Evidence of meeting #81 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 adaptation.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Julie Gelfand  Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General
Kimberley Leach  Principal, Sustainable Development Strategies, Audits and Studies, Office of the Auditor General
Matt Jones  Assistant Deputy Minister, Pan-Canadian Framework Implementation Office, Department of the Environment
Laniel Bateman  Acting Executive Director, Policy Development, Department of the Environment
Keith Lennon  Director, Oceans Science Branch, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Colette Downie  Assistant Deputy Minister/Chief Financial Officer, Department of Industry
Simon Dubé  Director General, Strategic Policy and Planning, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Ellen Burack  Director General, Environmental Policy, Department of Transport
Amanda Wilson  Director General, Office of Energy Research and Development, Innovation and Energy Technology Sector, Department of Natural Resources
Marc Wickham  Director, Energy Science & Technology Programs, Office of Energy Research and Development, Innovation and Energy Technology Sector, Department of Natural Resources

8:50 a.m.

Liberal

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

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome, everyone. Welcome, Ms. Gelfand. Thank you very much. Can you hear me?

8:50 a.m.

Julie Gelfand Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

I can hear you.

8:50 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I can talk louder. It's a big room, and the sound just bounces, I think.

Welcome today. We really appreciate you and your team coming before us. You have released your fall reports. They're all of interest to the committee, of course, because they're on reducing greenhouse gases, the impacts of climate change, clean energy technologies, and the progress in implementing sustainable development strategies.

Obviously, the last one is of real importance, given our committee's report on FSDA, the Federal Sustainable Development Act. The other ones are of importance to us as we move forward on our fourth study on climate change and clean technologies.

For the first hour, we will have you and your team. For the second hour, we're going to have the departments that we've asked to come before us.

I'll turn the floor over to you, please.

8:50 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

Madam Chair, thank you for the opportunity to discuss my fall 2017 reports that were tabled in Parliament on October 3.

I'm accompanied by Kimberley Leach, Sharon Clark, and Andrew Hayes, who were the principals responsible for the audit.

In this latest round of audits, we examined three areas in which the federal government has been working to address climate change. We looked at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, adapting to the impacts of climate change, and fostering the development of clean energy technologies.

Climate change is one of the defining issues of the 21st century. It is far-reaching and complex. These audits show that when it comes to climate change action, Canada has a lot of work to do in order to reach the targets it has set.

Our first audit looked at whether Environment and Climate Change Canada had led efforts to meet Canada's commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Canada has missed all of its reduction targets since 1992 and is also not on track to meet the 2020 target. Our audit found that the federal government had shifted its focus to a new and more difficult target, one that has to be met in 2030. This amounts to moving further into the future the timeline to reach the emission reduction targets.

Last December, the government released its newest climate change plan—the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change. We found that the federal government, provinces and territories established a governance structure to oversee and report on the framework's implementation.

Environment and Climate Change Canada worked with other federal departments to determine roles and responsibilities in order to implement the measures set in the framework and developed processes to track progress and report annually to first ministers.

While Environment and Climate Change Canada has made progress in working with the territories and provinces to develop the pan-Canadian framework to meet the 2030 target, it remains the latest in a series of plans that have been produced since 1992.

Environment and Climate Change Canada already estimates that even if all the greenhouse gas reduction measures outlines in the pan-Canadian framework are implemented in a timely manner, emissions will go down, but more action will be needed to meet the 2030 target.

Our second audit examined the federal government's efforts to adapt to climate change impacts. We just saw some yesterday, probably, here in Ottawa. The impacts of wildfires, floods, and extreme weather events are being felt across the country. Identifying climate change risks and taking measures to address them are another area in which governments can take action to adapt to a changing climate.

We looked at whether 19 federal organizations had identified and addressed climate change risks to their programs and operations. Overall, we found that the federal government is not prepared to adapt to the impacts of a changing climate.

Environment and Climate Change Canada developed a federal adaptation policy framework in 2011, but the department did not move to implement it. The department also failed to provide other federal organizations with adequate guidance and tools to identify their climate change risks.

As a result, we found that only five of 19 departments and agencies we examined had fully assessed their climate change risks and address them. For example, Fisheries and Oceans Canada determined that rising sea levels and increasing storm surges could impact some small craft harbours. For this reason, in Nova Scotia for example, the department raised a wharf after the harbour flooded, to guard against a reoccurrence.

In another example, as a response to the risk of permafrost degradation and sea level rise, Natural Resources Canada examined the vulnerability of mine waste management practices in the north and developed adaptation strategies.

