Environment Committee on May 7th, 2026

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Patrick Bonin]

I call this meeting to order.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

Welcome to meeting number 38 of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. I want to remind everyone in the room about the procedures.

Please follow the health and safety guidelines set out on the cards on the table to avoid any sound issues.

To begin, today we have a budget to approve. Is it the pleasure of the committee to approve a supplementary budget of $4,500 to cover travel and accommodation expenses for witnesses in the context of the briefing on the net-zero advisory body?

I take it that everyone is in favour, so it's approved.

We will begin, then, the briefing on the spring 2026 reports from the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development. From the Office of the Auditor General, we have Jerry V. DeMarco, commissioner of the environment and sustainable development; Susie Fortier, principal; Marie‑Pierre Grondin, principal; and James Reinhart, director.

The following witnesses, who are either sitting in the gallery or participating by video conference, may be called upon to answer questions: from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Cathy Furness, deputy chief veterinary officer, and Carlie Watson, area director general, west; from the Department of Environment, Tara Shannon, assistant deputy minister, Canadian wildlife service, and Doris Fortin, director general, policy, planning and partnerships directorate; from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Alastair Lawrie, director general, real property and environmental management, and Candice Wood, director, engineering and technical services, small craft harbours; from the Department of National Defence, Sarah Evans, director general, environment and sustainable management; from the Department of Natural Resources, Rinaldo Jeanty, assistant deputy minister; from the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Kenza El Bied, director general, policy and outreach, emergency management branch; and from the Department of Public Works and Government Services, Mathew Myre, associate assistant deputy minister, and Howah Lee, acting director general, technical services.

I think I've covered all the witnesses, if I'm not mistaken. I think so.

Mr. DeMarco, I understand that you need a few more minutes for your speech. You have the floor for seven minutes.

[Jerry V. DeMarco, Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General]

Good morning, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee today to discuss our reports that were tabled on Monday.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

With me today are Marie-Pierre Grondin, Susie Fortier and James Reinhart, who were responsible for the audits.

The reports I am presenting today focus on the federal government's efforts to address global challenges posed by climate change and avian influenza. To better protect Canadians now and in the future, stronger action is needed to adapt to a rapidly changing world.

Our first audit focused on flood hazard mapping, which is becoming increasingly important as Canada's climate changes. We can no longer rely only on present-day data to prepare for floods. We also need to plan for future climate scenarios, including changing precipitation patterns. This is especially timely, given that many regions across Canada experienced or are experiencing major flooding this spring. Flood hazard maps are a tool to inform residents, developers and infrastructure planners of the risk of flooding in a given area.

We found that Natural Resources Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, and Public Safety Canada were slow to produce and share the flood hazard maps needed to protect communities and support climate change adaptation.

Natural Resources Canada did not ensure that mapping efforts prioritized higher-risk areas. Many maps remain incomplete, and much of the existing mapping information is not practical or usable. The department is also not on track to make all maps currently in production publicly available by the target year of 2028.

We also found that Public Safety Canada's planned flood risk awareness portal did not integrate climate change considerations or allow information to be easily updated as conditions change. This means that information in the portal will not reflect changes to flood risks over time.

Climate change projections and easily available flood maps are needed to reliably inform long-term planning decisions such as where to build homes or develop infrastructure. Canadians face escalating risks and higher disaster recovery costs in the absence of up-to-date information.

In our next audit, we found significant gaps in the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat's oversight of the greening government strategy to strengthen the climate resilience of federal services and assets, which are valued at about $100 billion.

We found that the framework to track progress was weak. Despite repeated commitments, the secretariat did not publicly report on climate resilience in the first eight years that followed the strategy's launch in 2017. These gaps hindered decision-making and accountability.

At the organizational level, the audit examined how National Defence, Public Services and Procurement Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada assessed climate risks. The audit also looked at the actions taken to enhance the climate resilience of their assets, services and activities. Together, these three departments manage more than two thirds of the federal government's physical assets, such as buildings and bridges. We found that they made little progress in translating the risk assessments into meaningful action.

This lack of progress has clear environmental and financial consequences for Canadians. As Canada warms at twice the global average, accelerating efforts to protect federal assets and services will sustain communities and save taxpayers money over time. For example, some small harbours, which directly support more than 45,000 jobs, are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and require immediate repairs and reinforcement.

Our final audit assessed the federal response to avian influenza. An outbreak of the disease began in Canada in 2021, and there were concerns the virus could mutate and become more easily transmissible.

While Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the Public Health Agency of Canada took action to prevent and manage outbreaks of avian influenza, we found that they need to improve on planning, documentation and the management of human vaccines to better prepare for future threats to public health and vulnerable wildlife.

For example, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency successfully implemented procedures to eliminate the virus from all 47 premises in our audit sample. However, we found some weaknesses in the agency's documentation of its activities.

Environment and Climate Change Canada redirected funding to strengthen its surveillance of migratory birds following the 2021 outbreak. However, without dedicated funding, this activity may not be sustainable over the long term. In addition, the department did not target its surveillance on how the virus impacts species that are or could become threatened.

Finally, with respect to preparedness, we found that the Public Health Agency of Canada secured vaccines for people at higher risk of exposure, such as farmers and veterinarians, but purchasing decisions were not supported by sufficient analysis. This led to an oversupply, and more than 95% of the purchased vaccine doses expired before they could be used.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Patrick Bonin]

Thank you, Mr. DeMarco.

We will now begin the question period.

