Evidence of meeting #5 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 plan.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
We are not on track to meet our Paris climate targets. The committee recently heard that Canada is currently not even close to being on track to meeting our targets for selling 100% zero-emission vehicles by 2040. The government committed to plant two billion trees by 2030. Then we learned there wasn't a single dollar allocated to plant these trees.
I could go on with a list of other Liberal commitments and environmental targets that this government has missed or is on track to missing, but on trees, to many points by Mr. Albas, the minister responded that with all due respect, we put it in our throne speech, or we were facing a pandemic. My response is that, with all due respect, repeating promises with no action is in no way reassuring.
As was mentioned, the B.C. government managed to plant millions of trees during the pandemic. Planting trees is actually a very feasible activity while physically distancing, and could have given students or people who were laid off a job.
Has Environment and Climate Change Canada requested any funds in these main estimates to support that work?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
I would probably take issue with a couple of things you said. The first is that planting trees during a pandemic is simple and easy. It is not. There was certainly a lot of work done to try to enable the forestry industry and the tree-planting industry to be able to do this in a thoughtful way that protected workers. We were part of that. We committed money to doing that. We worked actively with British Columbia and with other provinces to ensure that it took place.
As I say, the government remains fully committed to the two billion trees. As you will know, most of the tree-planting activity, being a natural resources-related function, typically falls to provinces and territories. We will be working with them and with other stakeholders as well to ensure that we implement that promise. Planting trees is important from a climate perspective, but perhaps even more so from a biodiversity perspective. We will be moving forward with it.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you. Just to clarify, I did not say it was “easy” during a pandemic; I said “feasible”.
We learn in the estimates that funding for the youth employment strategy has decreased. Looking at the departmental plan for 2020-21, the target for the number of green jobs created under the youth internship program is down to just 179 from the target last year of 969. In 2018-19 the actual results were 887 jobs.
Can you explain why there's this large reduction in green jobs for youth? As well, given that we could be investing in a tree-planting program that could be done with physical distancing, why haven't we been providing this kind of employment opportunity to students over the summer?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Let me start with the first. I'll ask my associate deputy minister to respond to the second.
We will be ensuring that as we move forward with the commitment to plant two billion trees, obviously it will create employment for a range of different folks, whether those are indigenous communities, young people or many people who live in rural areas. That certainly is an important part of ensuring that we're building back in the recovery from the pandemic.
With respect to the specifics around youth employment within the department, maybe I can ask Martine to make a response.
Dr. Martine Dubuc Associate Deputy Minister , Department of the Environment
In supplementary estimates (B), an $11-million investment is planned for youth engagement. That covers the innovation and nature aspect. So a very good investment will support youth employment across the country.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
In terms of the target, does it remain at 179 for this year? Is that correct?
Associate Deputy Minister , Department of the Environment
Regarding the target established for this year, I could provide you with figures at a later date. That said, this target is comparable to last year's target.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Okay, because that doesn't appear to be correct. I would love a follow-up, if you could send information to the committee.
Associate Deputy Minister , Department of the Environment
Yes, we will do that.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Great. Thank you.
We are not on track to meet our climate targets. In the fall 2019 report, the commissioner of the environment found that there was no support for the government's statement that we're “on track” to meet our climate targets of reducing emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030. We also know that these targets are not adequate and that we need to increase our ambition.
Can the minister account for the discrepancy in the statement from this government that we are “on track” when the evidence shows that we're not actually on track?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
I would say a couple of things.
The first is that, as you know, the pan-Canadian framework contained about 50 different initiatives that identified about 223 megatonnes in reductions to 2030. That is most of the way there, but we've always said that there was a gap to getting to the actual target that was 77 megatonnes.
During the campaign, we committed not only to meet but to exceed, and one of the things that I am working on every day is the plan we will be bringing forward to ensure that we actually not only meet but do exceed—as you indicate—the target as part of our response to the international community.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Thank you, Ms. Collins. Your time is up.
We now go to a five-minute round. The first questioner is Mr. Redekopp.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Thank you, and thank you, Minister, for coming to us today.
