Natural Resources Committee on June 20th, 2006

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a quorum so we can begin our meeting.

Before us are five individuals who will be presenting. Following the presentations we'll commence with the first five-minute round of questioning. I think we all recall the comment of our chair that he will be enforcing the five-minute rule more strictly in the future. So cued by that, I'll endeavour to do the same today.

I will turn the meeting over to the presenters, who can perhaps begin by briefly introducing themselves and then get into the formal part of their presentation.

Ms. Gélinas, good morning.

[Johanne Gélinas, Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development]

I'm very pleased to see so many people around the table.

Good morning, Mr. Chair.

Committee members, thank you for inviting us here today.

Joining me are four principals who are responsible for coordinating the audits we conduct. Neil Maxwell, Richard Arseneault, John Affleck and John Reed, my senior management team, have led the audit work of the Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development for several years.

We are part of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada. We audit the operations of the federal government and report to Parliament on significant environmental and sustainable development issues.

While some of you may be familiar with our work, others on this new standing committee may not be. You have given us this opportunity to inform you of our mandate, to review some of our work to date, and to inform you of some of our upcoming audits which will probably interest you.

We have three business lines: performance audits; monitoring and reporting on departmental sustainable development strategies; and the environmental petitions process.

Each year in our annual report to Parliament, we conduct between three and six performance audits of government programming to see that such programs are well managed and that they are environmentally appropriate and meet the environmental standards and sustainable development objectives set by the government.

Recent performance audits relevant to the subject matter covered by this committee include, in 2000, government support for energy investments; in 2001, a major report on the Great Lakes; in 2002, we produced the chapter “Abandoned Mines in the North”; and in 2004, we audited the strategic environmental assessment process that assesses the environmental impact of policies, plans, and programs.

As you may know, each department produces and tables a sustainable development strategy in the House every three years. We review these strategies and audit selected commitments made in them. For example, Finance Canada established the objective of examining ways to better integrate the economy and the environment through use of the tax system, and we audited this commitment in 2004.

The sustainable development strategy of Natural Resources Canada will be of particular interest to this committee, as it sets forth departmental commitments and objectives against which any natural resources issue or concern that comes before the committee can be assessed.

Also of potential interest to this committee is work we have done to document commitments in sustainable development strategies related to climate change and energy efficiency. If the committee is interested, I have with me the full documentation of those commitments in both official languages. A copy was also provided to your clerk yesterday.

The Auditor General Act established the environmental petition process in 1995. Since then, over 200 petitions have been received from Canadians and Canadian organizations concerned about global, national, and local environmental and sustainable development issues. By law, each petitioner receives a response directly from the minister or ministers concerned. Of course, many of these issues relate to natural resources. And with a quick look at our website and use of the search tools, you can find petitions and responses of interest.

Several current petitions that may interest the committee include petition 158, related to subsidies to the oil and gas industry and federal efforts to address climate change; petition 159, concerning Canada's policy on ethanol; petition 95B and 164, concerning the federal environmental assessment of the mine and road project in northern B.C.; and finally, petition 60B, related to the Nuclear Liability Act.

Depending on how broadly the committee wishes to consider its natural resources mandate, there is considerable work in our past reports that could interest the committee. In particular, this includes three chapters in my 2005 report: “Canada's Oceans Management Strategy”, “Ecological Integrity in Canada's National Parks”, and “Canadian Biodiversity Strategy: A Follow-Up Audit”. These chapters all represent aspects of natural capital.

I would like now to turn from our past work to our present work.

My report for the fall of 2006 is wholly devoted to climate change. I cannot tell you about our audit findings, but I can tell you that we have examined how the federal government is organized to deal with climate change, whether it is able to report on the costs and results of its efforts, and how it develops key targets for greenhouse gas reductions.

Further, we are examining whether the government has strategies and action plans in place for adapting to and managing the impacts of climate change. We are also examining NRCan programs targeted at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, such as the Wind Power Production Incentive and the Ethanol Expansion Program.

Finally, our 2006 environmental petitions chapter audits a petition response concerning government purchase of green power — power derived from low-impact, renewable sources of energy.

Since the Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development was established in 1995, we have worked closely with several parliamentary committees, providing them with objective and fact-based information on the management of government programs, along with recommendations for improving the government's environmental and sustainable development performance.

As servants of Parliament, our work is most effective when committees such as yours take up issues and follow up on our audit work. I have seen many times how recommendations in committee reports, because of the necessity for a government response, have had significant effects on departmental performance. Parliamentary committees can hold departments and ministers accountable for their commitments and for the environmental and sustainable development effects of their programs. This is especially powerful when the committees require regular reporting by departments on their actions in response to committee recommendations.

