Evidence of meeting #100 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was change.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jean-François Tremblay  Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
John Moffet  Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
Terence Hubbard  President, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Darlene Upton  Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
Ron Hallman  President and Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency

4:40 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

We don't have impacts, necessarily, on what happens with food banks. We have the Bank of Canada, which said that the impact of the carbon pricing on inflation was actually very, very small. Inflation is due to other factors that actually are way more significant than the carbon pricing.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

Why does Environment and Climate Change Canada not track something like that?

One has to understand that environmental policies don't impact only the environment; they impact the cost of living and Canadians' day-to-day lives. Why would food bank use be a metric that your department would not keep track of?

4:40 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

We do work with other departments. The numbers the minister showed previously, for example, were from Finance. We work with Finance. We work with ESDC. We work with other departments. They analyze the impacts of all measures. When we go to cabinet, this information circulates among departments, and everybody has a chance to get in and talk about the impacts.

That's one of the reasons the carbon pricing has been managed the way it has. If you look at the rebate, it is higher for 80% of the families who are paying. The way it's framed is to make sure that the ones who are impacted by affordability are the ones receiving more in terms of their return, and the ones who can pay are the ones who are paying. The redistribution that came with carbon pricing was precisely to limit any impact it would have on the poor population—most of them don't drive cars, to be honest.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

Let me put it this way: When the carbon tax goes up 23% in a couple of weeks, how many more Canadians will become food insecure and how many more Canadians will have to turn to food banks?

4:45 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

When the carbon pricing increases, 80% of people who receive more money than they pay through the tax will receive even more money. If you look at the numbers the minister presented, they increased compared to last year. Money doesn't stay in the government's pocket; it's sent back.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

You're guessing that the carbon tax increase on April 1 will result in fewer people going to food bank. Is that—

4:45 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

I don't do that. That's not the work I do. What I'm saying is that from a purely mathematical perspective, the money that comes from carbon pricing is going back to Canadians. It's going back to a redistribution that makes sure that people who are in worse conditions get more, people who are in rural areas get more and people who are in first nation, Inuit and Métis communities get more too.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

Okay, but you are aware that the rebates are going to be less than the actual cost when one considers the direct and indirect costs of the carbon tax.

4:45 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

The minister told you about the numbers from the.... I beg to disagree with the PBO on this.

What can I tell you? As I said, I don't disagree with the Bank of Canada, which says carbon pricing has a very limited impact—I think it was 0.2% or 0.3%—on inflation.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

Earlier, we heard that the minister disagreed with the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Do you also disagree with the Parliamentary Budget Officer?

4:45 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

We have a methodological issue with him. With the way he calculated it, if he doesn't take that into account.... I trust he is using the right numbers, but we would take into account the cost of climate change. It's the same thing when he doesn't take into account the investments from businesses to green their businesses or invest in clean energy, which also creates jobs and creates growth in the economy.

There are multiple factors at play. We cannot just select one and not the others.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK

To summarize, if I heard you correctly, Environment and Climate Change Canada has methodological issues with the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Is that what I understood?

4:45 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

Let's say we would take that into account, because we are the Department of the Environment and we think the costs....

I've been the deputy minister of other departments and managed emergency issues. The costs of managing emergency issues have increased significantly in departments—

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

I think the point has been made on both sides.

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

On a point of order, or a point of clarification, I heard the official mention that “most of them don't drive cars”. I wonder if he can follow up in writing with—

4:45 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

We can. We actually published our difference with the PBO at the time, so we can share it with the committee.

As the minister said, it's not something new. It's something that's been said before, but we would be more than happy to share that.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Okay.

We'll go to Mr. van Koeverden for six minutes, please.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

As I was listening to the previous question, I was reflecting on the meetings that I've had and hosted with organizations like Feed Opportunity and the Maple Leaf Centre for Food Security. I've always been really honest about growing up in community housing and wanting to get involved in government to eliminate poverty. I actually think that poverty is an option, a policy choice that successive governments have made.

When I hear the Conservatives talking about food banks, as they do often—which is fair, because food banks are experiencing higher than ever volumes right now—I do take issue with how they frame that line of questioning. The reason I take issue with it is that when I meet with the Maple Leaf Centre for Food Security or other poverty elimination organizations, none of them make any recommendations with respect to carbon pricing. If that's different from the testimony that has been received from the Regina Food Bank by my colleague Michael Kram, then I'd like to chat about it. I'd like to hear about the testimony and the evidence that's coming from poverty reduction experts in Saskatchewan, because perhaps they're different from the poverty reduction experts I talk to in Ontario.

