Evidence of meeting #15 for Natural Resources in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Catherine Bell NDP Vancouver Island North, BC
So the other part of it was that in the paragraph 3.27 recommendation it says that Canada should lead the development of wind power strategies for Canada in collaboration with the provinces, and we see that some of the provinces don't have any capacity at this point. Natural Resources have said that they would have a consultation and a discussion paper. Given that there is data available for a long period of time, is that adequate? Do you think that this discussion paper is adequate, given that you said that Canada must act quickly on climate change? There's a time-sensitive issue here. Is there the ability, based on all this information, to move forward in a more expeditious manner?
5:15 p.m.
Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
This is one of many examples of where the government could move much faster. There is a lot of information available with respect to WPPI, and then it becomes a policy decision if the government wants to move ahead or not. Also, in the course of the audit we were told that some provinces are much more advanced than we are in developing wind power. So the federal government will have to adjust its approach to take into consideration that new reality of some provinces moving forward faster in the area of wind power.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
We've exhausted our time, and I hope we haven't exhausted you, Madam Commissioner, and your colleagues.
5:15 p.m.
Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
I can go for another hour, if you want.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
I can see that. I guess it's us who are exhausted.
We have run out of time, and we do appreciate your being here. The balance of the discussion, very quickly, is how we deal with your presentation here today. So I'm going to thank you and your colleagues on behalf of the committee, and I'm going to now take it back into the committee.
Members of the committee, it seems to me, if I may, that there are a few obvious questions that are raised out of Ms. Gélinas's comments. I've just noted a couple of them. One was that question raised with respect to the response that was received from the Department of Finance on a petition. This is a citizen's petition. The commissioner is indicating concern about subsidies to the oil and gas industry, that she's not satisfied with the response. This is an example to me of what, in terms of closing the accountability loop, we really should act on. She's recommending that the committee may wish to get Finance Canada to clearly explain the extent to which the sector is subsidized.
The other thing is that two questions were raised, and I think members have raised them. One was about what progress has been made in developing a system of collecting and reporting information on expenditures and results. Also, there was one about the review of climate change programs led by Treasury Board and how was it being shared horizontally across departments.
I wonder if I could suggest this, if I may. My suggestion would be that we have our research meet informally with the vice-chairs and the chair next week, and if members wish to attend that, fine, but I'm going to, on behalf of the committee, ask research if they would go over Madam Commissioner's report and pick out those things that we could then look at for follow-up, and then ask the committee if they wish to do that.
So I've given three examples to follow up, but it would be up to the committee. Is there any discussion on that?
Mr. Cullen.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
I think that's a good idea, Mr. Chairman, but I think there are a couple of obvious witnesses that we should call. One is Finance Canada and the other is the Treasury Board.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
5:20 p.m.
A voice
Do you want to make a motion?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
They could come together in one panel, Finance Canada and Treasury Board.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
The problem is that it's highly irregular, with respect, that some of the members are not here. And my suggestion is that we would meet Tuesday, and we could come back with that report. We do have the oil sands deputations that have been confirmed that are coming, Mr. Cullen. I think it would give the opportunity for members to prioritize who we'd like to come in and give them some advance notice. I'm sure we could get into that. But I really would try to avoid, at this point, motions being put, because there was nothing on the agenda that was going to indicate that we would raise that here, in fairness. I think we can move expeditiously next week, since we have our agenda filled. Okay?
Mr. Trost.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
Mr. Chair, this is just to say I think your idea is eminently fair. It also gives us a little bit of time to go back to rethink our notes, and so forth. I know I have scattered notes here, there, and everywhere.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
I'm just been informed—I forgot—that it's a break week next week. But we'll get on with it.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
From past experience, we avail ourselves of the best advice we can take, and it's usually our research people who put that together for us. It will give our research a chance to digest what Ms. Gélinas has also raised.
Madame DeBellefeuille.
5:20 p.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
I agree with you, Mr. Chairman, on the idea of reviewing the follow-up. However, it seems pretty clear that some witnesses will have to be called, including officials from the Treasury Board and the Department of Finance.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Commissioner talked about sustainable development strategies. A report is planned, and those strategies will be evaluated.
Since sustainable development has been identified as a topic for further study and we are looking for witnesses, if Committee members agree, I would like us to consider the matter of follow-up, which is related to a decision that has already been made with respect to sustainable development.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
I think the comments can be taken into consideration from our research and incorporated into the draft follow-up paper from the commissioner's report. I think that's what we want. We'd like something to work on.
Mr. Cullen.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
I was just going to add—nothing that we have to worry about today—that if we are going to invite the Treasury Board Secretariat, we've already heard from some of the witnesses that there was a certain level of Treasury Board evaluation, and then there was a report that went to the cabinet. What we want to avoid is having the Treasury Board Secretariat come here, for example, to the committee to be told that they cannot discuss the report because it's a cabinet confidence. If that is the case, I would suggest we invite the minister as well.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
We'll take that under consideration, but I think research can help us. They have a little experience on this too.
Mr. Paradis.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Christian Paradis Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
I understand my colleague's point, and I agree with him. However, Mr. Chairman, I also know you plan to hold a prior meeting with researchers and all concerned, to avoid our being told that we should speak to this or that person. When the right people are here, we will get answers to our questions.
Is my understanding of the process correct?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Alan Tonks
No, I'm not suggesting, Mr. Paradis, that we should have any individuals in other than the members of the committee. I'm suggesting that to begin with it's the two vice-chairs and the chair to meet with research. Research now is looking at Ms. Gélinas' report to make some suggestions as to follow-up.
We would present that to the committee at our first meeting, but it would be up to the committee still to decide. It may be obvious to us all that Treasury Board should come in and that there should be questions and so on. But I'm not presupposing that as chair on behalf of the committee; it's the committee that will decide that. I think you should have something in front of you, as research has digested this, as to who and what should be asked of departments, out of Ms. Gélinas' comments here.
Ms. DeBellefeuille.