Environment Committee on Nov. 9th, 2023

[Vincent Ngan]

There are a few things.

For one, I can turn to Mr. Hermanutz to talk about the availability of the information. As you know, every year there is an update on the greenhouse gas emissions projections on an annual basis. Also, on a biennial basis, we submit to the UNFCCC a report on the progress of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions reduction. That includes projections subject to peer review.

The third part is that we did provide all the information requested by the office of the commissioner, including a specific reference to one piece of information they were looking for. With that particular piece of information, it is not all the data but one specific piece that is subject to cabinet confidence, pursuant to section 29 of the Canada Evidence Act.

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

Is that a fair statement, Commissioner?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

We receive only the information that they disclose. It's not like a court, which receives the information in confidence and assesses whether the blacked-out information was properly blacked out or not. We have no reason to believe they were inappropriately withholding information that was found somewhere else and not just in a cabinet confidence. We take them at their word that this information was in a cabinet confidence.

However, it's a choice of the government to have the information housed only there. What we're saying is, in the spirit of transparency, make more information publicly available to us and essentially revisit the choice as to where information that's important for Canadians in terms of accountability is housed.

We aren't saying that the information was improperly redacted or anything like that. We're saying that the choice that was made to have it only in the cabinet confidence and nowhere else reduces the transparency and accountability. That's why recommendation 6.84 is in there; and it's been agreed to.

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

Thank you, Commissioner.

I think for a government that promised to be open by default, we've seen a bit of a trend line away from that here. I think it's entirely reasonable that you made that suggestion.

I'm just going to switch over to the fisheries audit number 9, on the catch data not being dependable and timely in the commissioner's opinion. Given this reality and some of our struggles between the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and our fisheries communities and fishermen themselves, is there a concern that generally speaking our fishery stocks are not being well managed due to this lack of data available to the department or being found by the department?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

There's a risk regarding the sustainability of the management. We had hoped to look at both the quality of the information base—that is, the monitoring data—and how it's used to good effect to sustain fisheries, but because we encountered so many of the same problems that we had seen seven years ago, the report focuses mainly on trying to tidy up the information base so that they have the information available that is dependable and timely and will help ensure the sustainability of the stock. It's going to take that step of filling in these gaps in the information bases before we can confidently assess one way or another whether the stocks are being sustainably managed or not.

We didn't see any problems with the use of the information they had. Regardless of its limitations, they weren't looking at information and then deciding to set quotas that were too high regardless of whether they were using the information they had properly. The problem that we identified in the report is the quality of that information, not the use of it.

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

Thank you, Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Thank you, Mr. Leslie.

Now we go to Mr. van Koeverden for five minutes.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll share a little of my time with Ms. Chatel towards the end, if you wouldn't mind letting me know when I'm up to about three minutes.

I'd like to focus a little on provincial jurisdiction. Since it's come up a couple of times, I also drive an electric car. I live in Ontario, so I received a federal subsidy but not a provincial one. It was a long wait for my car, and there isn't a used EV car market in Ontario because we have so few EVs, and that's a direct relationship with our province's removal of the subsidy for EVs and for zero-emissions vehicles. I'm glad that Mr. Deltell was able to obtain a used vehicle in his province, but it was directly because there is a used EV market in Quebec due to the fact that they have so many subsidized vehicles.

Focusing just a bit on provincial jurisdiction, I'm curious to know if anybody has any insight on this. In an alternate universe where provinces were more ambitious.... Canada is a federation, and we share jurisdiction in many areas. I'd like to also highlight that we're not talking about a redoubling or tripling of our efforts to get to 40%; it's projected to be around 34%. We need to increase our ambition; we need to go faster and go harder; it's not a matter of doubling or tripling our things.

What role do the provinces and territories play in things like EV subsidies? That's low-hanging fruit, so what else could they be doing to help us achieve these targets together?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Having conducted an audit at the provincial level in my previous work as well, I can speak to that in part.

