We established the priorities and we know what they are. When you say that Canadians don't know, I really object to that because the people in my community are Canadians and they know, so I have a problem when you say that because we do know. You say that gas tax is very flexible; we know the priorities and our residents know, and we do all those environmental studies. When you say that Canadians don't know, do you want to justify that to me because I know Canadians who do?

[Julie Gelfand]

I think you're absolutely right that, at the local level, Canadians probably are very aware of the infrastructure that's being built in their communities.

Our job is to audit only the federal government. That's it.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I've got that; I understand it.

[Julie Gelfand]

So the federal government gives money to the provinces and territories, and we looked at that relationship. Are they getting the reports back from the provinces and territories; how well are they issuing the cheques in a timely way; and are they getting all those reports?

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I get that, but that's not what you said. You said that Canadians didn't know, so—

[Julie Gelfand]

Just one second, I'm not finished. Let me finish.

So we looked at whether or not—

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

—I know what you're saying. The federal government bubble doesn't know. You, the auditor, don't know.

[Julie Gelfand]

What we looked at was whether or not the federal government was able to do a wrap-up of all the different funding. Over 10 years, $13 billion went out.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Gotcha.

[Julie Gelfand]

The objectives were to clean the air, clean the water, and reduce greenhouse gases. All that I was looking to find out was how many greenhouse gases were reduced overall in Canada.

Parliamentarians don't know that. Generally, Canadians overall don't know. Objectives were set. All we were looking at was whether or not it met the objectives. That was our job. That is our job as auditors.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

When you say that, did you do a survey of Canadians to check that?

[Julie Gelfand]

We looked at whether or not there was an overall report on the results of the objectives that were set.

Let's give one objective. We're flying to the moon. I want to know how well we're doing getting to the moon, and you need to report back to Parliament.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I understand that.

[Julie Gelfand]

In this case, it was reducing greenhouse gases and cleaning our air and cleaning our water. I looked for the overall report to tell us whether we were achieving those results and by how much.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Gotcha and I accept that and I understand what you're doing.

I'm objecting to when you say Canadians do not...you have no mechanism in there to verify that. None.

[Julie Gelfand]

I apologize if I took it in a different way. I was thinking about the report back to Parliament, and therefore the report back to Canadians.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you. I appreciate that because, as you say, it's a flexible one. The local people have an understanding. They see it. They see us in our meetings. They see us approving those budgets. They see us building those prioritized projects whether it's regional water...we get the environmental things done, we do all those pieces with it. Local people know.

I think it's a great program. The FCM has worked hard to get it back to the local level. It's their money, their dollars, and we promote it that way. We're getting your money back for you for the projects in our communities. That's how we promote it, and I think it's an excellent program.

So when I continue to see the bureaucracy and read a statement in your document, “provide a long-term vision outlining federal infrastructure priorities”, I go bananas. I said you should get out of the way of our money. We know the priorities. I don't like that statement, and I oppose it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have one more minute. Then I'll put my oar in the water, even though I shouldn't.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

I'll jump in. I want to get back to flood-plain mapping because we've gone through the gas tax, and we know there are some significant environmental mitigation pieces in there. They will be identified along the way in a document you need.

Getting back to the flood-plain mapping. It hasn't been done for quite some time. Is it the goal to get the mapping that's been done by cities and communities and overlay that, and to look at the gaps in terms of what you don't have and then have a complete picture?

[Julie Gelfand]

We found that 50% of the maps that exist are over 20 years old. Public Safety Canada itself came up with an estimate that it would take five to ten years to update those maps at a cost of about $365 million.

[Dianne Lynn Watts, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

So this is federally? You don't have those maps.