Environment Committee on Oct. 31st, 2017

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Let me ask you this: have those monies been spent?

[Julie Gelfand]

I didn't audit whether or not the 2011 to 2017 monies were spent.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Okay, but you did conclude that in fact the government has not been following through on its commitments to address adaptation to climate change, correct?

[Julie Gelfand]

That is correct. There was a policy framework established in 2011. Environment Canada held one workshop in 2013. They didn't do much more after that. They in fact didn't even do their own risk assessment for impacts to climate change in that period or since that time.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

What you're saying is that hundreds of millions of dollars were set aside for adaptation, but basically only one event has taken place to help the departments of government.

[Julie Gelfand]

No. Five departments did complete risk assessments. They include Natural Resources Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, Health Canada, and one more. I always miss one—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Fourteen did not, correct?

[Julie Gelfand]

Fourteen did not. Five did. Many of them went further than just identifying the risks and actually developed tools and processes and did scientific studies. They raised ports. I mean, there was action spent to adapt by those five departments. What's more disconcerting is that 14 did not do that good risk assessment.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Duncan.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

Commissioner, it's great to see you and your terrific team. I always value your audits and reports and I look forward to the next one.

I'm deeply concerned, Commissioner. We've gone through this series of reports. Going back as far as 2008, we have 2008, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, and 2017. Every time, the departments are not delivering their responsibility for a sustainable development strategy.

You say in this report that 80% of proposals submitted to cabinet are not doing the required sustainable development strategy. We have two legal requirements at the federal level. One is the sustainable development act, and then there's an overall strategy. Each department is supposed to do a strategy in tune with that. We have also had this cabinet directive since 1990, and then updates by Treasury Board and by the PCO with guidelines on how to do it, yet you're reporting that neither the Treasury Board nor the PCO seem to be even requiring that these documents be filed.

One thing I found stunning in your report was that they require that a gender lens report be attached to the submission to cabinet but not a report on sustainable development. One of your recommendations was that there needs to be a kind of higher-level central agency oversight over this situation to make sure there is compliance, yet in the bill that is tabled—we'll be hearing from the minister and her officials on Thursday—that responsibility is still resting with some official within Environment Canada.

I'm wondering if you could give us an idea, if you have looked at other jurisdictions and so forth, of a mechanism we can look to in order to be holding the federal government more accountable in delivering on these requirements and in ensuring that their policies, programs, and legislation are consistent with their commitment to sustainable development.

[Julie Gelfand]

That's quite a broad question.

Over the past five years, we've been looking at whether or not departments have been implementing the cabinet directive to review environmental impacts of all policies, programs, and projects that are put forward to ministers and to cabinet. The cabinet directive says that each one of these policies and programs is supposed to be vetted for environmental impacts, both positive and negative, and that this information is supposed to be brought forward to the minister and/or to cabinet.

Generally what we've found over the five or six years that we've been looking.... Basically we have 26 agencies that are responsible for doing this, and we've chopped it up and looked at four to six agencies per year. Overall, what we found is that the cabinet directive is better followed when the proposal goes to cabinet, and in that case I'm going to generalize and say that about 40% of the time that a proposal goes to cabinet, a strategic environmental assessment has been done. Very little information goes to a minister, when there is a minister, about either positive or negative impacts. There can be positive environmental impacts as well, and the minister should be aware of that. Very rarely do proposals get vetted for their environmental impacts, either positive or negative, when they go to the minister.

This is just one piece of the federal sustainable development strategy. That strategy and the new act have much broader scope than just looking at environmental effects, but our audits have been on that one piece of the old federal sustainable development strategy. It said clearly that all the departments were going to improve their use of the cabinet directive, so we looked at that slice, not at the whole thing.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

There are 17 parameters, now, that the departments are going to have to look at since Canada has signed on to the UN sustainable development goals. If the departments aren't going to be delivering on one of those 17, what confidence do you have that they're going to be reporting on all 17? I guess that's a bit of a rhetorical question.

[Julie Gelfand]

I can tell you that we are doing an audit right now on the preparedness of the government to implement the sustainable development goals, basically all 17. We want to know how well prepared Canada is to implement the SDGs. That is part of an international effort of auditors general from around the world going into their governments to see whether or not the governments are prepared to implement the SDGs.

Auditors general from around the world will then go and look at specific goals. As you know, there are 17 goals, 169 targets, and 200-some indicators. The auditors general will then be going in to look at specific targets and seeing whether or not their governments are meeting those targets. It's part of an international effort of auditors general from around the world.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I would look forward to a report on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have 30 seconds.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I notice you reported that the federal government seems to keep setting target dates and targets for climate and then missing them and just setting other ones. Do you have any concern with that? Should we stick with the target date and start reporting?

[Julie Gelfand]

My job is to tell you whether the government is achieving its objectives. It set those target dates, and to date we have not met any of our targets.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Gerretsen.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you.

Welcome back. I know you've been before the committee on a number of occasions, but it might be beneficial to put on the record for those who are watching. Could you very briefly tell us about your credentials and what you did prior to this role?

[Julie Gelfand]

Sure. I worked with the federal government for a few years at Parks Canada, maybe five years. Then I worked in the NGO sector, the non-governmental sector, for organizations like the Canadian Wildlife Federation and the Canadian Nature Federation. Then I worked for about five years in the mining sector, both at the industry association and with a mining company called Rio Tinto Iron Ore Company of Canada.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

You have lots of experience in the environmental world, so to speak.

[Julie Gelfand]

I would say I have lots of experience in the area of environment and sustainability.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you.

Do you see the proposed reforms in Bill C-57 as being a step in the right direction?