Evidence of meeting #6 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was money.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Minister, and thank you to all of you for being here today.
Minister, I represent Etobicoke Centre, a community on the outskirts of the city of Toronto. When I speak to my constituents about sitting on this committee, they almost unanimously ask me about the steps we're taking to fight climate change.
In the supplementary estimates you note the need for climate risk assessments by various departments. I wonder if you can tell us more about climate risk assessments, why they're important to Canadians and why they would be important to my constituents in Etobicoke Centre.
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Thank you for the question.
As you know very well, climate change is an existential threat from an environmental perspective. It is an existential threat for human health and it's certainly an enormous threat to our economy. Last year, we released “Canada's Changing Climate Report”, which highlighted the severity of the problem and the increasing intensity of the problem. It pointed out that Canada is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the world. In fact, in the northern part of Canada, it is even faster than that. We are feeling the effects of climate change through the changes to permafrost, flooding, wildfires and deadly heat waves.
Climate assessments are an important tool to allow us to better understand how our infrastructure may be impacted and what we need to do from a climate resilience perspective going forward. Climate mitigation is critically important in order to not make the problem worse. The problem exists and it will get worse irrespective of the mitigation efforts. We need to ensure that we're focused on mitigation. It is very important that Canadians have that kind of information to make the appropriate choices.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
We appreciate that.
Minister, climate change is obviously an immense challenge, as you just alluded to, and we know that, as you pointed out, carbon pollution has a cost. Some of the funding we're looking at today includes our government's climate action incentive fund. I'm wondering if you could explain to the folks who are watching at home how the incentive fund helps us fight climate change and how it helps families and businesses in Etobicoke Centre.
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
I think we all know that putting a price on pollution is the most cost-effective way to cut emissions and to create good jobs. That has certainly been demonstrated in British Columbia, which is where I'm from and which has had a price on pollution since 2008. A family of four in your riding will get $486 back as a climate action incentive when they file their taxes.
Additionally, we are helping businesses invest in projects, through the incentive fund, that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as installing solar panels or making buildings more efficient. Putting a price on pollution is a practical way to reduce emissions, support clean growth and make life more affordable for families.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you, Minister.
I'll pass my time on to Mr. Scarpaleggia.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Thank you, Mr. Baker.
Welcome, Minister.
As you know, any discussion about climate change necessarily leads to a discussion about water resources. At the end of the day, climate change impacts our water resources, whether through flooding or droughts. As you know, during the last election campaign, we committed to creating the Canada Water Agency. It's a pretty innovative idea, and you're responsible for bringing it to life.
Can you share with us your vision for the new agency that is in the works?
Are you envisioning a large-scale organization that will bring together everyone at the federal level responsible for water management and protection?
Otherwise, do you have more modest beginnings in mind, perhaps focusing on a few foundational pieces such as flood prevention and adaptation?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Thank you for your question.
I'd like to start by thanking you for your work on the protection of Canada's freshwater.
As you know, our government committed to keeping Canada's water safe and clean, and creating a Canadian water agency is vital to that objective. I've asked my parliamentary secretary, Mr. Terry Duguid, the member for Winnipeg South, who is responsible for the Canada Water Agency, to lead this important work.
Although the specifics of the agency's role have yet to be determined, we will work closely with parliamentarians, indigenous groups, governments at every level and the public to ensure Canada's water is safe, clean and well managed.
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
Some would argue that Canada's water legislation needs to be modernized.
Have you had time to consider ways to keep the legislation relevant, so it can serve to better protect our water going forward?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Of course. The conversations about the Canada Water Agency will probably focus on setting priorities and examining possible legislative changes, but that still has to be determined.
Liberal
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Minister, thank you for your appearance today and your opening statement.
In fact, my question ties in with something you said in your statement. It's about the Trans Mountain expansion project. You said, and I quote: No longer can we think of economic opportunities without also considering environmental impacts.
I'd like to take you back to June 2019. A provision stipulated that, should costs be revised upwards, the bill would be passed on to users, similar to toll highways. That wasn't retained, however. Trans Mountain rejected the option. The Canada Energy Regulator could have stepped in to prevent taxpayers from being stuck with those costs, but it didn't, so taxpayers are the ones who will be on the hook.
Oil companies will get to use the pipeline at a lower cost than the market value. The pipeline won't bring in any profit. Taxpayers are the ones who will have to pay for it, since pipeline users won't be paying any tolls, so to speak. Those costs weren't exactly laid out clearly in the budget.
Isn't the government underestimating the project costs to keep them under wraps, to some extent, so the public doesn't become outraged? The fact of the matter is that the costs are going to go up and the pipeline is going to become more and more expensive.
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Thank you for the question.
I believe the costs associated with the project are the domain of the finance department.
We took a lot of advice from independent advisers with respect to the structure of the transaction on the Trans Mountain expansion. The intention on the part of the government has always been that it would be transacted back to the private sector once the political risks are lower. That is something we have always intended to do. It will end up being a private sector transaction. We are confident that the Canadian public will recoup the costs and then some.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Let's set the Trans Mountain pipeline aside and turn to fossil fuel subsidies. It appears that there was an agreement with Argentina. The initiative dates back to 2018 and was launched through the G20. Six countries gave themselves 12- to 24-month time limits.
Further to the agreement, where does Canada stand progress-wise?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Our government understands that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand. That's why we've invested heavily in the protection of air, water and natural areas for our children and our children's children. Together with our G20 partners, we committed to phasing out ineffective subsidies for fossil fuels by 2025. Naturally, we are currently engaged in a process to determine what we've done so far and what Argentina has done to reduce fossil fuel subsidies.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
They're supposed to be phased out by 2025, but have any tangible measures been taken? Can you give us an example?
Liberal
Liberal
Raj Saini Liberal Kitchener Centre, ON
I have a point of order.
Is that in the supplementary estimates?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
No, it isn't.
We do like to stay within what the minister is here for, which is the supplementary estimates.
Your question even about the Trans Mountain pipeline's cost is not.... It's the cleaning costs.
If you stay within that envelope, that's okay.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Forgive me. I wanted to take advantage of our time with the minister to have him answer a question in a way that is also political, since we are in politics, after all.
I'll ask another question, then, but I'm not sure it will be deemed in order, either. It has to do with health and the environment.
Numerous experts around the world are beefing up research on the health impacts of environmental degradation. Since we have to stay on the topic of the estimates, I'd like to know whether any funding has been earmarked to make scientific and medical publications available to the public to help people properly understand the effects of climate change on their health, particularly with regard to endocrine-disrupting substances. As we all know, a significant number of studies have examined the issue.