Environment Committee on March 27th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Lake, we're out of time.

We'll now go to Mr. Weiler.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I'd like to thank the minister and officials for being here today to answer questions on the main and supplementary estimates.

There are few issues I hear about that generate as much concern as the continued high level of logging of old-growth forests in B.C. by our NDP provincial government. This is very frustrating, because we know how cherished these irreplaceable ecosystems are. As a result, we're seeing major protests right across the province.

The main estimates and supplementary estimates (C) include an increase of almost $27 million for the B.C. old growth nature fund. My question for the minister is, what's holding up the launch of the old growth fund, and what is the Government of Canada prepared to do to protect some of our last intact old-growth forests?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Obviously, old-growth forests and species that are dependent on them are found primarily on provincial lands. We continue to look first to the province to protect and recover species at risk on those lands and to manage its forestry sector.

That being said, the establishment of the old growth nature fund is in progress. The funding agreement is also in place. We are currently negotiating a trilateral nature agreement with provincial and indigenous partners. We have in fact had several meetings in the past few weeks, specifically on that, with the province and with indigenous partners. The agreement will help all parties to better protect and restore habitats, including old-growth forests, to improve ecosystem resilience and to advance the recovery of species at risk.

With respect to the spotted owl in particular, I recently determined that the species is facing an imminent threat to its survival and recovery, so I'm now consulting with the Government of British Columbia and first nations communities on my finding. While the federal government continues to prioritize collaboration with provinces and partners on these issues, I will use the authorities outlined in the federal legislation if British Columbia's protection efforts for the species should be determined to be ineffective.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you so much for that. That's good to hear.

As well, I know there's lots of private capital that's interested in contributing to the conservation of some of our most important ecosystems.

In your opening, you mentioned that Canada has budgeted about $120 billion since 2015 to tackle climate change. You also mentioned that the most recent greenhouse gas inventory for 2021 is going to be released here in the coming weeks.

Minister, I was hoping you could share with the committee what have been the results in emissions reductions since 2015, outside of the fossil fuel sector.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

As you rightly point out, we are in the process of deploying more than $120 billion in investments to tackle climate change, restore nature and fight plastic pollution. These investments, along with policies, regulation, tax incentives and other measures taken since the adoption of the 2016 pan-Canadian framework, have enabled Canada to bend its GHG emissions curve downward.

In 2015, when we came in, the sky was the limit for emissions, so what we've worked on over the past few years is to bring that curve down. Now, in the 2022 national inventory report, the data shows that Canada's greenhouse gas emissions have decreased to 672 megatonnes. That's a 9.3% reduction below 2005 levels, the baseline against which Canada's climate efforts are measured.

Obviously, that's not enough. We need to do more. Emissions trends have remained consistent with previous editions of the Canada NIR, unfortunately, with emissions increases in the oil and gas and transportation sectors being offset by decreases in other sectors. Clearly, we need to work harder on every sector of our economy, but those two sectors—transport and oil and gas—represent more than 50% of our greenhouse gas emissions, so there is a specific targeted effort that needs to be done in these two sectors.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

I want to ask a question on that, because emissions from oil and gas are the largest and of course the fastest-growing in Canada, growing by over 20% since 2005. The emissions reductions plan has committed to reducing emissions by 41% relative to 2019 levels.

One of the things we've committed to is bringing in a cap, to cap and reduce emissions from oil and gas. Given that B.C. has now committed to bringing in a similar cap and is requiring new projects to be net zero by 2030, I'm wondering what that means for Canada as a whole.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Unfortunately, Minister, you'll have to work that answer into another answer.

Ms. Pauzé, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you.

Earlier, Minister, you opened the door concerning Export Development Canada. Indeed, under the Glasgow commitments, Export Development Canada must stop funding projects at the international level. However, in its most recent report, which dates from just a few weeks ago, Oil Change International noted that Export Development Canada was still funding projects in the United States, in the amount of $7.5 million. Someone is going to have to clamp down on Export Development Canada someday.