We'll go to the Conservative Party for six minutes.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, witnesses, for being here today. I appreciate the hard work you've been doing. I hope we inform the Canadian public on shortcomings and what we expect our public servants to deliver.

Commissioner DeMarco, did you take a look at the costs associated with these programs over time and how increased costs to departments may have informed the value proposition? Do we get value for the money, and if so, how much money...? Do you understand what I'm getting at here?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Yes. Thank you for the question.

Perhaps the best place to start would be with respect to the national adaptation strategy, which we audited last year at the general level. These two audits today are more of a deep dive into particular programs.

At the strategy level, Environment Canada estimates that for every dollar invested in adaptation and resilience, up to $15 is saved in the long run. That's a very global estimate from the national adaptation strategy. In general terms, as the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I understand that.

What I'm getting at is the next level. We hope these programs identify shortcomings in our national inventory, but they didn't get that survey complete and there are gaps in it. How much money did we spend for that amount of work to get done? How much more money do we have to spend to get the rest of the work done, and what was the original plan?

They've blown their budget, and they didn't get the work done.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

It depends on the program we're speaking to, but on adaptation, generally, from the report last year, we found that one of the gaps is directly relevant to your question, which is what the global figure is for Canada's adaptation efforts. There are all sorts of different programs and some of them have multiple benefits, so it is actually very difficult to calculate the total envelope on adaptation.

I can say that on the specific programs today, one example would be the funding for flood mapping for the project led by NRCan, which is $64 million over four years. The one managed by Public Safety is $10 million for the portal. Those are some examples of specific program budgets that we've audited.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I appreciate that.

The report found that only 11 out of 26 completed flood-mapping projects are currently available. How much money was spent for the 11, and how much more has to be spent? Maybe this is out of scope, but this is the question: Are taxpayers getting value for money, and why not? Is it mismanagement? Is it misallocation of resources? Is it bad planning? Is it not doing the low-hanging fruit first? Is it poor priorities?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I don't think there's any question that producing high-quality, publicly available flood maps is a worthwhile investment. The question is whether they are spending the money allocated to that wisely. I'll draw your attention to exhibit 6, where you can see what some of the expenditures have been in the first couple of fiscal years outlined there and how much remains unspent.

The question of whether we're getting value for money is premature at this point, because so few maps have been completed and made publicly available. We have seen significant expenditures so far and not a lot of return on that, but hopefully that return will come.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Hope is not a plan.

Could you comment on why they did not reach their objectives? Why did they not reach the targets?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

We have the departments here who can directly answer that question. I would probably say that we're equally disappointed by the pace and the public availability of the maps. It's not for us to make excuses for them. I think you can direct your question to them.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I appreciate that.

I'll put this question to Rinaldo Jeanty of Natural Resources Canada.

Could you comment on why the targets haven't been achieved?

[Rinaldo Jeanty, Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources]

Thank you, Chair, for the question.

These are the comments I would provide regarding the targets that have not been reached at this point.

We value the commissioner's recommendations. What I would say at this point is that we have completed over 400 maps. The time of the audit was at the very beginning of the program, so you can imagine that there may not have been that much data available at that particular juncture. To date—

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Did you reach your time-bound objectives?

[Rinaldo Jeanty]

We are on track to reach all of our objectives for the program and surpass those objectives. In addition to that, I would add that this is a jurisdiction of the provincial and the territorial...as part of this program, so we work with them.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I appreciate that you're working with them, but Natural Resources Canada has to provide some oversight nationally so that there's a seamless and integrated thing for the provinces and municipalities to use. You need to provide that unifying structure, and that hasn't been achieved. High-risk and vulnerable communities are not getting the protection they need and expect from this program.

[Rinaldo Jeanty]

I would say to you that's not completely accurate. At this particular juncture, we've worked with 800-plus communities that have been identified and prioritized. All of those areas are coming directly from the provinces and territories that we've been working with. None of the dollars that have been spent to date to actually map and create data.... It's all prioritized based on high-risk areas that are identified by the provinces that we've been collaborating with.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Which provinces—

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Patrick Bonin]

Thank you.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you very much, Chair. I appreciate the extended time.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Patrick Bonin]

Mr. Grant, go ahead.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You look good in that chair, I have to say.

Thank you to all of the witnesses and those online as well for being here.

I'll start with you, Mr. DeMarco.

Your report, “Flood Hazard Mapping”, includes a number of constructive recommendations. Can you confirm that departments have accepted these recommendations and are already taking steps towards implementing them?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

With this tabling of reports, we're pleased to say that not only for this report but for all of the ones tabled on Monday, each of the departments, many of which are here, agreed with the recommendations and have provided responses as to their intentions for implementing them. Some of them have timelines and some of them don't, but yes, they have all been agreed to.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay.

I forgot to mention I'll be sharing my time with Monsieur St-Pierre.

I'll move on to my next question.

Budget 2025 commits $25 billion to housing and $115 billion to infrastructure across Canada. In your view, does your report establish that accurate, accessible and climate-informed flood hazard maps are a prerequisite for ensuring those investments are sited and built responsibly?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Yes, that's a point we make in paragraph 7 of our “Flood Hazard Mapping” report, with that total expected expenditure of $140 billion. We also mention in another report the expected expenditures on defence. These are an opportunity, with good flood hazard mapping in this case and good climate resilience efforts in the other report, to make sure that this significant amount of taxpayer money is invested wisely and is not invested in things that will later be subject to disaster because we didn't have the proper flood mapping or resilience plans in place.