Under vote 5, “Payments to the New Parks and Historic Sites Account”, there was just under $10 million set aside. That's down from last year's estimates, which were around $26 million, so it's a significant reduction.
In the throne speech, your government promised that the “Government will work with municipalities as part of a new commitment to expand urban parks”. I've raised Saskatoon's Meewasin Valley with you and your officials on multiple occasions, formally and informally. As you are aware, there is an appetite at the provincial, regional and municipal levels to explore expanding and improving the Meewasin Valley as part of the federal government's plan to expand urban parks.
On October 21, I sent you a letter, along with correspondence from the Meewasin, asking for a formal meeting with you. To date, I'm not aware of a response. How do you intend on keeping the throne speech promise of new urban parks with a reduction in estimates under “new parks”? Why don't you start with low-hanging fruit like Meewasin in Saskatoon?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Well, first of all, let me say a couple of things. I'm very familiar with Meewasin.
As you know, I grew up in Saskatoon, and I think the idea of an urban park in the Meewasin area is a very interesting one. I would tell you that there are many urban municipalities that have reached out to us in the aftermath of the commitment to say that they are interested in similar kinds of things. I would be more than happy to meet with you and with the Meewasin people in the context of the discussion about how we move forward.
Maybe I can ask Ron Hallman, the CEO of Parks Canada, to speak a bit about the broader issue.
Ron Hallman President and Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
Thank you, Minister, and thank you, Chair.
First of all, to the member's question, I can confirm that Parks Canada met with the individuals locally. Today, in fact, the executive director for the Prairies did that.
On the broader issue of urban parks, we are very much interested in working with willing partners across the country to identify those areas that might be identified as urban parks, recognizing that not all of them would necessarily be like the Rouge. They might not all need to be owned and operated by Parks Canada even, but we're at the early stages of understanding what such a network of urban parks might look like. We're interested in having the discussion such as the member raises right now, in addition to a whole bunch of other ones that would provide us a network across the country.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Yes, well, Meewasin is a great example of the Prairie ethic. The park was funded by local governments and private donors, so their needs are fairly modest. I think it encourages exactly what we want, which is governments and individuals putting their money together to build great projects for our communities. I really don't understand why the government doesn't jump all over that.
Let's switch over and talk about the trucking industry. Page 8 of the departmental plan talks about the heavy vehicle sector. It says, “The Department will also implement regulations amending the Heavy-duty Vehicle and Engine GHG Emission Regulations”.
In my discussions with them, the trucking industry has indicated a strong desire for a working group, which includes government, truck manufacturers, engine manufacturers, the fuel industry, etc., to work together to develop a road map for decarbonization in the trucking industry. It's a very complicated issue, with significant greenhouse gas impacts.
We've asked several of your officials about this idea. They don't seem to be aware that consultations are even a thing to pursue. Why are you not creating a trucking industry working group? Do you plan to impose carbon targets on the trucking sector and just wash your hands of the economic consequences?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
I'm not sure who you've been talking to in the department. I'm certainly happy to learn the names, but obviously there is a need for consultation when we're looking at how we enhance the efficiency and/or the technology used in a range of sectors. That's true of light-duty vehicle standards and it's true of heavy-duty vehicle standards. That relates to short-term issues around enhancing energy efficiency. It also relates, as I said, to long-term technologies like hydrogen and fuel cells that may be a replacement for the internal combustion engine or the diesel engines that are typically used.
I know my officials have already been having some of those conversations, but if there are specific folks who have not been reached out to who you think should be reached out to, I'm happy to do that.
Conservative
Brad Redekopp Conservative Saskatoon West, SK
Are there working groups that have been created on the heavy-truck industry class 8 engine situation?
Liberal
Jonathan Wilkinson Liberal North Vancouver, BC
There are all kinds of consultations that have been going on at the officials' level, whether that's with associations or individual companies. That's true on the light-duty side, it's true with coal regulations, it's true with natural gas. It's true with everything.
Liberal