We found that the 14 other departments had taken little or no action to address the climate change risks that could prevent them from delivering programs and services to Canadians.

Many departments have an incomplete picture of their own risks, and the federal government, as a whole, does not have a full picture of its climate change risks. If Canada is to adapt to a changing climate, stronger leadership is needed from Environment and Climate Change Canada, along with increased initiative from individual departments.

Our third audit examined three funds that support the development of demonstration projects on clean energy technology. These technologies are one way to decrease greenhouse gas emissions from the production and use of energy.

I am happy to report that the three clean energy funds we looked at were working well overall. The money was spent properly, it was easy to track which projects were funded, and projects were approved through a rigorous and objective process.

Our fourth audit examined whether six federal organizations were providing ministers and cabinet with assessments of the environmental impacts of the proposals they were putting forward.

We found that almost 80 percent of proposals to ministers did not provide assessments of positive or negative environmental impacts. The Public Health Agency of Canada gets the gold star this year, as it was the only one of the six organizations we examined to include preliminary assessments with almost all its proposals to its minister and with all of its submissions to cabinet.

You may recall that last year Parks Canada was the agency that was able to do the same.

Turning now to the environmental petitions process. In the 2016-17 fiscal year, we received 16 petitions from individuals and organizations.

This year, our annual petitions report to Parliament includes a 10-year retrospective of the petitions process.

Addressing climate change is not only difficult and complicated, but also important and urgent. Addressing climate change requires whole-of-government action across all departments and agencies.

The federal government has come up with a new climate change action plan and worked with important players to develop it. That sets this plan apart from the ones that came before, which did not meet any of Canada's climate change commitments. Now the federal government needs to turn its new plan into action. We remain hopeful that progress can be achieved, and we will continue to audit this very important issue.

Madam Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We are happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you very much.

8:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Thank you very much.

We're going to start questioning with Mr. Bossio.

8:55 a.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Good morning, Ms. Gelfand. Thank you very much for being here again this morning. It's always a pleasure to have your smiling face at our committee. We always look forward to your reports. They're insightful and give us a snapshot in time of where things are.

In your report, you acknowledge that the government has come up with a plan. You suggested that it is a good plan, the pan-Canadian framework. For the first time, the government is working with all levels of government to try to move in the same direction instead of the federal government saying, “We're going to do this, and then all the rest of you follow our lead.” That hasn't worked out so well.

Would you agree that trying to reach a consensus with the different levels of government is going to put us in a much better place to actually achieve targets, moving forward?

9 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

In our audit, we did acknowledge that Environment and Climate Change Canada worked quite collaboratively with the provinces and territories in establishing the Vancouver declaration as well as the pan-Canadian framework. The collaboration and input of all the provinces do make this plan different from previous plans.

Remember that depending on how our auditors define a plan, since 1992 we've had anywhere from five to 11 or 12 plans to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. That's 25 years of plans, and at the same time our emissions are going up.

Yes, they worked more collaboratively with the provinces and territories. It's now time to see that put into action. As I said, we remain hopeful that the collaboration does make this plan different.

9 a.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

In looking at this plan, though, in a more multi-faceted way.... We're working with the different levels of government, putting a price on pollution, making investments into green innovation and public transit and climate mitigation, and reducing the overall cost of green energy to make it more competitive with fossil-based energy. Would you not agree that in trying to bring forward a multi-faceted plan, there's no silver bullet? No one option, I think, is going to solve the climate change reductions that we're looking to achieve by 2030. Would you agree, though, that it's going to take time for that plan to bear fruit?

9 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

Absolutely. We recognize that we were auditing this plan at the beginning. The plan was signed in December of 2016. Not even a year has passed. Absolutely, it will take time to implement the plan. Yes.

9 a.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

I don't know if this is a fair question, but I'm going to ask it anyway.

What would you say would be a reasonable amount of time to determine whether the plan is going to start to reach its targets? I know that over the years.... I know you're looking backwards, but perhaps we could try to look a little bit forward, based on your previous experience in trying to measure the success or failure of these plans.

9 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

That's a great question that actually impacts our work. We are trying to figure out when to start auditing elements of the plan. How much time should we give the department to start putting this stuff into action? At this point, we don't plan on auditing climate change again until at least past the spring of 2019.

We are going to do another audit on the commitment around fossil fuel subsidies. That's the one that was tabled by the Auditor General earlier this year. We're going to redo that one in the spring of 2019.

