Environment Committee on Dec. 9th, 2024

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you.

So there would be three possibilities. The first would be to abolish carbon pricing and do nothing to fight climate change. At that point, Canada's emissions would increase and Quebec would be the only one making an effort. The second would be to replace that with regulations, in other words, we would tell people that their emissions can't exceed a certain threshold. So it would be a very prescriptive approach. The third would involve massive investments, which would increase public debt.

Are those the options that are being discussed right now?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

In terms of providing grants, not only is it very expensive, but as we pointed out in our last two or three reports, to date there have been no major reductions. Proceeding that way would be very costly—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

—in terms of regulations, whether it's seen as a prescriptive approach or a kind of command and control, that's the other option...

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We have to stop there, unfortunately.

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. DeMarco, I think my colleague Ms. Chatel's questions are relevant and I'd like to come back to them at length, but I only have two and a half minutes of speaking time. We may have an opportunity to come back to that later.

How does the current pricing system in Canada compare to what's in place in other G20 countries?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Canada has a national carbon pricing system, but provinces and territories can also have their own systems. In all cases, there's a system in place, whether it be the federal government's or that of the province or territory. So there is no gap.

It's similar to the EU, which uses another carbon pricing tool, a cap-and-trade system for gas—

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

I apologize for being rude, but time is of the essence.

In your opinion, is the system in place in Canada more effective or as effective as the European one? Do other countries have systems that we should envy, copy or be looking at?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Again, you're asking me to make a political choice.

I haven't looked at how Canada compares to G20 countries, but I can tell you that we have the worst emissions record in the G7.

That being said, we're talking about the period from 1990 to today, and pricing is a fairly recent measure.

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

Mr. Chair, I'm going to give the little time I have left to my colleague Mr. Morrice from the NDP, if everyone agrees.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay, but there are only 30 seconds left.

Mr. Morrice, you have the floor.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Okay.

Commissioner, as you noted in one of your recent reports, Canada is now the only country whose emissions have gone up from 1990 levels among G7 peers. Of course, our target doesn't look back to 1990. It only looks back to 2005. Still, it doesn't have us doing our fair share. We're not on track to meet it, and you noted there's some double counting involved. You were disappointed in 2021 and disappointed in 2024. Environmental Defence has called out the elephant in the room: the subsidies to the oil and gas industry.

Have you done any kind of value-for-money assessment of how those funds of $18 billion plus could be redeployed to get us emissions reductions over the coming years?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Unfortunately, I again have to limit you to a binary answer.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

You can take 20 to 30 seconds of my time to answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay.

Please keep it brief, Commissioner.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Okay.

We haven't done a recent report on fossil fuel subsidies, but we did two reports on that issue before I was commissioner. We testified on that issue a year or two ago, as well.

The choice of how to use the money, if it were to be redirected from those subsidies to somewhere else, is for the government.

Yes, we have had concerns over the years about fossil fuel subsidies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Collins.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to move the following motion:

Given that:

A. the Environment Commissioner reported that the government is not on track to meet their 2030—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Ms. Collins, is this the motion regarding the net zero accelerator?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Have you given 48 hours' notice?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay. Go ahead.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The motion reads:

Given that:

A. the Environment Commissioner reported that the government is not on track to meet their 2030 emissions reduction targets;

B. the testimony heard by the committee from witnesses in the meetings which took place on November 20, 2024, November 27, 2024, and December 2, 2024, included concern with the government's emission reduction policies and progress.

The committee report to the House of Commons its disappointment regarding the government's slow progress in meeting 2030 emission reduction targets.

I won't speak too much to this. It's pretty straightforward and clear. I'm hoping we can pass this very quickly by heading to a vote without taking up too much time of the committee.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. van Koeverden.