Evidence of meeting #35 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jacques Maziade  Legislative Clerk
John Moffet  Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
Émilie Thivierge  Legislative Clerk
Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Angela Crandall

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

We'll move on now to clause 9 and CPC-6.

Mr. Albas.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Mr. Chair, it will come as no surprise that we want to make sure there is a whole-of-government approach. Again, we've heard a few things that Mr. Moffet has said with regard to how the minister must consult. That doesn't necessarily mean the minister has authority or accountability when it comes to other departments. That's where we think the bill gets it wrong—by putting the focus on just one minister in terms of it—and we would all be better off if clause 9 included, “The Governor in Council must, on the advice of the Minister, establish a greenhouse gas”.

Again, this changes the model, and I would hope that members might be coming around, because sometimes you have to keep punching through, Mr. Chair. As you know from your time in politics, sometimes you have to keep saying it over and over before people tune in and suddenly say, “Yes, I'm for this.” Therefore, I'm really hopeful that I will see maybe Mr. Bachrach or someone else—maybe Mr. Baker, who keeps teasing his support—respond and vote in favour of this amendment. Quite honestly, the more collaborative we are and the more focused cabinet is on it, the more I think we'll end up with a better result.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Okay. You're free to speak to CPC-7 separately, but your comments seem to apply to CPC-7, too.

Anyway, we'll vote on CPC-6, Madam Clerk.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

Okay, so we go to CPC-7.

Mr. Albas, do you need to intervene on that?

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Yes, I do. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Again, in keeping with a whole-of-government, all-hands-on-deck approach, this would say, “The Governor in Council must establish an emissions reduction”.

Again, this strengthens the bill and increases the accountability of the government for its efforts, and every cabinet minister, when they ratify this, would then become part of the solution rather than hanging back. I don't know if you've ever heard of this before, Mr. Chair, but sometimes people tell me that the government works in silos. The idea of these amendments is to break those silos down, to have ministers talking about ideas and coming around to a consensus at cabinet, and then standing behind those ideas in their different departments.

Right now, leaving it to just one minister to administer all plans.... Look, I know from my own personal experience—in my previous business experience or even working as an MP—that when I bring my team together with some of my ideas, they often improve them and sometimes massively so. Most people would say that “massively” is an understatement.

I would just simply, again, encourage all members to vote in favour of this, because if you want to see better things, then you have to change the way you do it. I think making the Governor in Council more responsible and more accountable would do that.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Okay, so you're seeking a holistic approach.

Let's vote on CPC-7.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

We will go now to PV-12.

I would note that if PV-12 is adopted, PV-13 cannot be moved, as they amend the same line.

Ms. May.

7:50 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is, again, to clarify.... Although it uses the year 2025 for a reference point, it is not another attempt to my several previous amendments, which were defeated, to create a 2025 milestone year.

In amending clause 9, if you go to the relevant section of the current draft, it states:

The Minister must establish an emissions reduction plan for 2030 within six months after the day on which this Act comes into force.

My amendment would require a plan for 2025 and 2030. Without creating a milestone year at 2025, it would require a plan for 2025 within six months, in tandem with the plan for 2030. It can only improve the chances that we're actually going to be on track, to have a plan for 2025 within six months of when this act comes into force.

I'm feeling fairly despairing at this point, Mr. Chair, but you never know. I hope that the committee will vote for this motion.

7:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Thank you.

Seeing no other hands up, can we proceed to the vote on PV-12?

(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will move on to PV-13.

Ms. May.

7:50 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is similar to the one that the committee just defeated, but I think it would be well worth mentioning some of the other witnesses and those who did not get to testify in person.

As Cathy McLeod mentioned, there were no indigenous witnesses present before committee, but in a written brief from the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, they definitely called for the 2025 year, as did, of course, the Canadian Climate Action Network. Generation Squeeze is another witness that called for this, and so is Eco-elders for Climate Action, the 2025 plan being essential if we're going to see early action.

To keep everybody on the right page, this is PV-13, amending that same line, but this time stressing the need for a plan for 2025 within six months from the day this act comes into force.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

7:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

I don't see any hands up. Going once, twice....

Mr. Bachrach.

7:50 p.m.

NDP

Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

I take Ms. May's point.

I heard the same testimony, as did every member of this committee. I believe that the need for a near-term accountability measure is very well established and well founded. As we go through these amendments, I think it will become clear that in order to gain enough support for that near-term accountability measure, it's going to have to be something other than 2025.

Regrettably, that's why I'll be voting against these amendments. I believe that the spirit of these amendments, which is that we need that near-term accountability measure and we need planning that reflects that measure, will be reflected in future amendments.

7:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Seeing no more hands, we'll vote.

7:55 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. May I respond briefly to Mr. Bachrach?

7:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Sure.

7:55 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

I won't be able to speak to the next amendment that comes up, which is being moved by the NDP and which does talk about something sooner than 2030. It's half a loaf; I'll just say that. It's an interim objective, which is not the same as a plan, a target or a milestone year. I regret very much that this is the most the NDP could get out of negotiations with the government. Obviously, that's how they feel their chances were to improve the act.

I wouldn't have accepted half a loaf—not with so much at stake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

7:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Mr. Albas.

7:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Moffet, obviously, there is the emissions reduction plan, and PV-13 is calling for one to be done for 2025. Given that there's been some contrast already made with the next one, NDP-2, which talks about an interim greenhouse emissions objective, what is the difference? Are they the same thing?

7:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

John Moffet

No.

I apologize if I sound like I am splitting hairs. The short answer is that the act makes a fairly significant distinction between targets and plans. This particular amendment has to do with establishing a 2025 plan, whereas the subsequent NDP amendment that you referred to would require that the 2030 plan include a GHG emission objective, which introduces a third term. The objective would be for 2026. It would be an element of the 2030 plan that would need to be published within six months of the bill coming into force.

I hope that's clear.

7:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Is there no set criteria for an interim greenhouse gas emission objective? Is it just something the government is promising to do as part of the 2030 plan?

7:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

John Moffet

If NDP-2 is passed, it would be more than a promise. It would be a legal obligation.

7:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

There's no granularity on what would be included in that, is there?

7:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment

John Moffet

No, you're correct. At the moment it is simply described as a interim greenhouse gas emission objective.

7:55 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Thank you.

7:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

I'm told that we were lucky to keep going to 8 o'clock. It's 7:58 or 7:59, and 8 o'clock is a hard stop.

We made quite a bit of progress. I think we're at least a third through. We'll carry on next time, starting off with NDP-2.

7:55 p.m.

The Clerk

Mr. Chair, I don't believe we took the vote on PV-13.

7:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

I'm so sorry. Boy, it's been a long day.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Can I have a motion to adjourn?

We'll stop there and we'll pick up with NDP-2.