Environment Committee on Sept. 24th, 2026

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

FCM has stated that 4,400 retrofits have been completed via this program thus far. Out of those, how much public money has been spent in totality?

[Marieke Cloutier]

For the community efficiency program, we had an envelope for six years of $300 million. We are expecting this year to have finalized the spending of the whole envelope. We have more demand, a lot more demand, than what we can fund. This is why we're also looking to leverage the programs that already exist within the municipalities. We want to leverage these.

Some have done this. I have concrete examples and numbers for you, if you want, of municipalities that have been able to invest, after our funding, the federal funding, in their first iteration of the program. They are putting in more millions, let's say. They are choosing to invest in a program so that it can continue, or they are going to partner with a private entity. We have examples of that.

It's showing stability. It's not one program happening for a short period of time. It's staying for a longer time, because there's such a demand from the homeowners.

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

I imagine there's a lot of overhead in administering such a program. How much actually gets to people to do a retrofit?

[Marieke Cloutier]

I really appreciate the question. Yes, a certain amount is spent on administration, but we have to see what the administration achieves. The administration is not just regarding the loan administration. We have a whole suite of concierge services, such as homeowner outreach, underwriting, rebate administration and customer support. There is really a service layer that comes with that type of project. It is not just managing the loan; it's also accompanying what is brought along to the clients.

As for administering this full suite of services, including loans, mature PACE programs currently average around 16%. I know that can appear high for administrative costs, but you have to take into account the customer support. We're taking clients by the hand. We're also developing the market for the contractors. We're de-risking the markets and having lists of people who can do the work in a way that's credible.

The whole service layer turns homeowner interest into completed retrofits. It really helps them to act. If not, it would be too complex sometimes. It enables the action to just go ahead with the project.

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

Thank you.

Madam Chair, with my remaining time, I'd like to put in a notice of motion, as follows:

That, given that section 9 of the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act requires the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to establish an emissions reduction plan, and paragraph 10(1)(b) requires that plan to describe the key emissions reduction measures the Government of Canada intends to take to achieve its emission target;

Given that the Government of Canada has changed a number of measures described in the existing 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan;

The committee recommend that the Government of Canada:

1. promptly initiate the process to update the 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan so that it accurately reflects the measures the Government of Canada currently intends to pursue, and

2. take all reasonable steps to avoid unnecessary expenditure of public funds on litigation where the issues in dispute concern the existing 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan; and

That the committee report this recommendation to the House.

I'll circulate the written version.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much, Mr. Leslie.

We will now turn to Mr. Malette for five minutes, please.

[Chris Malette, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My first question is for Mayor Vrbanovic and the FCM.

Your Worship, having spent several years at the municipal level myself, and proudly as chair of the green task force advisory committee for the City of Belleville council, I was instrumental in helping introduce the FCM's partners for climate protection. I'm fairly conversant with knowing what good policy can look like on paper, but it becomes very different when it reaches municipal staff.

In your estimation, Mayor, what's the biggest implementation challenge municipalities face when it comes to residential energy retrofits?

[Berry Vrbanovic]

Thank you for the question.

I would tell you that the biggest challenge municipalities face has to do with meeting the demand of residents who are interested in pursuing this and are looking for support from a program. As we've indicated, we have much more demand from Canadian municipalities from coast to coast to coast, and municipalities of all sizes, to engage in the program.

The second challenge, as we have municipalities of different sizes across the country, is making sure we can support all of those municipalities. All of them are important, and the residents in each of those communities are looking for the benefits of these types of programs. We need to make sure we can support municipalities of all sizes, and the staff that they have, in order to assist with the implementation of it, often with a community partner.

[Chris Malette, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

I have another question in this regard.

From your experience, then, Your Worship, what would meaningful federal-municipal co-operation look like when we're trying to get more homeowners to undertake energy retrofits?

[Berry Vrbanovic]

First, I have to say that the green municipal fund is an excellent example of effective partnership and collaboration that started on a smaller scale, back in 2000 when GMF was first created, and has grown as both FCM and Canadian municipalities of all sizes have been able to demonstrate their ability to deliver successful programs on the ground.

Second is looking at how we ensure that municipalities have the resources they need in order to continue delivering on these programs. As we've indicated in the case of many of them, the demand is greater than the uptake. It's part of the reason, as we look ahead to budget 2026-27, that part of the ask we have for the federal government is to look at increasing the dollar value at GMF by $800 million, so we can invest and scale three proven deployment programs—namely, the community efficiency financing program, the net-zero acceleration program and the local leadership for climate adaptation program.

[Chris Malette, Liberal, Bay of Quinte, ON]

My next question is for Ms. Cloutier.

Ms. Cloutier, what in your estimation has the green municipal fund taught you about the gap between announcing retrofit funding and actually getting projects completed? It goes further back to my question of how some policy looks good on paper, but when the rubber hits the road.... What has been your experience?

[Marieke Cloutier]

Thank you for the question.

It's really complementary. Of course, at the national level, we need to have these targets and these policies. It really gets done, from my perspective, at the municipal level. It's more than a complementarity. We are implementing programs within the localities, whether they are small, rural, northern, urban or medium-sized. There is no one size that fits all, but we need to think about the outcomes and let the solution come from the locality, I would say, or the municipal entity. As Berry has mentioned, they can partner and develop their capacity.