It's a whole-of-society issue to address climate change, as is the related biodiversity crisis. Those are whole-of-society crises that need to be addressed. It's not only all levels of government but also individuals in the private sector who all have to do their part in addressing these if we're actually going to succeed in not just hitting a target, which is important, but more importantly averting the worst effects of climate change and biodiversity loss.

Provinces can do a lot in both the climate area and the biodiversity area, given the division of powers under the Constitution, and local municipalities can play a part as well.

On issues of international or national concern such as the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis, it's incumbent on the federal government to take the lead. There's no doubt about that.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. DeMarco.

Just very quickly, yesterday I met with Nature Canada, and I'd like to highlight our government's $1-billion nature protection agreement with the Province of British Columbia and various first nations in the province.

How important is protecting nature and achieving our climate emissions reduction ambitions but also our climate change ambitions? Please give a very short answer so I can pass it over to Sophie.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

There is more and more recognition of the interplay between the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis, both in terms of the negative effects of climate on biodiversity, and also the role that nature can play in helping address climate issues, so the arrows go both ways in that cycle. Protecting and restoring natural habitat is one of the key measures to not only store carbon.... It shouldn't just be about storing carbon, but also protecting wildlife and improving—

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

Go ahead, Madam Chatel.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Major economies are making efforts to become green, with investments and policies. They are also concerned about competitiveness. We are increasingly talking about carbon pricing and adjusting the price of carbon at the border, in the form of tariffs, for countries that do not have such a price, for example.

My question is for Environment and Climate Change Canada. It could also be answered in writing.

The European Union has just introduced a carbon price for certain sectors, including cement. Where is Canada in this discussion?

You have one minute left to respond.

[Derek Hermanutz]

Are you referring to border carbon adjustments? Yes. We would have to table some information for you. I can't speak to that issue directly.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Perfect, that would be great.

There's also competition between the provinces. Indeed, Quebec was a pioneer in setting up a carbon exchange.

In your opinion, if federal carbon pricing were to be eliminated, what would happen to competition between the provinces, between those who are making efforts and those who aren't?

[Derek Hermanutz]

Again, we can table some more information, but I think it's fair to say there would be efficiencies for having a common national market, rather than different provincial programs.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I completely agree with you.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Dan Mazier]

That's it. Thank you, Ms. Chatel.

Go ahead, Mr. Garon.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Commissioner, the federal government has set targets for the electrification of its fleet of vehicles. Reading your report, it becomes apparent that it's headed straight for failure.

According to the government, it needs such specific vehicles that it would be impossible. Nobody, however, is asking the Canadian army to use electric tanks. We know that 96% of the government's fleet could be electrified, but we're surprised to learn that the federal government isn't even able to pluck the lowest-hanging fruit.

In practical terms, when it comes to procurement policies and planning, what simple things can federal departments and agencies do right away to improve their odds of success? Should they take a page from Parks Canada or the Canada Border Services Agency, for example, who seem to have done a slightly better job than the other departments and agencies?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

We published our reports on net-zero emissions, the current one and the previous one, well before the 2030 target in order to give the departments and agencies time to revise their approach and the chance to meet their targets instead of failing once again. They still have enough time to meet their targets, but they need to be strategic about it and act immediately, because vehicles have a seven-year lifespan.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

What can they do, for example?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

They can immediately acquire light-duty electric vehicles. There will be a waiting period, because the market is rather limited, but they need to start with that immediately. As far as heavy-duty trucks are concerned, they will have to wait a few years until the technology has advanced enough. That said, they can take action now.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Is that what Parks Canada did, for example? If it's beginning to use more electric vehicles, is that because it started planning earlier and showed more foresight by getting on waiting lists?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

That's our recommendation in terms of strategic approach. Since light-duty electric vehicles are available right away, they need to acquire some faster. It will take a few years, however, to see if electric trucks will be available. They need to set targets and proceed gradually.

Simply put, the goals are attainable. I hope our report will encourage the departments and agencies to speed up their efforts in a strategic fashion.