Environment Committee on May 5th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Let's start.

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you for being here.

This is the 37th meeting of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

For those who are here in person, please remember the health and safety guidelines as per the cards on the table to prevent audio feedback incidents.

This meeting is in public. The last 10 minutes will be in camera so that we can complete the adoption of our freshwater report.

I'd like to warmly welcome two new members to this committee now that we're having a meeting in public. We have MP Mr. Watchorn and MP Mr. Malette joining the Liberal members of this committee. We look forward to their contributions.

We also have with us the Honourable Nathalie Provost, Secretary of State for Nature, to provide a briefing on Canada's strategy to protect nature, along with several people from several different departments.

I'll welcome them. We have with us Kathy Graham, director general, marine planning and conservation, from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans; Kaili Levesque, associate deputy minister, president of the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario and direct support for the Secretary of State for Nature, from the Department of Industry; Tara Shannon, assistant deputy minister, Canadian Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment; and, returning to us, Andrew Campbell, interim president and chief executive officer of the Parks Canada Agency.

Welcome, everyone. Thanks for being here today.

We will start with Secretary Provost.

Ms. Provost, you have five minutes for your opening remarks.

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Secretary of State (Nature)]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Members of the committee and colleagues, I am very pleased and honoured to be here with you today. Thank you very much for welcoming me to this committee.

Thank you for inviting me to appear before you to discuss the strategy “A force of nature: Canada's strategy to protect nature”.

Nature is foundational to our Canadian identity and sovereignty. Protecting our lands and waters means protecting what defines us.

As Canada's first secretary of state for nature, my role is to work closely with my cabinet colleagues to advance Canada's priorities for nature conservation and our natural heritage.

I approach my duties as those of a project manager. My goal is clear: to help achieve the protection of 30% of Canada's lands and waters by 2030. This commitment is at the heart of the strategy “A force of nature: Canada's strategy to protect nature”. A month ago, the Prime Minister unveiled this ambitious strategy to strengthen the protection of Canada's lands and waters and support biodiversity.

Today, I'll provide an overview of the topic. Afterwards, I will answer your questions.

Nature is essential to Canada's resiliency, community well-being, climate action, reconciliation and national security. However, in Canada and elsewhere, nature is under pressure due to climate change, urbanization and biodiversity loss. At the same time, floods, wildfires and extreme weather events are on the rise. In this context, protecting nature is not only an environmental priority, it's essential to building Canada strong.

Canada's strategy to protect nature sets out a clear plan to conserve nature, support economic growth and build a stronger, more resilient country. It includes a $3.8‑billion investment over five years to achieve our goal of protecting 30% of our lands and waters by 2030. It is based on three pillars.

The first is protecting nature in Canada by conserving and protecting ecosystems on a large scale.

The second is building Canada well by integrating nature into the planning of infrastructure and resource development projects.

The third is valuing nature and mobilizing capital by stimulating private investment and integrating nature into economic decision-making.

Under this third pillar, an expert panel on natural capital accounting and financing for nature will be established this spring. Its mandate will be to formulate recommendations for better recognizing the value of nature; repositioning conservation as a long-term investment; and mobilizing more private capital to complement the public funding that has traditionally dominated this field. Together, these three pillars demonstrate that nature conservation and economic growth can go hand in hand.

Furthermore, the recognition of indigenous peoples is at the heart of this strategy. Their leadership and traditional knowledge are essential to achieving concrete and sustainable results. That's why over $230 million will be invested to support and strengthen indigenous-led conservation initiatives. This will include the implementation of a new program, the Arctic indigenous guardians program.

In closing, I would say that we need to recognize that the decisions made today will have lasting consequences. Either we leave behind a country where nature is protected and resilient, or future generations will have to deal with its degradation. Through the “A force of nature” strategy, our choice is clear.

It's up to us to take serious, ambitious and collaborative action to protect nature today so that it can continue to protect us tomorrow.