This is why it's also so important for GMF, because we're able to de-risk some of the investment with the federal investments that have been made. Then afterwards, either we're able to bring in private capital, or the municipality chooses to invest again within the PACE program, for example, that has been developed, and developing, also, if I may, the market. When I say that, if we're staying in the retrofit sector, of course, there are the contractors and the insurers. When you look at the resiliency side of things, why not invest in home energy retrofits? Also, instead of renovating a home twice, think about the energy efficiency but also the resiliency side of things, because sometimes these measures can be complementary and add up.

This is why we've—

Oh, sorry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

We're running out of time. Thank you.

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

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I would like to follow up on my last question.

Ms. Cloutier, I asked you to tell me how much of the total investment of $2.155 billion in the green municipal fund went to Quebec. You didn't give me any specific numbers. It may be difficult.

Do you have those numbers?

[Marieke Cloutier]

It is totally possible. You are right, I did not provide a figure. We can get back to you on that. The information is in our annual report, which was just released.

We're on the right track. Things are readjusted every year. Let's say one year, British Columbia receives more funding through some of our programs, then we make sure that is adjusted fairly in subsequent years. It is an equitable approach that evens things out over time.

I just want to say something important, Mr. Beaulieu: The $2.3 billion is our permanent endowment fund, if I can use that expression. It is not the amount we can invest annually in municipalities, because we have to keep part of it in perpetuity. However, a large portion of that fund is invested every year in municipalities. I just wanted to clarify that. We offer loans, grants and capacity development support, but not all of that amount can be invested every year; only part of it.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you.

If you have access to those figures, you can send them to us or include them in your brief.

[Marieke Cloutier]

Yes, we will provide that.

I would also like to mention that there is still no legislative framework for the PACE model in Quebec. However, municipalities are very interested in the program. We have funded a number of pilot projects and studies, including one by the Fédération québécoise des municipalités in the Îles de la Madeleine, where there's a lot of interest in this program. In 2012, we carried out a pilot project with the municipalities of Plessisville, Varennes and Verchères on the PACE model.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I have one last question.

Do you think the current programs and resources invested by the federal government are sufficient to meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets for buildings?

[Marieke Cloutier]

To reach the federal government's goal of renovating one million residences, which we've heard about, more funding will certainly be needed at the municipal, federal and provincial levels. I think the committee is conducting a study on such measures. It's a big challenge, but one of the ways we can succeed is by building on what we've started with the green municipal fund's ecoenergy retrofit program. That tool could get us there, but we need additional funding because our program is coming to an end.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Ross for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair. I wasn't paying attention. I didn't have my clock on.

Thank you to our witnesses and to Mayor Berry Vrbanovic for the discussion.

We've been listening to witnesses previous to your testimony as well. We were listening to a lot of discussion around the issue of affordability, basically, and the protection of homes against weather disasters. When we're talking about that, do you think, from your experience, it's important that programs can demonstrate measurable household savings after this money has been spent?

[Berry Vrbanovic]

Mr. Ross, I would say to you that all the programs the GMF funds, both directly to Canadians in their homes, in terms of energy retrofits and so on, and in the programs that are funded for Canadian municipalities—whether in terms of energy efficiency or around climate mitigation and dealing with some of the challenges that Canadian municipalities have found they have in recent years—ultimately end up impacting affordability.

There's the direct affordability correlation when we're talking about home energy retrofits, but there's the indirect correlation when Canadian municipalities can upgrade their buildings and when they can deal with things associated with climate mitigation, whether it's wildfires, some of the rainstorms we've seen in recent summers or other things. Those things ultimately impact property taxes, which have a long-term impact on Canadians and their pocketbooks. There is really no one-size-fits-all solution for everyone. In fact, each of these programs targets different areas.

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

As for the energy retrofits in particular, specifically for homeowners, is it important that these programs can demonstrate measurable household savings in that respect?

[Berry Vrbanovic]

As we pointed out, we are seeing those measurable savings, in fact. Approximately 30%, on average, in household energy cost savings have been realized. An important one to note, and I'll give it as an example, is better homes Kingston and the evaluation that was done on their program. They saw an average of 66% GHG reduction per home. However, the important point here is that 36% of participants noted that they would not have retrofitted their home without the program. It was the ability to access the dollars to do the work that ultimately led to the cost savings that allowed them to pay for the work that was done. Ultimately, it has a longer-term impact on affordability, which I think is in the interest of all of us who serve Canadians, regardless of what order of government we serve them in.

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

Without a doubt it is, especially when we're talking about taxpayers' dollars in these huge amounts. There seems to be a contradiction between what Natural Resources Canada has described and predicted in terms of retrofits and what Ms. Papineau just told us about the reality of retrofits. It's almost 60% less than the predicted models have said. She went on to talk about the value for the dollar, especially when talking about affordability, being more on the insulative side for a homeowner in terms of a retrofit, and then maybe thinking about an energy fit either in parallel or even secondary to that. Have you come across that information, that result or that summary?