Environment Committee on Nov. 20th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. It's a pleasure to have you here again today to—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Chair, I have a point of order.

I was wondering, now that Minister Boissonnault has stepped down, who's going to be in charge of Jasper and who's going to come out on the 5th.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I'm not making those decisions, but Minister Boissonnault obviously won't be here on the 4th.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Can we get a report back to the committee as soon as possible on who is going to take his spot so that we can plan for that meeting?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Sure.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, we'll look into that.

She is replacing him, but I don't know if that includes Jasper. I don't know if that includes.... We'll—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Who is replacing?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Minister Petitpas Taylor is going to be taking over Minister Boissonnault's responsibilities, but I don't know if that includes Jasper. We don't know. That's something to look into.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You're welcome.

Commissioner, we're very happy to have you here today.

I believe you have an opening statement of around 10 minutes. The floor is yours.

[Jerry V. DeMarco, Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to be here today to discuss our annual report on environmental petitions and four performance audits, which were tabled in Parliament on November 7.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

I am accompanied by Kimberley Leach, Susan Gomez, James McKenzie, David Normand and Daniel Sipes, the principals who were responsible for the reports.

The four audits all touch on the importance of 2030, a year heavy with expectations.

By 2030, Canada is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 to 45% below 2005 levels; halt and reverse biodiversity loss in Canada; generate 90% of electricity from renewable and non-emitting sources; save 600 petajoules of energy every year; and meet the sustainable development goals set out in the United Nations 2030 Agenda.

I will begin with our audit under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act.

In this audit, we looked at the government's progress in implementing climate change mitigation measures. This is our second report under the act.

Last year, we looked at the government's 2030 emissions reduction plan and found it to be insufficient to meet Canada's reduction target because key measures were delayed or not prioritized.

This year's audit assessed progress to date on 20 of the 149 measures included in that plan and its progress report. Overall, we found that measures were being implemented too slowly and that estimates of expected emissions reductions were overly optimistic.

We also followed up on progress made by federal organizations in implementing 41 recommendations from some of our audits on climate change since 2021. We found that while some recommendations were implemented, organizations' actions were sometimes slow or did not always fully address the concerns raised in our audits. This is important because slow and unresponsive actions impair Canada's ability to meet its targets.

Our body of work has shown that the stakes grow even higher each year, and the window of opportunity to reduce emissions and meet Canada's 2030 target is rapidly closing. The federal government must act quickly and decisively by implementing effective measures.

Let's turn now to our report on departmental progress in implementing sustainable development strategies.

We assessed the progress made by four departments in meeting two energy targets: generating 90% of Canada's electricity from clean sources and reducing annual energy consumption by 600 petajoules.

We found that results were limited, that progress was slow and that most of the reporting by Natural Resources Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada and Indigenous Services Canada failed to clearly show how their results contributed directly to the federal targets. This left the government without a clear picture of its progress on clean power generation and energy efficiency targets.

Currently, over 82% of electricity produced in Canada comes from renewable and non-emitting sources, while the 2030 target is 90%. This gap is significant, and the gap for the energy efficiency target is even larger.

Generating cleaner power and improving energy efficiency are both key to reducing Canada's greenhouse gas emissions and supporting the transition to a low carbon economy. Redoubling efforts to achieve these two targets by 2030 would demonstrate Canada's leadership in the global fight against climate change.

Also on the topic of net‑zero, our next report looked at Natural Resources Canada's critical minerals strategy.

The federal government allotted $3.8 billion over eight years to increase the supply of responsibly and sustainably sourced minerals.

Canada needs these resources to support green technologies such as electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines and solar panels. Our audit focused on two of the strategy's objectives: environmental protection and advancing reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

We found that Natural Resources Canada did not do enough analysis to weigh the benefits of increasing Canada's supply of critical minerals against the impacts this might have on the environment and indigenous communities. Though these resources are critical for supporting the transition to a net-zero economy, caution and proper planning are necessary to avoid adverse impacts on climate, biodiversity and indigenous communities. For example, an increase in mining activities could also result in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution and loss of wildlife habitat.

Moving forward, Natural Resources Canada will have to fully assess risks and impacts of the Canadian critical minerals strategy to help maximize the strategy's benefits while minimizing adverse effects from increased mining activity. Otherwise, the benefits of advancing technology in support of the transition to net‑zero emissions could be offset by adverse effects on climate, biodiversity, indigenous communities and future generations.

Our next audit looked at the support Environment and Climate Change Canada provided for status assessments and reassessments of plants and animals at risk of extinction.

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada is responsible for completing these assessments under the Species at Risk Act. Environment and Climate Change Canada's role under the act is to provide the committee with the financial, administrative and technical support it needs to carry out this work.

We found that in 2023-24, the department set a target to support only 60 assessments and reassessments each year, without any formal analysis to support this decision. Even with that target, the department did not provide the committee with the support necessary to complete the 60 assessments. This is important because the committee's assessment of the status of species at risk is the essential first step to protecting and recovering them.

With Environment and Climate Change Canada's yearly limit of 60 assessments and reassessments, it would take the committee almost 30 years to assess prioritized species and over a century to assess those that are potentially at risk. The department's limit also makes it impossible for the committee to keep up with reassessments, which the act requires on a 10-year cycle for every species at risk.

Given the scale of the global biodiversity crisis, the current rate of assessments and reassessments negatively affects Canada's ability to protect plants and animals from disappearing because of human activity.

In closing, I want to re-emphasize that time is of the essence and Canada is moving much too slowly. The window to avoid catastrophic climate change continues to close. Intense forest fires, heat waves, violent storms and flooding have become more severe and frequent—affecting everyone, everywhere.

Canada's action and inaction affect more than just present and future Canadians. Our country plays a very important role in meeting the global challenges of sustainable development, climate change and biodiversity loss. Canada needs to step up and do its part.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening statement.

We would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Commissioner.

I now give the floor to Mr. Mazier, who will start this round of questions.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner, for coming out this afternoon. It's good to see you again, and all of your department officials.

I have a lot of questions today, so if your replies can be as brief as possible, it would be appreciated.

I'll start off with a very short yes-or-no question. Is the government on track to meet their 2030 emissions reduction targets? It's just a yes or no.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

No.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Commissioner, did the environment department ever indicate to your office that the government would not meet the 2030 emissions targets with existing measures?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Yes, they indicated that. Their calculation is that they're on track for about 36%, and the target is 40% to 45%.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Was the environment department aware they wouldn't meet their emissions targets?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Yes.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Why does Minister Guilbeault keep telling Canadians the opposite?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

You'd have to ask him.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I will.

The United States is outperforming Canada in emissions reductions without a carbon tax.

If the will is there and other measures are used, is it possible for Canada to meet its emissions targets without a carbon tax?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

There are a range of measures available to reduce emissions, including a carbon levy, regulations, subsidies and so on. The mix chosen by any country to reach a target is a policy decision for that government to make. If the carbon levy were to be removed, it would need to be replaced by something equally effective, plus something additional to bridge the 4% gap we just spoke about.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Is it possible for Canada to meet its emissions targets without a carbon tax?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

It is theoretically possible. However, there isn't much time left between now and 2030, so changing tracks has its disadvantages.