I would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much.

We will start with the Conservatives.

Mr. Leslie, the floor is yours for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister.

Your nature strategy says that Canada must add at least 1.6 million square kilometres of protected or conserved terrestrial area by 2030. For context, that's roughly two and a half times the size of my home province, Manitoba. Can you tell this committee exactly where this land is coming from?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

Mr. Leslie, thank you for your question.

This land comes from all kinds of initiatives launched by indigenous communities, by the communities themselves, by private landowners or, sometimes, by the provinces, since they own and manage 76% of the land.

Like those that are already protected, the lands that will be conserved are the result of all kinds of initiatives, and they will be the subject of consultations and discussions with the provinces, municipalities and communities concerned, which will help us to achieve that result.

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

On this landscape that will be protected.... will hunting and fishing be restricted in any way on any of the new lands or waters that you plan to count towards your 30 by 30 target? Answer yes or no. It's a simple question.

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

It depends. I know that many hunters and anglers are wondering about this.

It all depends on the type of protection that will be recognized and determined in the various contexts. For example, generally speaking, when the agreed-upon protection comes from Parks Canada, hunting and fishing are allowed for first nations out of respect for their ancestral activities. However, for all other conservation methods, hunting and fishing may be permitted, obviously within established frameworks defined through a collaborative process to ensure sustainable hunting and fishing.

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

What percentage of the land you count towards your 30 by 30 will be allowed to have hunting and angling on it, whether it's for first nations or non-indigenous people?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

Right now, we have not yet identified all the lands that will be protected. Therefore, it's not possible to give a precise answer to your question about the proportion of territory that will, or will not, allow hunting and fishing.

What we do know is that conservation doesn't automatically stop hunting and fishing activities on the land.

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

Thank you for saying that. I would agree wholeheartedly. I think that's why so many in the angling and hunting community are deeply concerned that the percentage might be higher than zero—perhaps significantly higher. I hope you take that into consideration.

Your government has referred the Churchill plus project to the Major Projects Office while it's also moving ahead, as indicated in this strategy, with the Seal River protected area in northern Manitoba. My question is simple. Can you guarantee that the Seal River designation will not limit any future road, rail, port, energy or transmission corridor that could impact that project?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

Projects of national interest are very important to our government. The projects we have are important for economic development. We remain committed to economic development and economic self-sufficiency. Major projects of national interest, which are discussed with the provinces, remain central projects.

However, as you heard, in the strategy we have a pillar called “building Canada well”. Using tools such as mapping, internationally recognized insights into a mitigation strategy and other conservation tools, such as working landscapes, it will be possible to mitigate and enable development and conservation projects.

Canada is a very big country. Thirty per cent of our territory is far from 100%. We're going to work with communities, with provinces and with developers to be able to meet the 30% target, but also to be able to carry out the development projects we want to do.

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

You mentioned the building Canada well section. To me, that looks less like a project approval and more like a layer of conditions that are going to be added to any project.

Our premier in Manitoba, Wab Kinew, has said the Prime Minister wants LNG moving through the port of Churchill by 2030. That would potentially be through some sort of energy corridor, which I assume would have to go through the Seal River watershed area via a pipeline.

Is it true that the Prime Minister has asked the premier to have natural gas flowing through Churchill by 2030?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

Major projects are important, and so are the large territories to be protected. In the discussion—

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

Minister, let me interrupt. I have only a few seconds left.

Do you see how these two things can be very much at odds? You have a massive area, which you're saying is protected, and directly behind it, where a pipeline would have to go through, is the port of Churchill. How do these two things line up?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

I am simply saying that we're going to work on development projects with the people of Manitoba to find a solution that will enable us to conserve land and ensure its development. That's our intention.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Watchorn, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll be sharing my time with the member for Victoria.

I would like to welcome my esteemed colleague, who, like me, is an engineer and a graduate of the École Polytechnique in Montreal. I think the more engineers you have in government, the better.

