Evidence of meeting #108 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 price.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
They have their own CGE model that they use. We talk to them. They can see our—
Conservative
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
They know how EC-PRO works.
Conservative
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
It's quite comparable in terms of results, whether they're looking at individual policies or overall progress. Really the two models are from the same family of computable general equilibrium models. They're just customized in different ways for different organizations.
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
Who would okay what?
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Who would okay their having access to EC-PRO?
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
They don't want access to EC-PRO. They have their own model.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
You just said they would have access to it, so who would okay that?
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
Who would okay...?
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Who would say, “Here's the EC-PRO model that we've been asking for here at the committee”? Who would give them that access?
Director General, Economic Analysis Directorate, Department of the Environment
We have the document that we shared with the committee. That's our best evergreen documentation of the model. That's what we give academics, and we would give it to Navius if they wanted to know the latest state of our model.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Okay.
Do Canadian hospitals pay a carbon tax on their energy bills?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
I'm going to have to get—
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
It's a very simple question. Do Canadian hospitals pay a carbon tax on their energy bills? Say they're using natural gas to heat their hospital, would they be paying a carbon tax?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
There are specific arrangements for institutions such as hospitals, and I'm happy to provide the committee with a written description of those arrangements.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Would those arrangements include...? Is the carbon tax fully refunded back to Canadian hospitals?
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
We can return to the committee with fuller details on that.
Conservative
Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Okay. Thank you.
I think that's pretty close.
Liberal
Shafqat Ali Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
It's fascinating to see how my colleague from the Conservatives is confusing the situation with the price on pollution by trying to use the words “carbon tax”, or how, in interrogation style, he is asking questions of our officials. I think we should treat them with respect and not put our words in their mouths.
Again, thank you to the officials for being here.
As you know, Canada's 2024 national inventory report, which tracks all greenhouse gas pollutants, estimated that emissions were at 708 megatonnes in 2022. Outside of the years during the pandemic period, when emissions were artificially low, when was the last time that Canada's emissions were below this current level?
What role has carbon pollution played in getting to this level? Anyone can answer.
Associate Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
I do not have right in front of me the backward years for the NIR. I will note that one of the things that happens in the NIR is that the historical numbers get revised after the fact. I know that sounds counterintuitive—how can the past change?—but the reality is that, because methodologies and the UNFCC approaches change, sometimes the numbers do get revised upwards. In some ways, that could distort the answer a bit, but we can certainly provide the year-over-year changes in the NIR.
In terms of the actual numbers this year, I think there are probably a couple of things to note that are important. One is that you can now see for the first time ever, really, that there's been a decoupling from our emissions reductions and our GDP growth. It used to be that you couldn't grow the economy without growing emissions. That trend has broken down. I would also note that, in terms of our post-COVID kind of rebound and what we expected in terms of emissions, it is much lower than we had originally projected.
Thank you.
Liberal
Shafqat Ali Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Canada's next interim emissions reduction objective is to be 20% below 2005 levels by 2026. Does the latest national inventory report show progress toward this goal? Are we on track to meet it? How significant is the role that the price on pollution is playing to get us there?
