Environment Committee on Nov. 20th, 2024

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

The plan, as I just said, doesn't add up to the 40% to 45% target. Exhibit 7.1 shows how steep the graph would have to be to reach that target.

However, I want to caution that it's still only 2024; it's not time to give up. It is possible to bridge that gap over the next six years. We do owe it to Canadians, present and future, to make that effort to bridge the gap. Simply because I'm saying that we're not on track now doesn't mean that it's impossible to meet that target. There is still time to meet it, but it will require more measures than are in the plan right now.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Okay, that's fair enough.

On January 29, in the House of Commons, Parliamentary Secretary van Koeverden stated, “we are ahead of our initial 2030 target and firmly on track to meet the targets set out in our 2030 emissions reduction plan.”

Commissioner, would you say that statement is accurate or inaccurate?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Well, they've never published a pathway between 2005 to 2030 in terms of annual targets, as we were just talking about, so I don't know what shape of graph they were hoping for. Therefore, I can't really say one way or the other whether they're following the shape of graph that they intended.

In terms of what would be required, doing the math between now and 2030 shows that we can't have any more years when there's just a 0.5% reduction or a 1% reduction. We're going to need substantial reductions every year between now and 2030 to reach the target.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Let me put it this way, then. Let's look at the graph on page 2 of Report 7. Would it be accurate to say, based on that graph, that we are ahead of our 2030 target?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

The only way to be ahead of the target at the current time would be to have already met it. Some of our G7 colleagues have already reached the reductions that we're hoping for in 2030. That would be ahead of it.

As I said, I don't know what pathway the government is following. If you just draw a line on exhibit 7.1 in terms of extrapolating the data, you will see that we aren't on target.

However, the future isn't determined entirely by the past. We have the ability to bend that curve downwards, and we require additional measures to do so.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Okay.

This is my last quote, Commissioner. In December of last year, on Twitter, now known as X, Minister Guilbeault stated, “Our climate plan is working...we are on track to meet our goals and achieve a strong, sustainable and secure future.”

Commissioner, would you agree that the government is on track now to meet these goals?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I think we've said this a few times today, but with the measures the government has that are bankable and can be modelled right now, the government recognizes and has actually stated, in the first progress report that Environment Canada put out under the act, that it doesn't have bankable measures yet to meet 40% to 45%.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay. Thank you.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Longfield is next.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. DeMarco, and all the support you have here. It's always good to have you reporting to this committee.

It's good to note that you report to Parliament through this committee, so your work is incredibly important not only for this committee but for all of Parliament.

On that track, I'm thinking of the other auditors general across Canada. Looking at page 11 of report 7, we see that 15 of the 20 measures are multi-jurisdictional. The report reads:

...challenges affected the timeliness of measures in the transportation, oil and gas, electricity, and building sectors...provinces raised concerns with the draft Clean Electricity Regulations, including impacts on costs and rate affordability. The department proposed measures to mitigate these concerns...

There's a back-and-forth with the provinces and the federal government. How does that play out with the provincial auditors general? How do you work with them on issues like this?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I'll start and then I'll turn it over to Ms. Leach, because she actually coordinated the collaborative audit we did with those offices.

It was an unusual and innovative endeavour in coordinating our work on climate with theirs. That resulted in individual audit reports to each of the legislatures, as well as the one to Parliament. Our office also did reports for the territories. There is an ability to do that. It's a lot of effort, so we aren't going to do it every year, but we have done it once.

I should state that when I was the commissioner in Ontario, we also did something similar to last year's report. We looked at Ontario's climate plan and looked at whether there were overly optimistic assumptions and so on.

That work can be done, and is being done, by some of the auditors general.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I think what may be interesting for our committee is if there is a companion provincial report from Alberta, as an example, for us to know how it's auditing, and even to make sure that Alberta has a copy of what we're looking at, because the oil and gas industry has been mentioned several times. If we're going to make progress, we have to do it together.

Looking across at Mr. Bachrach and Madame Pauzé, we were on the committee when we drafted the accountability act. We looked at five-year reporting so that we could get outside of election cycles. We didn't really look at the provincial impacts of this as closely as we maybe should have.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

We're the Auditor General's office for the federal government and the three territories, so we can cover those areas directly, but yes, we certainly encourage our colleagues in the provinces to hold those governments to account for their part of this essentially whole-of-society endeavour to address climate change.

However, the federal government is the one that makes the international commitment and the domestic commitment to reach a target, so it holds the lead and it has the constitutional authority, which has been upheld in pollution regulation under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.

Yes, the federal government can take a lead role.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

It's not to shirk responsibility at all from our side, but we definitely need to see progress.

In paragraph 7.21 in your report, you talk about the four regulations that were “delayed in meeting milestones”—the clean fuel regulations being one of them—and the emissions cap, which we've also talked about.

The emissions cap was worded as an emissions cap and not a production cap because production is provincial jurisdiction. We're careful to word it within what we're trying to work on, but clearly, with regard to the details on oil and gas emissions, that draft regulation has been delayed by trying to work with the provinces and the oil producers to say what's realistic, how we are going to get there together and how we can sign off on this so that we know we're going to get those results together.

The national modelling on buildings is another one in which municipalities and provinces are involved. I'm trying to see how we could coordinate all of this with the audit departments and the auditors general to make sure that we have those impartial results coming to us as well as to the provinces and territories.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Ms. Leach can talk about that issue, because she coordinated the collaborative audit with the auditors general.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Unfortunately, I can give you just another 25 to 30 seconds.

[Kimberley Leach]

Yes, it's 20 seconds. Thank you.

In 2018, we tabled a report in Parliament that all auditors general in Canada contributed to. Each auditor general looked at climate change adaptation and mitigation. That is on our website. It's from 2018. All provinces have followed up on that work.

Here are a couple of very quick findings.

It found that many provinces and territories did not have adaptation plans.

When we're talking about mitigation, all of them had different targets.

That's an example.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

That was in 2018. It would be great to get an update on that one. I'm just saying.

Thank you, Chair.

[Kimberley Leach]

Yes, it would.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Leslie is next.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I'm sorry. How long do I have, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have five minutes.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll start with the commissioner.

Thank you for being here.

I'm going to have a couple of questions for ECCC officials, if they want to join us at the table. I'm not sure whether they are up here just yet.

I think my colleague Mr. Kram did a very good job of outlining some of the more troubling statements made in your audits regarding outcome and the track we are on right now.

I'll put this simply and reiterate for the officials who are joining us here, because I'm going to ask them some questions about this: Are we, or are we not, on track—as claimed by the current Liberal government—to meet our 2030 targets?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Is this question for the department?