Evidence of meeting #36 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 target.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

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

5:20 p.m.

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

John Moffet

The bill as amended would make the NDC the 2030 target. The government can amend the NDC from time to time, and the Paris Agreement calls on parties to continually increase their ambition. As we have observed over the past few years, and most strikingly with the issuance of the so-called 1.5°C report by the IPCC, the consensus around the science, not just around the effects of greenhouse gases and climate change but around the timing and urgency for action, can evolve. That is the reason this provision is in the act, to enable targets to be updated if, for example, there is an evolution in the science.

I would remind members that this authority would be constrained by the amendments that were made to the bill last week, which would require each successive target to be more ambitious than the previous one. In other words, with that amendment and this provision that's in the bill, it would be possible to change targets, but only to make them more ambitious, not to go backwards.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Does that answer your question, Ms. Michaud?

5:20 p.m.

Bloc

Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC

Yes, it does. I just want to make sure I understand it correctly. So it would be amended upward, as proposed by the Paris Agreement, and could not be amended downward.

Would it be better to specify that in the bill, or is it implied that it has to be an upward amendment?

Under the current wording of clause 11, it can be just as easily amended downward or upward. I want to make sure that's clear. If not, we can move a subamendment to make sure that if the minister changes his target, it's to make it more ambitious.

5:20 p.m.

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

John Moffet

I think amendment G-3 has already made that clarification.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

It seems so.

Are there any other interventions?

Mr. Albas, you have the floor.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a question for Mr. Moffet.

If BQ-12 passes, essentially the minister would then be given the ability to make changes. That's the essence of what's being called here. Is that correct?

5:20 p.m.

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

John Moffet

I think it's the opposite. The bill as currently written allows the minister to change targets, but only more stringently. The amendment before the committee at this time is to eliminate that provision, which would eliminate the authority to change targets.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Just so I can get it straight, can you say that one more time?

5:20 p.m.

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

John Moffet

Sure. The bill currently allows the minister to alter the targets, but only to make them more stringent. This amendment would eliminate the ability to change targets.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Okay, if people are concerned about changing goalposts, then that would be a plus for this particular amendment to pass. Is that correct?

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

I don't know if I should characterize it the way you did, but it would fix the targets so it would make them immutable.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

They couldn't be made more stringent. Is that correct?

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

I'm sorry. I just need to make sure I look at the amendment.

Does it concern the targets or the plans?

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

It concerns the plans.

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

The plans must include a target, and this is referring to plans.

I apologize.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Okay, so can you just say it one more time? I've been confused here. It's easy to do, so don't take offence.

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

I'm scrolling through amendments here, and maybe we should be referring this to the committee clerk just so we're precise about precisely what is involved here.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Do you have a question for the clerk?

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

It's just to clarify precisely what the implication of this amendment is.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Go ahead, Madam Thivierge.

5:25 p.m.

Legislative Clerk

Émilie Thivierge

Yes, it's not a procedural question. It's a content question, so it's a question more for the officials.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

What I'm trying to understand is.... I'm really curious here. There's a difference between the plan and the target. Is that correct, Mr. Moffet?

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

Yes, the plans have to contain the target.

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

We know that we can make the target more stringent, but we can't make it less stringent. That's been agreed upon. Is that right?

5:25 p.m.

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

John Moffet

That's correct. A target cannot be made less stringent.