Our planning will start in the fall of 2019 and go into 2020. At that point the plan will be anywhere from two to three years old, and that would be a good time, most likely.

9 a.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Based on your previous experience, is that a good time frame to judge it? I know it's a moving target and it's a difficult question to answer, but based on your previous experience, does that three-year time frame, looking forward, based on this plan, seem reasonable?

9 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

In the case of the Kyoto implementation plan, I believe Ms. Leach audited that almost every year. We were looking at it every year.

In our case, we're thinking not before spring of 2019. Perhaps the fall of 2019 or into the spring of 2020 would be when we might start looking at the implementation of the carbon price or any parts of the plan.

9 a.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

I have another question, so maybe I'll go to that. These are your words:

We found that Environment and Climate Change Canada improved its reporting on projected greenhouse gas emissions. It more clearly outlined key assumptions, and it changed its projections to better reflect the uncertainty included in its calculations. The Department was working on its methodology to improve reporting on carbon sinks and emissions from Canada’s forests. It was also working with provinces and territories to improve how provincial and territorial measures would be reflected in reporting projected emissions.

You mention that the ECC improved its reporting on projected greenhouse gas emissions and better took into account the impact of GDP growth and fluctuating oil and natural gas prices. If the previous data made it difficult to accurately assess progress, would you agree that this is an important early step in taking an evidence-based approach to trying to determine the difference that we're making?

9:05 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

What I can say is that absolutely we found that Environment Canada had improved its reporting of projected greenhouse gas emissions in all the ways that you've already mentioned.

The one area where we thought they could improve was to try to separately indicate the impact of federal measures and provincial measures, but we were extremely pleased to see a change in how they were reporting it. This audit was a follow-up to a previous audit. We had made recommendations to improve projections, and they had followed them.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Wonderful. Thank you so much.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Thank you.

Mr. Fast is next.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Thank you, Commissioner, for appearing before us again.

One of the biggest frustrations we've had as the official opposition is that we have been unable to secure from the government detailed information as to the impact that carbon taxes will have on Canadians. We've put in requests. What we've received back are almost totally redacted documents. To be able to hold the government accountable, we need to have some information that allows us to determine whether the government has done the necessary homework before it implements policies.

Did you examine at all the economic impacts of the government's climate change policies?

9:05 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

Sorry; I didn't hear the very last bit.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Did you examine at all the economic impacts of the government's climate change policies?

9:05 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

We were doing a follow-up on whether or not we were going to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and achieve the targets that the government had set. We were looking at the 2020 target and then the 2030 target. The government has set a 2020 target and a 2030 target, and our audit objective was to find out whether or not we were going to achieve the 2020 target and/or the 2030 target. That's where our audit stopped.

We did not look at the impact of the carbon price. That would be in our next audit on the implementation of the pan-Canadian framework.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

All right.

Given the fact that we've had significant challenges in trying to get the government to provide us with economic impact analyses on the impact of a carbon price on Canadians, is it your position that this kind of information should be made available to Canadians?

9:05 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

It will definitely need to be made available to us when we ask for it. I don't know if we have a position on whether or not analyses of government are supposed to be made available to the public or not, so I can't answer that specific question. I can say that we've had difficulty getting information on subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. That is why I wasn't able to table the report on reaching that goal, because the Department of Finance was not providing the office with that information. We've had difficulty with access to information, and that's why the Auditor General tabled that report.

As for a position on whether or not that information is to be made available to the public, I don't think I can comment on that.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

It's my understanding that the government has done some economic impact analyses. In fact, more recently I understand that they've done that full analysis for the forest industry and, again, they have refused to release that information to the public.

I note that each of the ministers' mandate letters indicates that information should be available to the public by default, that there would be greater openness and transparency under this government. It's something that's really frustrating. We've not seen them deliver on that.

You concluded that Environment and Climate Change Canada, in collaboration with other federal partners, did not provide adequate leadership to advance the federal government's adaptation to climate change impacts. Your report also noted that Environment and Climate Change Canada did not identify concrete actions, priorities, and targets to achieve those objectives.

The amount of money that's available for the government to help with adaptation is around $260 million. Am I correct in making that assumption?

9:10 a.m.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General

Julie Gelfand

There's all kinds of information about the funding that was available for adaptation. Between 2011 and 2017, about a six-year period, there was $540 million for climate change adaptation. It's been stated that from 2016 to 2018, $11.7 billion will go toward green infrastructure, building codes, and the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund.