Environment Committee on Dec. 14th, 2023

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

Thank you for the question.

First of all, I do not share your interpretation of the last report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. It doesn't say we're not going to meet our target; it says we have less and less time to meet the target. So we need to move faster, and I have said that many, many times since I became minister of environment.

The update on our climate change plan, which my colleague Mr. van Koeverden tabled in the House last week, shows that we are 90% of the way to meeting our 2030 target. It cannot be said that we failed to meet our 2030 target in 2023; that makes no sense. We still have seven years to implement measures.

On the specific issue of the emissions cap, you say that it took a long time and that it took two years to put forward the framework. I would remind you that it took five years to develop the clean fuel standard. Since I became minister of environment, our collective objective has been to reduce the time it was taking to develop these regulations to about two years.

In this case, we put forward the regulatory framework. The draft regulations are expected to be announced in June, probably, and the final regulations are expected to arrive in the middle of 2025. So we will have put those regulations in place in about two years.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Again, that's a lot of numbers. As I told you earlier, things are starting to get complicated. It's fascinating to see all the numbers changing.

You say that you are 90% of the way to meeting the 2030 emissions reduction plan targets. However, the commissioner says that Canada has almost no chance of meeting its targets, that emissions projections are unreliable, that they are too optimistic, that the implementation of mitigation measures has considerable flaws and that there is no way for the ministers responsible to be accountable for the failure to meet the targets.

So how will we get there? It seems to me that playing with figures is not going to get us there.

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

No, we have to implement measures more quickly, and that is exactly what we are doing.

You have to understand that since I've been Minister of Environment and Climate Change, we've announced a zero-emission vehicle strategy, proposed clean electricity regulations by 2035, and the most ambitious regulations on the planet to reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas sector. We are the only G20 country to have eliminated fossil fuel subsidies. We also announced a greenhouse gas emissions cap for the oil and gas sector. No other country in the world has done this, no other. You know this as well as I do.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I understand that, Minister. I know that this is not an easy position in a country where Alberta and Saskatchewan depend on oil, while Quebec depends on clean energy.

I have one last question on the figures. In Canada's national statement at COP28, you say that we need to get out of our comfort zone and realize that our current actions are insufficient to build a sustainable future. However, the emissions cap will only be implemented in 2026, and the methane regulations in 2027. The Bloc Québécois agrees with these two positions, but not with such a long time frame. Do these measures really reflect the urgency of the situation?

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

Again, we want to reduce by more than half the time it takes to develop and implement these measures.

You're talking about methane. The oil and gas sector will reduce its methane emissions by at least 45% by 2025, which is almost half of emissions. We are not starting from scratch. We have already done some of the work, but we are told that 45% is not enough and that we have to go even faster. We also have to look at the reduction of emissions in the electricity sector.

Why has Canada not yet managed to meet the target? We still have seven years ahead of us, but there is one sector where emissions are not going down, and that is the oil and gas sector.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Ms. Pauzé and Mr. Guilbeault.

Mr. Bachrach, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here. It's good to see you.

I'll pick up where my colleague Madame Pauzé left off, talking about this question of whether Canada is indeed on track. I think that we, along with several other parties at this table, want to see ambition and we want to see the necessary work being done to meet the promise that you've made to Canadians.

It's interesting. This committee heard maybe a month ago from the environment commissioner, and he told a story very different from the one you're telling today. I'll read what he said in his report.

It reads:

Environment and Climate Change Canada estimated that the measures in the 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan were not expected to reduce emissions to the extent needed to meet the target.

The environment commissioner, whose work is required as part of the emissions accountability act, has found that Canada isn't on track to meet either the 2026 objective or the 2030 target, yet ECCC's progress report that came out last week had a very different conclusion. It said that everything was rosy and well on track to meet both the 2026 objective and the 2030 target.

The key criticism that the environment commissioner makes is that the projections that ECCC uses are overly optimistic.

I was looking through the progress report that includes these optimistic projections, and I noticed that for the oil and gas industry, for instance, a fairly precipitous drop in oil and gas emissions in 2023 is projected, back down to below the prepandemic levels.

My first question is this: How should Canadians understand the contrast between the message we received from the environment commissioner and what you've put out, which is much more optimistic, and do you have information that suggests the oil and gas industry is going to reduce its emissions next year, the year after and the year after that, as this modelling in your report clearly shows?

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

Thank you for the question, Mr. Bachrach.

This is not a criticism of the work of the environment commissioner, but it's important to remember that his work is based on data that is already a year old. When he did his report, we hadn't announced the zero-emission vehicle mandate. We hadn't announced the clean electricity regulations. We had not announced the new targets for methane. We hadn't announced the cap on oil and gas emissions. We hadn't phased out fossil fuel subsidies. These are all new elements that have happened since the commissioner was able to do the work.

The issue of modelling is extremely complex. One of the things we have started doing, following recommendations by the environment commissioner, is to work with other organizations on modelling to perfect—although it will never be perfected—or improve the modelling we do. We share this information so that other organizations—I can certainly think of at least one other, which is the Climate Institute—can contest whether the modelling we're doing and the assumptions in the projections that are in the documents, such as the progress report of the ERP, the emissions reduction plan, are valid.

I'll be the first one to acknowledge that it is a challenging sphere and one in which we're trying to improve year after year.

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

I guess what I'm getting at, Minister, is that your report provides that optimistic projection of emissions declining in the oil and gas sector, but we know that emissions in the sector are actually going up year over year.

I am wondering why there is the disconnect there. You have modelling that shows they're declining in the next three years, before the oil and gas emissions cap is even in place. Are the emissions expected to go down?

We've heard from Rich Kruger from Suncor, and other CEOs, that they want to expand production as quickly as possible. They want to make money and increase emissions like gangbusters. How do we square the circle here? We have an industry that's increasing emissions. We have a policy that doesn't come in until 2026, and we have a graph, based on ECCC modelling, that shows the emissions from the oil and gas sector magically going down between now and 2026.

Is that actually going to happen?

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

It's not magic, but it is going to happen. You—

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

Sorry, but I will stop you there. It's going to happen. You're saying that emissions from the oil and gas sector are going to go down between now and 2026 when the key policy comes into force.

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

If I may—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Answer briefly, please, Mr. Minister.

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

You're basing your assumptions on the fact that the only thing that will result in emissions reduction in the oil and gas sector is the emission cap, whereas we've already implemented clean fuel regulations to reduce emissions from refineries. We already have methane regulations. We already have a price on pollution, which goes up year after year and which will—

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

And yet you—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We have to go on now to our second round. It's with Mr. Mazier.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming today.

Minister, will you provide the committee with all of your meeting and expense details from the trip to Dubai?

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

I will, as we always do—yes, of course.

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

You'll provide those documents to the committee. Thank you very much.

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

Yes.

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

The environment director for the Chiefs of Ontario stated that the carbon tax “exacerbates the affordability issues our citizens face”.

Do you agree with the Grand Chief's statement?

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

The Bank of Canada disagrees with that statement.

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

But do you agree with that statement?

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

I agree with the Bank of Canada statement, which I referred to earlier in this testimony.

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

The Prime Minister says that it's “misinformation” to say that the carbon tax is costing Canadians more. Do you believe that the Chiefs of Ontario and the Assembly of First Nations are spreading misinformation by saying that the carbon tax is unaffordable and unfair?