That said, conservation in Quebec, particularly the conservation of the entire area in southern Quebec, is very important. When I was mayor of a small municipality, Morin‑Heights, we kept 60 acres of land from an old site that belonged to nuns. We worked without subsidies from the federal government or the provincial government. We paid $2.1 million for the conservation of those 60 acres, but it was important to the people in my community.

In the coming weeks, there will be a big announcement about a protected scout camp in Mille‑Iles. It's a joint effort between the federal government, the provincial government, private donors, foundations and the municipality.

How can projects like these contribute to conservation in order to meet the 30% land protection target by 2030?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

Thank you for that very interesting question. It addresses the other aspect of our vision.

There's a lot of talk about this 30% by 2030 target and the overall protection of the big territories. Projects like the one you carried out in your community or the one in Mille-Iles are invaluable to locals, because they're close to home. People want access to nature. Over 80% of Canadians are committed to protecting and conserving nature. So these small-scale projects are essential.

The nature strategy's structure will enable the use of various drivers to ensure that the people continue to steer leadership, as in the examples cited. The strategy will also ensure that initiatives are supported by the government capacity, whether at the federal, provincial or community group levels.

In addition, by working on the third pillar, that is to say, valuing nature and mobilizing capital, we will ensure that we get results, not only through public funds but also through other sources of funding.

These are fine examples of projects that are highly valuable, but not necessarily in terms of the percentage of land. They are also of great value to the people.

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

I'd like to reassure people. When we carry out a project, we may often work together with real estate developers.

In the second case I mentioned, that's exactly what we did. We protected a large part of the area's ecological value, but we still allowed the developer to develop a certain area so that their property would have value.

How can we combine these two uses in future projects for the nature strategy?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

This example, where the private sector could develop a project, is a small-scale example, but it's exactly the example I was trying to illustrate in response to Mr. Leslie's question. The goal is to have the ability to determine in which sector the project to be developed will have a limited impact on the environment and nature. The goal is to value nature and give access to it, to protect it permanently where it is most fragile and where the ecological benefit is much greater.

This allows us to move forward, reconcile land uses and increase social licence for conservation.

[Tim Watchorn, Liberal, Les Pays-d'en-Haut, QC]

That's excellent.

Mr. Greaves, I'll turn the floor over to you.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, colleagues.

Hello, everyone.

Thank you for being with us, Ms. Provost.

My question for you, Madam Secretary, has to do with how the government is going about the process of identifying new lands in order to meet the 30 by 30 target.

In particular, is it often the case that rural, remote and northern parts of the country have more land available to conserve? What measures are contained in this strategy to try to conserve land closer to urban areas, where more Canadians would be able to access it?

[Nathalie Provost, Liberal, Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville, QC]

Thank you very much for your question.

When we look at Canada's geography, it's very tempting to say that it's not complicated and that, since there is no one up there, we will protect the Far North and develop the south.

However, as I was saying a little earlier, Canadians love nature. Canadians need access to nature, and their health depends on it. So it's important to find solutions for the southern part of the country, which is home to more Canadians.

As a result, all existing restoration methods will continue to be used. Restoring degraded environments is a promising strategy.

I come from a rural region in the riding of Châteauguay—Les Jardins‑de‑Napierville. Farmlands are not used much as of yet, for example. Even though we use working landscapes, we must learn to manage them while also being able to conserve biodiversity.

There are also all the other effective conservation measures. For example, in their forests or on their large pastures, our colleagues in Alberta have some incredible examples where those measures have a major impact on maintaining biodiversity.

These tools will serve as a means to promote conservation. They may not be entirely and directly linked to the 30% by 2030 target, but they will still help protect biodiversity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Mr. Bonin, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Because the Bloc Québécois is very generous, I'm going to give my first minute of speaking time to my colleague Ms. May from the Green Party.