Fisheries Committee on Feb. 13th, 2018

[Julie Gelfand]

It's often been said that Canada emits about 2% of the world's emissions. There are many other countries that emit 2% of global emissions, and in the end they add up to 100%. There is thus a responsibility on the part of every government. They've recognized in the Paris Agreement that everybody has a role to play in reducing their emissions.

In terms of adaptation, Canada is already feeling the effects of climate change. We're getting increased extreme weather events; increased sea level rise is already happening; we have more flooding—we've seen examples in Toronto and Calgary, and in Ottawa just this past summer—so we're already having to adapt to climate change. That's why we did this audit, to see whether the country was ready to adapt.

Irrespective, the greenhouse gases are in the atmosphere. They're continuing to be pumped into the atmosphere. The world will have to adapt to a changing climate, but at the same time, the world has agreed and Canada has agreed to reduce its emissions. They have a new target aimed at 2030 to reduce their emissions. We will continue to audit to see whether Canada is on track to achieving that goal.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

If Canada is producing only 2% of the emissions and other countries that are producing tenfold that amount don't make any changes, what effect can Canada have?

[Julie Gelfand]

Right now, I believe, other than the United States, everybody is involved in the Paris Agreement, so all the countries are working to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

China, India, and Asian countries as well?

[Julie Gelfand]

That's correct, yes. They've all signed on to the Paris Agreement. Everybody is trying to aim to keep emissions and the global temperature rise at less than two degrees and even hoping to get to under one and a half degrees. The goal of the countries around the world is to reduce emissions.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

To go more into the details of the assessment you have done on DFO, have assessments also been done to consider a drop in sea levels? You mention that they've done assessments that deal with a rise in sea levels. Have assessments also been done to address a potential drop in sea levels, requiring harbour dredging and so on?

[Julie Gelfand]

I'm going to pass that on to David.

[David Normand, Director, Office of the Auditor General]

Yes. Fisheries and Oceans did a risk assessment of their climate change risks related to adaptation and came up with six risks. To address those risks, they implemented some 38 research projects and 22 adaptation tools.

Some of those tools use web-based technology and satellite technology to measure sea level rise and sea level drops. They also measure the impact on coastal erosion and other coastal characteristics. They also have a tool that measures and can predict how much damage there will be and where it will occur in their assets over their lifetime.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Have assessments been done on the impact of sedimentation in lower river reaches and some of the estuaries? Have those assessments been done by DFO?

[Julie Gelfand]

At that level of specificity, you'd have to ask the department that. We were looking to see whether or not they had looked at their entire mandate and had developed and actually planned for all the risks associated with all of that. The specifics are really at the departmental level.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Donnelly, please, for seven minutes.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Commissioner and team, for being here and for doing the good work that you do.

You stated in your opening remarks that Environment and Climate Change Canada already estimates that even if all the greenhouse gas reduction measures outlined in the framework are implemented in a timely manner and result in emission reductions, more action will be needed to meet the 2030 target.

If Canada considers new pipeline projects, for instance, which we know are going to add carbon to the atmosphere and into the ocean, does this make sense? Is this even achievable or possible?

[Julie Gelfand]

It's not my role to comment on policies that the government decides. My role is to look at commitments that the government makes and whether or not we're going to achieve those commitments. At this point, what we can tell you is that Environment Canada has said that even if they implement everything that's in the pan-Canadian framework, there's going to be a gap, which means that more effort is going to be required, so we are all going to have to pitch in.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

If we were to look 25 years backwards to, say, 1992, when, as you mentioned, they first started setting targets, Canada hasn't achieved or hit a single target. We've been burning oil and gas in that time frame. I guess if we were to look backwards, we'd say that our track record isn't good.

[Julie Gelfand]

That's correct. I would say that over time we've set several different targets. We have not met any of those targets. We've developed many different plans and we have not implemented those plans. Where are we at now? We have a new plan, but it's a plan, and it's one in a series of plans. If it's implemented and everything in there gets implemented properly, we're still going to have a gap. More will be required. This is something that the government has already indicated.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Commissioner, I know you're aware of the Cohen commission and its final report, which contains 75 recommendations. I'd like to ask you specifically about the final recommendation, number 75. I'll just read it out:

An independent body such as the office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development should report to the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans and to the public as follows:

By March 31, 2014, and every two years thereafter during implementation of the Wild Salmon Policy, on progress in implementing the policy in relation to Fraser River sockeye salmon. By September...2015, on the extent to which and the manner in which this Commission's recommendations have been implemented.