My dad used to live in Regina. I used to visit often. The national championships for the sport that I love have been hosted on Wascana Lake many times, and I've spent a lot of time there. I love Regina; it's a great city. I gave the Regina Food Bank a follow on Twitter just now to see who else they follow. Indeed they follow Feed Opportunity and the Maple Leaf Centre for Food Security, and I thought it would be pertinent to bring up some of the recommendations that they've made.

They made a budget letter submission, as a lot of these poverty elimination organizations do, such as the Daily Bread Food Bank and the Maple Leaf Centre for Food Security. All of these organizations make regular submissions to the federal government and ask us to consider different policy choices. Not one food bank or poverty elimination organization that I have ever talked to—and I meet with them frequently—has ever recommended eliminating the price on pollution.

Last week I was on a program with Andrew Scheer, who was here earlier, and I brought up a gentleman named Peter Gilmer. To my colleague from Saskatchewan, we have a couple of weeks at home in April, and I would implore you to look up Peter Gilmer. He lives in Regina. Peter Gilmer is a poverty reduction expert from your city. Perhaps you already know about him.

Peter Gilmer has said that an elimination of the carbon price in Saskatchewan would actually have devastating impacts on the lowest-earning individuals in Regina. It's quoted. He works in poverty elimination. None of the organizations that I've met with have suggested or cited that the carbon price is a leading cause of food inflation or that eliminating the price on pollution would help lower-income families. I want that to be on the record.

I also want to thank the officials for joining today. I want to provide Mr. Tremblay with the opportunity to elaborate a little bit more on the work they've done to ensure that the Canada carbon rebate that goes out to Canadians on the price on pollution accounts for the expense that the carbon price costs them, particularly the lowest quintile of earners in Canada.

The price on carbon has been widely regarded as a good tool and an effective mechanism for lowering our emissions. A gentleman named William Nordhaus won a Nobel Prize in proving that carbon pricing is the cheapest and most effective way to lower our emissions.

Our emissions are coming down, and they have been since 2015. That's good news for Canada. I know that the Conservatives ran their election under the failed leadership aspirations of Andrew Scheer with a plan to increase emissions. He said it again yesterday on television. He said that Canada should be allowed to increase its emissions, which is absurd. It is not our goal, and it is not what Canadians voted for in 2015, 2019 or 2021. Canadians strongly believe that we should be leaders on fighting climate change and lowering our emissions. I don't know how those failed aspirations of the former leader of the Conservative Party found their way back into the contemporary political debate, but they're here; like a zombie; they won't die.

Mr. Tremblay, let's have some words from you on how we've ensured that the price on pollution does not have a negative impact on food costs or the lowest-earning Canadians.

4:50 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment

Jean-François Tremblay

I will turn to John, who has been our specialist on this for years.

March 19th, 2024 / 4:50 p.m.

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

Thanks.

I have just a couple of facts, off the top.

As our deputy minister mentioned, there are two important numbers that are relevant to this discussion, and they have been released by the Bank of Canada and various economists. The Bank of Canada, just last year, said that the carbon price contributes less than 0.15% to inflation each year. Policy Options, which is, as you all know, an unaligned think tank, just this year published a report saying that, at most, the carbon price contributes a 0.33% increase to grocery prices. We know that the impact is negligible.

To your question of why that is the case—

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia

Unfortunately, Mr. Moffet—I hate to interrupt you—we're past six minutes. I think you made your point.

We'll go now to Madam Pauzé for six minutes. She of course can continue on that line of questioning if she wants.

4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Moffet, I want to go back to my earlier question, but first I have a question for the representative from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada—I asked the minister the same type of question earlier.

In the relatively recent history of the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, have you ever conducted regional assessments in certain parts of the country?

4:55 p.m.

Terence Hubbard President, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

We are conducting regional assessments right now. There are two assessments ongoing regarding offshore renewable energy development, one in Nova Scotia and the other in Newfoundland and Labrador.

4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

What criteria have to be met for you to decide to conduct a regional impact assessment?

4:55 p.m.

President, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard

The essential criterion is support for assessments of future projects. We have to make sure that there will be projects in the future that could have a federal impact. Before those projects are developed, we have to assess their potential impact.