Environment Committee on Dec. 9th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, thanks.

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. DeMarco, we know that greenhouse gas emissions fell 7.1% between 2005 and 2022. We also know that the reduction target for 2030 was 40%. So the difference between those two percentages, nearly 33 percentage points, is significant.

Perhaps I'm naïve in saying this, but it seems to me that's a gap that's virtually impossible to close. Earlier, however, I heard you say the number was 36%.

Am I to understand that what we're going to achieve in 2030 is 36% if the government implements all the planned programs and meets all the targets it has set?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Yes.

There are two variances here: the one between 7% and 40%, which represents the results recorded in 2022 as a percentage of the 2030 target. So we have to hit 33% in order to close it.

As the forecasted target in the Environment and Climate Change Canada is only 36%, that creates another variance, but only in the plan. I also believe that 36% is an optimistic number because the one we meet will probably be a bit lower. The department therefore has to improve its plan if it wants to raise the number from 36% to 40%. It also has to improve its results in order to go from 7% to 40%.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Do you think it's realistic to think that we can meet those targets?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Yes, it's possible to get there in six years if we want to do it.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

How can we do it?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

We can do it by applying the measures that are in place and by adding others in order to close the variance to zero.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Are the subsidies associated with the green shift in pubic transit sectors such as school transportation a major factor in the equation? Shouldn't the subsidies currently granted to the oil industry also be abandoned?

I understand that you aren't the one who'll make that decision, but aren't these compelling ideas?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Your time is unfortunately up, Mr. Fortin.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Could Mr. DeMarco answer with a yes or no, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Can you answer with a yes or no, Mr. DeMarco?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

It's more complicated than—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You don't have to respond, and I believe that question has already been answered. We could obviously invest or divert allocated funds from one item to another.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

There are two kinds of subsidies: those that help meet the targets, such as the net zero accelerator initiative, and those that don't concern the targets and fall into the class of oil and gas subsidies, which we discussed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Collins, go ahead.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to go back to the question around carbon budgets.

Establishing carbon budgets is something that I pushed for when we were initially amending the net-zero accountability act. This is also a recommendation from the net-zero advisory body.

I'm wondering, Commissioner, if you can comment on how it might be beneficial if Canada were to adopt carbon budgeting.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

You did get a chance to come back to the question. In the meantime, it allowed Ms. Leach to find the paragraph from last year's report about carbon budgeting, so I'll turn it over to Principal Leach to address that question, Ms. Collins.

[Kimberley Leach, Principal, Office of the Auditor General]

Thanks very much.

In our report from last year under the net-zero act, the 2023 audit, we talked about carbon budgeting as an effective tool for avoiding a slip in ambition and for course correction. As we know, carbon budgets allow a fixed total amount of greenhouse gas emissions over a period of time. In the U.K., they have legislated five-year carbon budgets. That is a tool they use for accountability, and they have been successful in setting and meeting their carbon budgets.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

This is something that I pushed for when we were amending the net-zero accountability act. I was really disappointed that the government was not willing to adopt carbon budgeting here in Canada. We've seen the consequences of that.

I'm curious when it comes to other policies that the U.K. has implemented, which we could have learned lessons from. Have you looked at country comparisons, about what has been effective in other jurisdictions like the U.K., which have bent that curve and reduced their emissions more than Canada?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

When we see the huge difference in performance between Canada and the U.K., it would obviously lead to the question about what they are doing that we aren't doing. They're not exactly in the same situation as Canada, but there are some similarities.

We did use some examples—not only carbon budgeting, but also some other examples—in the lessons learned report. Ms. Leach probably has those at the tip of her tongue as well.

[Kimberley Leach]

The U.K. Climate Change Committee has been an enormous accountability factor there. Yes, we have looked at other countries as well in our lessons learned document, including Norway, Denmark and some others.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is it all in the lessons learned document, basically?

[Kimberley Leach]

Yes it is, for both of those countries.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We have Mr. Kram.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. DeMarco, I'd like to follow up with my questions from the previous round.

Given how far behind Canada is in meeting their reductions targets and the yet-to-be-announced new initiatives that would have to happen in order to meet that goal, is it a safe assumption that any plan or any initiatives to meet their climate change goals would come with significant economic cost?