In summary, the oversight of committees, armed with audits, sustainable development strategies, and petitions can be a formidable means for Canada to achieve its environmental and sustainable development goals.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my opening statement. Although we did not know the scope of topics you may wish to explore, the principals have prepared themselves for this meeting. We may not have answers to all of your questions, but if that is the case, we would be pleased to provide you with answers in writing sometime next week.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Thank you very much, Ms. Gélinas, for that very focused presentation and for your invitation that we now turn our attention to questioning you and perhaps the others.

Before we start, I'm wondering if, without getting into any type of presentation, each of the four gentlemen with you would describe in what capacity he's working with or under you.

Could we could start with Mr. Maxwell, please.

[Neil Maxwell, Principal, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development]

Yes, I'd be happy to, Mr. Chairman.

I have several responsibilities. I have the responsibility for the commissioner to monitor the sustainable development strategies, which she's referred to, and I've been responsible for a number of different audits through the course of the last five or six years.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Thank you.

Mr. Arsenault.

[Richard Arseneault, Principal, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development]

Yes, it's same with me. I'm responsible for audits that we conduct in the commissioner's office on various topics over the years. I've been in mines in the north; I work with my colleagues right here; and we've done work on various topics, including, as you know and as Johanne just indicated, climate change, which we're doing now.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Thank you.

Mr. Affleck.

[John Affleck, Principal, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development]

Yes, similar to my colleague, I have responsibilities for performance audits. I have responsibilities for two of the climate change reports upcoming in the commissioner's report. I oversee the petition process on behalf of the commissioner, and I handle the human resources in the group.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Thank you.

Mr. Reed.

[John Reed, Principal, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development]

I've been with the office for 10 years now. Like my colleagues, I've led several audits, including major work on toxic substances, which implicated Natural Resources Canada quite significantly; a big piece of work on the Great Lakes, which also affected Natural Resources Canada because of its inclusion of water provisions; work on sustainable development strategies; and on a few other topics.

Also, you may not know this, but our office is the chair of an international committee of national audit offices in the business of promoting environmental audits of their national governments. We chair that work, and I lead the work in our group.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Thank you, Mr. Reed.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Thank you, Madam Gélinas.

As I said at the outset, I will endeavour to have us adhere to the five-minute-per-questioner rule. So please bear that in mind.

I'll commence on that note with Mr. Cullen.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Madame Gélinas.

Thanks very much to you and your colleagues for your presentation.

You must have a pretty good impression about NRCan, as to whether or not they have a solid commitment to sustainable development and whether they're environmentally responsible. Could you give them a rating on a scale of one to ten?

[Johanne Gélinas]

Giving you a rating may be difficult, but let me tell you that over the last six years, for sure, we have looked in detail into their sustainable development strategies, so that's what it looks like. It's the department's game plan to move on a sustainable path with respect to its mandate. We have come out with pretty good marks over time. For an auditor, a department will never be perfect, but NRCan has done a lot of work to move on a sustainable path.

I will let Neil tell you a little more, because he's the expert in the SDSs.

[Neil Maxwell]

Thank you. I'd like to add to that.

One of our issues, and it's not specific to Natural Resources Canada, but more broadly in terms of probably being true of most government departments, is that we think that what they do in the strategies are important steps towards sustainable development, but we really have been concerned about whether collectively that does enough.

The other thing I would say builds on something the commissioner said in her opening remarks. These strategies are very useful to you as parliamentarians and as a parliamentary committee because really they contain a series of commitments that the department has made towards protecting the environment, towards achieving sustainable development. For example, in that strategy there were a number of very interesting commitments in terms of increasing efficiency. If you bear with me, I can cite a quick example just to give you a flavour for what we're talking about here.

For example, the department committed to--and this is part of achieving emissions reductions, so this is in the climate change field--and I quote: “By 2006, improve average energy intensity by 20% in retrofitted commercial and institutional buildings which have received financial incentives.” So there's an example of the kind of commitment that you can use in your work as parliamentarians to really hold the department accountable.

So that's much of the focus of our work.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you. I don't know if EnerGuide would have been part of that mix--that's a whole other story--but there was something in the Hill Times, and heaven knows, I don't rely on a lot that is in the Hill Times from time to time. They said that the department, NRCan, had changed the name and the focus from sustainable development to responsible development. We checked up on that, and the minister's office denied that there had been any such change, although there seems to be some messaging filtering through the department that instead of sustainable development we talk about responsible development.

It seems to me that there is a big difference between those two terms, and not to get too pedantic about that, I was surprised by it, because when I was briefed by NRCan they talked very proudly of their focus on sustainable development. Have you heard any rumours to this effect, or have you seen any evidence that they're changing their focus from sustainable development to responsible development?

