Environment Committee on Oct. 30th, 2025

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

Who do you expect to absorb those costs, then? Will the shipping companies be expected to absorb them, or ultimately will consumers in Canada and everywhere in the world absorb them?

[Amy Nugent]

Let's defer the costing analysis to the body that did it.

We can look at costs here at home, domestically, which is the focus of Oceans North's work. If we're thinking about, for example, installing shore power at the port of Montreal and the expansion at Contrecoeur, those funds can be passed through by cruise ship passengers.

That's an example of an area where we'd say there's an appropriate cost pass-through. We could have an extra few bucks on a cruise ship trip to pay for eliminating pollution at the port of Montreal.

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

I would ask you more specifically about the folks I represent, the ones on a fixed income—say, seniors—who are also going to face an extra few bucks on their grocery bill, on their heating bill and on everything else that has been passed through to them. It's one thing to talk about the cruise ship person paying a few extra bucks—that's a nice way to singularly look at it—but what about everybody else who's going to pay more for every single thing that's imported into this country?

[Amy Nugent]

I don't see that analysis borne out. Canada, largely from shipping, is an exporting.... We're putting out our goods through export, and absolutely you would mitigate the costs of the transition.

The question would be, what are the costs of the impacts borne by our communities in climate change, and the health costs of the pollution dockside?

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Fanjoy, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, witnesses, for joining us today.

Mr. LaBobe, I'd like to direct my first question to you this morning.

My Conservative colleague said something in his questions about the position of the Assembly of First Nations. He accused it of “walking away” from the 21st century. I thought that was a very interesting characterization since most of us in Parliament are trying to bring the Conservative Party into the 21st century.

I'd like to give you an opportunity to clarify the indigenous perspective on addressing climate change.

[Wendell LaBobe]

I was not necessarily saying we have to go back to the old ways, but there's our traditional knowledge of our old, ancestral ways. When you look at it this way, our people used what we needed, and we didn't take too much. We respected Mother Nature. We respected our animals and everybody around us.

Really, we're not saying to go back to our old ways of doing things, but to bring some of our old knowledge back. Just adopt it into today's society is what I'm trying to say.

I'm not saying to go all the way back, but to respect our traditional knowledge and our traditions, and incorporate that into the discussions you are having when you guys do these policies.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

When you were making your opening statement, you didn't get a full chance to finish. Is there anything else you wanted to share with us from your opening statement?

[Wendell LaBobe]

No, I got in pretty much everything I needed to say. I just missed out saying in my closing remarks that our recommendations are fully elaborated on in our AFN technical submissions to your committee. You guys now have them in your packages.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

Thank you.

Madame Potvin, nature is something that unites Canadians. Nature-based solutions are also some of the most affordable and effective ways for us to address the climate crisis we're having.

Can you elaborate on what you see as the most powerful nature-based solutions we should be leveraging in Canada?

[Catherine Potvin]

In Canada, nature-based solutions are more efficient in the agricultural sector. I think it would be incredibly politically tempting...so thank you for this question. It seems as though climate policy often concentrates on urban set-ups. That's mostly because most people live in cities. It leaves the rural areas feeling vastly abandoned, not concerned with and even negatively impacted.

If we think about farming, a transition to no-till agriculture, for example, which provides a large store of carbon in agricultural soil, could be supported by the federal government through training and incentives. Usually farms have a lot of buildings. There could be solar panels on these buildings so that farms could produce their own energy and maybe even sell energy to the grid, which would be beneficial. I actually come from a farming family. My daughter has a farm. She's a horticulturist, so it's a topic I really like.

People who have cattle could use manure and biodigestion to produce methane and then produce natural gas, which is renewable and could be used for heavy machinery. There are really exciting examples, in particular in Manitoba, of farmers who are embracing the transition and moving forward. I think it's a topic of interest. It's not a big sector of emissions for Canada, with more or less 9% of greenhouse gases, which is maybe why it has not reached the forefront, but between the carbon we could put in the soil and the rest of the modernization of farming, I think it's a really good avenue.

In Canada, unfortunately, I think the forest sector is now so stressed that we should aim at protecting it rather than considering it a solution. We want to try to limit the climate warming up and drying so that our forests can still help us. I don't think we can invest in that as a natural climate solution.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you, Ms. Potvin.

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

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Nugent, emissions from the marine sector currently account for 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Are marine transport emissions expected to rise to about 10% of global emissions unless we see regulations and a drop in emissions?

[Amy Nugent]

You're right; emissions in the sector overall are currently the size of those in a country about the size of Germany and are expected to rise. A recent study of vessel traffic on Canada's west coast—this is positive news in some economic respects, for sure—has a very large increase, an increase of about 600%, in ship traffic. We're looking for ways to mitigate the impacts of those volume increases.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Could you provide us with your solutions to reduce the marine sector's emissions at both the national level and the international level?

[Amy Nugent]

Do you mean to talk through them or to submit them in a more formal way?

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yes, in a more formal way. I'm running out of time.

[Amy Nugent]

I would be very happy to. Thanks for the invitation.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you.

With regard to black carbon, which you mentioned, do you think Canada's strategy should be updated or enhanced? Do we need to focus on black carbon in order to reduce emissions?

[Amy Nugent]

The Clean Arctic Alliance, with colleagues and leaders across the Arctic, has off-the-shelf solutions where you can move to a different kind of available fuel, very similar to blends you see in other sectors, and you can eliminate black carbon. Black carbon is right now a vicious-cycle pollutant and a superpollutant in the Arctic that's making ice melt and the planet heat up faster. You could virtually eliminate it overnight through a drop-in fuel switch.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Nugent.

Ms. Potvin, you mentioned your concerns about forestry and agriculture. I think we are running out of time, but can you suggest some solutions for managing emissions from forestry and agriculture? You may also provide them to us in writing.

[Catherine Potvin]

For forestry, it is simple: reduce emissions from transportation and the oil and gas sector. The issue for forestry is that temperatures are too high. Temperatures are rising too quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you, Ms. Potvin and Mr. Bonin.

Mr. Ross, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. LaBobe, I've based my questions today on your submission to the environment committee. What was missing was whether or not the AFN supported one of the Liberals' key components of a climate action plan, which is the carbon tax. It's not in your submission. Did the AFN support or oppose the dropping of the consumer carbon tax?

[Wendell LaBobe]

I'm going to pass this over to Graeme to answer.