On May 14 of this year, we had the Department of Fisheries and Oceans here to give us an update on their progress to date in implementing Justice Cohen's recommendations. Clearly, given recommendation 75, this is problematic. My opinion is that the department is in conflict of interest due to its conservation mandate on the one hand and its promotion of a fish farming industry mandate on the other.

Is your office currently investigating the progress of the Cohen commission's recommendations and, essentially, how could we initiate a study or a review whereby the commission is looking at this so that it's essentially an independent review, not the department looking at itself and asking, “How did we do?”

[Julie Gelfand]

That's a wonderful question.

When I became commissioner, the Cohen commission recommendations were definitely one of the high-risk items that were brought to my attention as one of the issues that we could audit. Soon after that, the government indicated that it made a commitment to implement all of the Cohen commission recommendations. I can't remember exactly when they made that commitment, but our office thought, okay, they've made the commitment to implement, so let's give it a bit of time, and then we can go in and audit that issue.

One way you could encourage that as a committee would be to make a recommendation and send in an all-party letter saying, “We believe the commissioner and the Auditor General's office should do an audit.” That would definitely raise it in our risk register, if you like, because we audit things that are of high risk and things that are of importance to parliamentarians. If one parliamentarian says “this is really important”, well, that's interesting, but if an entire committee says “this is of interest to us”, then it goes way up on our list of what we could do and when we could do it. What I would recommend, if you're interested in that as a committee, is that you write a letter to us as an all-party committee. That would probably encourage me, as commissioner, to launch an audit on it.

Often when a government commits to something we give it a bit of time before we go in and audit it, which is interesting, because the audits on climate change happened right in the middle of the pan-Canadian framework negotiations. We were auditing things before the pan-Canadian framework, essentially, and then the pan-Canadian framework came into play, so that was an answer the government could give us in terms of dealing with these issues. When the government made its commitment to implement, our staff would think, okay, let's give it a year or two, maybe three, for them to implement, and then let's go in and do an audit. To shorten my answer to you: a joint letter by the committee to us would be a way to initiate it.

The only other thing I was going to say is that we are doing an audit on aquaculture that will be released in April of this year. We're looking at salmon farming in New Brunswick, P.E.I., and off the B.C. coast. We're also looking at the Aichi biodiversity targets. Some of those pertain to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

Since the review and the department's commitments, we've had Fraser River sockeye runs added to SARA, the Species at Risk Act, so there are some definite concerns. It would be good to have an independent evaluation of those. Definitely, we'll take that, and maybe this committee will consider passing a motion to ask you to come and do that or to review that. I know that we can't obviously direct it.

[Julie Gelfand]

That's correct.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I take your point.

Finally, I would mention the invitation, I think, once you've completed that salmon aquaculture report, to bring that report to this committee. It would be most welcome.

You also mentioned the climate change plans of the provinces and territories, and you'll have that report here at the end of the first quarter. This committee might want to take a look at that as well.

[Julie Gelfand]

We'd be pleased to come and talk to you.

One is being released—I get the dates a little bit mixed up—on March 27. That's the collaborative report on the climate change audits that have been done in the provinces and territories, both for reducing greenhouse gases and for adapting to climate change. It's a wrap-up report. We'll be releasing it with other auditors general across the country on March 27.

On April 24, I'll be releasing three audits: one on aquaculture and salmon farming; one on biodiversity targets, which implicate Fisheries and Oceans Canada; and one on whether or not Canada is prepared to implement the sustainable development goals of Agenda 2030, which also have a goal about life beneath the sea, life in water.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Gelfand. I have to put down the law of the committee for just a moment. My apologies.

Before we go on to our next question, your office requested to have a couple of pictures taken of us in action. We normally don't allow this, but I'm just looking for any objections from anybody if they take a few pictures from their office.... Okay?

Please proceed during the next round of questions.

[Julie Gelfand]

I was not aware that we were asking for pictures. It's a bit odd.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Well, there you go. You have permission. Whether you do or you don't, it's entirely up to you.

Mr. Morrissey, please, for seven minutes.