[Johanne Gélinas]

We read the same articles, obviously, but let me be clear here. You have before you people who do audits, and we don't audit rumour, nor can we discuss things that we have not audited. So sometimes it may be frustrating for you not to get a clear answer from us, but we cannot go beyond, and we have to be always policy neutral. So you will never get from us a view, an opinion, unless it's something we have audited and we can comment on based on our findings.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

You're driven totally by audit. Don't you have any natural contact or rapport with the departments? In other words, would you ever pick up the phone and say “We read this in the Hill Times, and that would be a concern to us. Is there any truth to the rumour?” Is there nothing like that?

[Johanne Gélinas]

If I were to do that, I would be on the phone all day long, so I had better not start doing that.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

I'm not so sure.

In any case, I have a number of issues. I just wondered it you had done any work in these areas: sustainable in the context of the oil sands development, or sustainable development from the point of view of the consumption of water. I don't know if you look at only our physical resources, but there are huge issues in Fort McMurray with respect to the social pressures.

In terms of the amount of natural gas that is consumed, the net energy to get out the oil sands production, I'm wondering whether that is something you've looked at. Is that something you're concerned about?

[Johanne Gélinas]

We haven't looked at this particular aspect in detail, but it's an area that will be covered in part in our 2006 report on climate change. We haven't looked at it specifically, beyond the fact that we have information with respect to greenhouse gas emissions within this area.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Okay. I hope it's an area that you do look at.

I wanted to talk about water resources and the Great Lakes audit that you did, because I have some concerns about bulk water. But with only five minutes, I'll have to come back, if I'm lucky to get to it.

I'm sorry, Mr. Arseneault, did you have a comment?

[Richard Arseneault]

Yes, I'd like to say something.

Last year, we did look at water in terms of the responsibilities of the federal government. We wanted to determine the status of the federal water framework, which is a broad framework describing all the activities of the federal government in the area of water. There are 19 departments involved in some way in the water field, if you will.

As you probably know, there is a federal water policy, which is dated 1987. The work progress reports prepared by the federal government went up to 1994; since then, we've heard nothing. This policy is kind of dead. It still exists, but it's not really applied, as far as we can see.

After Walkerton and some of the other incidents related to water, the federal government decided to look at water again. They came up with this federal water framework, which in our view is a good first step, because in there is a vision of what water is all about from a federal perspective. There's also five outcomes that the government is aiming for, I guess.

First of all, this is still not publically released. We've asked the federal government what the status was, and essentially it's going nowhere. They said they wanted to link it to another framework. It was kind of framework over framework, and not clear.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Lloyd St. Amand]

Thank you.

Mr. Ouellet, please.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you very much for coming forward to meet us.

I would like to discuss your mandate. It is hard for us to understand exactly what the difference is between the environment and sustainable development.

As you know, sustainable development was defined quite some time ago. I am sure you are aware that even today, according to many definitions, sustainable development is clearly economic development, not environmental protection. The environment is one component of sustainable development. There absolutely has to be a significant social component to eliminate poverty. Does your mandate clearly define the difference between the two?

In your presentation, at point 4, you distinguished between the environment and sustainable development, which is nowhere to be found in the Library of Parliament Parliamentary Information and Research Services suggested questions. In that document, the environment and sustainable development go hand in hand.

Similarly, Mr. Mulcair, the former Quebec Minister, was criticized for putting out a document on sustainable development without including the environment. To environmental groups, sustainable development has more to do with environmental protection. We know full well that is not what it means.

Environmental protection and climate change are one thing; sustainable development is another. Are you involved with departments that have more sustainable development needs, like NRCan, which you mentioned earlier, the department responsible for economic development, Agriculture and Agri-Food, Industry, Transport, Infrastructure, Finance, Public Works and Government Services Canada? Sustainable development is indeed a priority in those departments.

[Johanne Gélinas]

Whatever the subject of the audit, we always make sure the audit addresses the environmental, social and economic dimensions. For example, when we conducted the audit of abandoned mines in the north, we looked at the economic and social impacts, in addition to the environmental impacts, which were major.

Among the amendments to the Auditor General Act, there is a definition of sustainable development that gives me all the leeway I need to go beyond environmental protection. In fact, we do much more than that in terms of auditing.

As for the departments, I have the authority to audit all of them. As I said earlier in my presentation, we have audited the Department of Finance. In most cases, whatever the subject of the audit may be, we cover a number of departments. We have covered virtually all of them in the past 10 years. We have a lot of leeway.

The Department of Justice has its own sustainable development strategy. We can look at the commitments it has taken in that regard. We have audited the Department of Foreign Affairs, Fisheries and Oceans, Agriculture and Agri-Food. You can name them all, because they have all, at one time or another, in greater or lesser depth, been audited by us. So it goes much further than the Department of the Environment or NRCan.