According to all credible sources, such as the World Energy Outlook report, the International Energy Agency and the IPCC, investment is needed in the fields of energy efficiency and renewable energy. This is what is important if we are to address the energy crisis, not investments in oil, gas and fossil fuels.

Canada has provided exceptions to the Glasgow commitments. I have not seen other countries do that, in everything I have read. It has provided a national security exemption, ongoing support for natural gas, and false solutions such as carbon capture and storage and hydrogen that is not green.

Why have these exceptions been made?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

First, we have to understand that what we published after making our Glasgow commitments dates from the end of last year, for EDC. This isn't going to happen from one day to the next. I have also seen the evaluations you are talking about. The one by Oil Change International is based on data from the previous year. We have to look at what EDC is going to do starting this year.

You referred to $7.5 million dollars, and that is a lot of money, but in 2018, EDC invested $12 billion in fossil fuels. So we have gone from $12 billion to $7.5 million, as you say.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I think it was more than $5 million. That is what we have found, but the figure was probably higher.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

We have made a lot of progress. We have to make a distinction between investments in fossil fuels that provide for increased production and investments in decarbonation.

Our commitment to the Canadian public and all of the regions is to work with firms and organizations in all economic sectors to help them decarbonize. We are working with firms and organizations in the cement, aluminum and steel industries and we are also going to work with firms and organizations in the oil industry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Collins, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the minister again for being here to answer questions.

I wanted to quickly follow up on something. You said you were open to the amendment I've tabled around reintroducing the words “tailings ponds” to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Does that mean you are supportive and open, or...? Can you clarify?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

To be quite honest, I learned about it over the weekend, so I haven't had a chance to be properly briefed by the department and the team on it. However, as an initial reaction, I'm very open to it.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you.

There is a requirement for a 2026 emissions objective in Canada's net-zero climate accountability act. Has that been set? What is the emissions reduction objective for 2026?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

You're talking about the interim target on the way to 2030. We are in the process of elaborating on that. We have to do an update to the emissions reduction plan by the end of the year this year. Starting this year, it's going to be every two years. We're still working on that interim—

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Will we have the 2026 emissions objective by the end of this year?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I can't answer that at this point, but I would happy to follow up with your office on it.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Okay, that's great.

I wanted to follow up on the announcement from three days ago that you mentioned. I quickly looked up the $420 million. It's $420 million over 10 years. Again, when it comes to front-loading, this still doesn't tell me how much is being spent this year, when that $420 million will be spent, and if it's even going to be spent in this minority Parliament.

Given that we have, at most, until 2025, I'm curious how we're going to ensure that the commitment the government made for $1 billion over 10 years is actually going to materialize.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I don't have the details of how and at what speed the $420 million will be spent, but I can assure you that some of the money will start being spent very soon. We need to act as rapidly as possible.

As someone who comes from the environmental sector, one thing we really don't like is when there's a lot of money, and then all of a sudden there's no more money. You want to have a sustained amount of money so that you can continue to work to support your scientists and the organizations on the ground that are doing the work.

It's important that there is an investment initially, but you want to sustain it over time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll go now to Mr. McLean.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Welcome, Minister.

I'd like to thank you and the officials who are with you for being here with us today.

In the supplementary estimates for this current year, Minister, you've allocated over $2.5 million extra for grants and contributions for the Trans Mountain expansion project. Can you tell this committee to which organization you gave those funds?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I don't have that information.

Could you please, Linda...? Merci.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Let me go on to the next question. You bought this for $7.4 billion back in 2018. You're now over $22 billion over budget in building this.

It is a ridiculous execution. Obviously, something has not gone right. The pipe has been purchased. The route is roughly the same as it was before.

There's $22 billion that has been spent on something that isn't, as your government would say, “just inflation”. Can you tell us what allocated expenditures led to a quadrupling of costs in this project, when the hard costs were virtually locked in?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

As I told your colleagues, I'm not the finance minister, but I would be happy to turn to Finance and ask them to provide written information on this to the committee.