Environment Committee on Nov. 21st, 2023

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Isn't it misinformation when he's saying that the minister is clearly avoiding the committee when you've explained there's a scheduling conflict?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Mazier's free to doubt the veracity of what I've just said and impugn my motives, but he's free to speak.

Go ahead.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

We now know, today, that he is not going to appear today after numerous calls from this committee to appear this week at committee to become accountable, so it is very clear that Minister Guilbeault is hiding from Canadians, and it's very clear why he's hiding from Canadians.

On October 13, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the Liberals' “no more pipelines” bill, Bill C-69, was unconstitutional. On October 26, Minister Guilbeault was forced to backtrack on his failed carbon tax. He admitted that it was unaffordable for Canadians.

On November 7, the government's own environment commissioner stated that Minister Guilbeault is failing to meet the government's own emissions targets. On November 14, the Federal Court ruled that Minister Guilbeault's plastic ban was unreasonable and unconstitutional.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We have another point of order. Go ahead, Madame Chatel.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

It may be more a request for clarification. What are we discussing, exactly? Is it a motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We are discussing Mr. Mazier's motion, which is:

That, pursuant to the Order of Reference of Thursday November 9th, 2023, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, appear before the Committee for no fewer than 2 hours to consider the Supplementary Estimates (B) before Friday, December 1st, 2023.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to call upon the goodwill...

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is this a point of order?

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Call it what you will, a point of order or a question of privilege.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have to raise a point of order for me to give you the floor.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Chair, we have two witnesses here today whom I had proposed: Mr. Lillo, who has come from Montreal, and Mr. O'Connor, who has come from Estrie. These two witnesses are not appearing by video conference. They have travelled here, but we are unable to ask them questions, when we had planned to discuss committee business at...

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, I understand very clearly, but we are now debating Mr. Mazier's motion.

Mr. Mazier, back to you.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

It is very clear why the minister is hiding and doesn't want to testify in front of this committee: On October 13, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the Liberals “no more pipelines” bill, Bill C-69, was unconstitutional. On October 26, Minister Guilbeault was forced to backtrack on his failed carbon tax. He finally admitted that it was unaffordable for Canadians. On November 7, the government's own environment commissioner stated that Minister Guilbeault is failing to meet the government's own emissions targets, and on November 14, the Federal Court ruled that Minister Guilbeault's plastic ban was unreasonable and unconstitutional.

No wonder he is hiding.

I expect the Liberals and the NDP will help cover up the minister's tracks again by stopping debate on my motion, but Conservatives do believe that Canadians do deserve answers from this minister.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I have Mr. van Koeverden.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It has now become a little bit of a trend that we interrupt studies and our witnesses who have joined us and who in some cases have gone through great tribulations to be able to be present and answer questions. We have committee business following this. That is a perfect time to deal with this motion.

I appreciate Mr. Mazier bringing it forward, but with that said, I move to adjourn debate on this motion so that we can return to the study and work on committee business in the time allotted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That's a dilatory motion, with no debate.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

We'll go back to the meeting. It was Mr. Kram. You have two minutes left.

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

Very good.

I'll go back to Mr. Zeman from the Wildlife Federation of British Columbia.

Mr. Zeman, on your website you have a considerable number of recommendations for the Government of Canada in terms of next steps for water policy.

Can you give us a brief summary of what the next steps should be?

[Jesse Zeman]

There's a lot there and not enough time in committee to unpack all of it. I would say that the biggest priority in our world is definitely going to be dedicated funding.

We are continually seeing these wild swings in funding. It doesn't enable us to plan it doesn't enable us to forecast. Quite frankly, we are often firefighting and living in crisis management rather than proactively addressing all of these issues. This summer in British Columbia we had a drought, and even now we're still in drought here in a number of parts. Addressing those things ahead of time proactively is probably the best step.

The other piece that we didn't have a chance to talk to is around regulation and enforcement of regulation. Recently the University of Victoria environmental law centre put together a report for the Yaqan Nukiy First Nation and the B.C. Wildlife Federation related to the harmful alteration of fish habitat through hydroelectric development. Permits or authorizations are supposed to be given by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans if we're going to allow hydroelectric developers to impact fish habitat, and what we found in that case was that no permits had been issued. In essence, we're asking the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to follow its own rules to bring BC Hydro and Fortis into compliance.

I would say those are two of the top. We already have existing regulations and legislation that don't have enforcement or are not being used. In our world of British Columbia, we would definitely love to see the Government of Canada step up with $400 million for the watershed security fund.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Your time is up.

We have six minutes exactly until noon, so Mr. Bachrach, you're going to just fit in under the wire.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I'm just going to fit in under the wire. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate it. Thanks to all of our witnesses for their testimony so far.

I'd like to pick up where Mr. Zeman left off with his request that the federal government invest $400 million in the B.C. watershed security fund. Perhaps he could lay out what the British Columbia government has invested to date and some of the activities that it would facilitate if the federal government stepped up and enabled the billion-dollar watershed security fund in our province.

[Jesse Zeman]

Yes, absolutely.

This spring, the province announced $100 million to get the fund going. We'd like to see another $300 million out of the province to help bring it up to a billion dollars federally and provincially.

What has it enabled? It's enabled fish habitat restoration and wetlands restoration. It's enabled a bunch of planning, co-governance and partnerships with first nations, all things that we need in order to take care of our watersheds and our fish.

It has also drawn in a whole bunch of local community support, and that's something that our organization and other organizations in British Columbia, such as Ducks Unlimited, are fairly good at. It's also, I think, brought communities closer together. It has helped support reconciliation between first nations indigenous communities and non-first nations communities. There's a whole bunch of really good value-added stuff.

It's also going to help mitigate the effects of climate change. A bunch of the infrastructure we've invested in around beaver dam analogues, riparian area habitat restoration and wetland restoration is just generally good stuff for wetlands and watersheds as well as for preventing or mitigating the effects of climate change.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Zeman.

Based on that, Mr. Chair, I would like to put on notice the following motion: “That, given the importance of freshwater ecosystem services to the prosperity, sustainability, and resilience of British Columbian communities, and given the increasingly severe impacts of climate change including drought, wildfires, and floods, the committee urge the federal government to match the Government of British Columbia’s to establish a $1 billion watershed security fund.”

I'll provide the written version to the clerk in both official languages as soon as possible, but I wanted to notify the committee that I'll be putting that motion on notice.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay. Are you going to continue with your questions?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Continue with my questions....