Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 10th, 2009

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the minister for coming. Congratulations. This is a big job. The portfolio you hold seems to be at a convergence of some important questions around energy and the economy and also climate change. It seems that you are going to be holding a lot of the decisions within your department.

A question I have right off the bat is this. I was casting about Natural Resources Canada trying to figure out what defines green energy. I can't find a definition. Does the department have a working definition? Are there types of energy that are in, types of energy that are out of that definition? What criteria do you use for it?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I'm going to have to defer to the deputy on that.

[Cassie Doyle, Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources]

Thank you very much for the question. It is indeed an important one.

In terms of the way we approach clean energy, one definition would be the level of emissions from an energy source.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Just for clarification, do you mean greenhouse gas emissions; do you mean pollutants? What defines emissions?

[Cassie Doyle]

I wouldn't say strictly greenhouse gas emissions. From an energy perspective, this is the number one contributor to GHG emissions, so it is probably more of a consideration than other releases. But as a government as a whole, we're concerned with all releases, and with clean air as well as GHG emissions.

From a clean energy perspective, it really is a question of trying, on almost a portfolio basis, to reduce the emissions from energy production.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

As you can probably suspect, the reason I'm asking this question is that in the budget—in the supplementary estimates, but in the larger budget that you've referred to, Minister—green energy is referred to quite a bit. What I'm trying to understand is this. If the department doesn't have a set definition, it becomes problematic for the Canadian people to understand what they mean and what you mean when you suggest that you're going to fund green energy up to a certain amount of money--what's in and what's out.

I'll be specific. In the budget, there is clear notation around carbon capture and sequestration having a connection to green energy, although there's some dispute about that. How much is allocated in the upcoming budget for the true alternative green energies: wind, tidal, or solar?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

As I indicated in my opening remarks, in the energy sector the focus is green. I've already spoken about emissions-free electricity and the importance of moving in 2020 towards 90% emissions-free electricity. Since 2007, we've committed about $3.6 billion to develop our clean energy potential, as opposed to the narrow definition of green that you're indicating. And as for clean energy potential, the kinds of things we've been investing in are really definitional in that sense. If we take a look at it, it's energy efficiency, because as I indicated, the best energy is the one that you conserve; it's the most efficient way of dealing with it.

The second piece that's important as well concerns the renewables. We have a number of different types of renewables. When we talk about renewable electricity, the focus, of course, is on hydro, and we take a look at hydro. Hydro, of course, is a very important part of the mix, especially in Quebec, but especially in British Columbia as well.

As well, it's important to not only develop these new technologies—they're old technologies—but as well to take a look at the mitigation of our use and our current consumption of fossil fuels. That's where we come back to the concept of CCS.

If you take a look at it all, in the big circle it has to do with mitigation of our current uses of fossil fuels, which involves CCS and other developing technologies—which are important as well, because we still use fossil fuels, we still use coal, we still use oil. Those are very important parts of the Canadian fabric.

The second part is of course, as I indicated, energy efficiency: utilizing the best tools we can in terms of energy efficiency, home retrofits. President Obama, of course, has indicated—

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I'm sorry, Chair, I've only got so many minutes and the repetition of points is all good. I wanted to know how much money has been allocated for solar, wind, and tidal.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

In the past, in 2007, we committed $1.48 billion for renewable energy. I had the pleasure of announcing the opening of a wind farm most recently. It's one of the projects we funded that are coming on line now. We expect many more projects to come on line in the future. Wind, of course, has been very important, and in fact when I worked at the Port of Toronto, what we noted was an increase, an uptick in importation of wind turbines into Canada to be put into wind farms in and around southern Ontario and all the way out to the west.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Your predecessor committed $200 million to the pine beetle fund. Do you know how much of that has been spent?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I'll just take this opportunity to introduce the deputy minister, Cassie Doyle, who is with the minister, and the associate deputy minister, Serge Dupont, and I see another gentleman has come to the table. These officials will be here for the second part of the meeting, but they are involved in this part, so I thought I'd take this opportunity to introduce them. We also have at the table Mr. Jim Farrell, Assistant Deputy Minister, Canada Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada.

Welcome.

The clock is stopped, actually. It has been stopped since we started that.

Go ahead, Minister.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We understand that the forestry sector is facing special challenges, as you're well aware, Mr. Cullen. Both Mr. Harris and Mr. Hill from the Conservative caucus are very concerned about the mountain pine beetle and are good advocates for their constituencies on the issue.

The specific question that you have asked is what has been allocated, of the $200 million, and I turn to Mr. Farrell to help on that.

[Jim Farrell, Assistant Deputy Minister, Canadian Forest Service, Department of Natural Resources]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Of the $200 million that was dedicated to the pine beetle, roughly 50% was around economic adjustment for communities, and the other 50%, $100 million, was with our department for slowing the spread as well as community protection.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Being very specific, what has actually been spent?

[Jim Farrell]

By the end of this year—I wanted to clarify, because $100 million is actually within our department, and of that $100 million, by the end of the year roughly 90% will have been committed—

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

And the other $100 million?

[Jim Farrell]

It's not within our department. It is shared between Western Diversification and Transport Canada. I can get you those figures, though.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

The figures we've been working with show we've got a little over $14 million of that second part spent, and for communities that are facing a crisis, as the minister pointed out, it's somewhat problematic.

This is my last question, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Actually, you're out of time, Mr. Cullen, but we will ensure that Mr. Farrell does get you the information you have asked for. Thank you very much.

We go now to the Conservative side, to the government side. Mr. Allen, you have up to seven minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, welcome. Congratulations on your appointment. I must say that in the few situations we've had to deal with, I appreciate your forthrightness.

But I am going to switch the topic completely now to forestry. Having an opportunity to actually be part of the pre-budget consultations, a number of them in New Brunswick as well as one in Nova Scotia, and having been helped with the report last year that we did on Canada's forest industry and recognizing the challenges and opportunities, I want to start with some of the numbers that are in the supplementaries.

One is the $5 million to promote Canada's forest sector internationally. There are a couple of items in there...they're probably different. One is the contributions to support leadership—that's $4 million—and the other is the $5 million for Canada's forest sector internationally. Can you talk a bit about what the objectives of those dollars are and how that dovetails with where we want to go in the future for the $10 million that we've put over two years to support large-scale marketing, that we added in the 2009 budget?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Thank you as well for helping out in our unprecedented budget consultations, which I indicated in my opening remarks.

Canada is a global leader in sustainable forest management. To help translate this record into a market advantage, budget 2008 provided $10 million over two years to promote the environmental reputation of Canada's forest sector internationally.

Misperceptions about our environmental performance are compounding the challenges facing the forest industry. They also threaten our ability to sell into future markets. If people begin to understand and believe misperceptions, it's not going to allow us to penetrate foreign markets.

The leadership for environmental advantage in forestry program is helping to mitigate the impact of large-scale campaigns. The program is cost-shared with federal contributions, leveraging matching funds from industry and provincial sources. Canada's ability to close the gap between environmental performance and reputation is a critical element of securing the long-term prosperity of the Canadian forest sector. The majority of the funds are provided to the Forest Products Association of Canada, Canada's national forest industry association, to carry out market research and advocacy and monitoring activities as well.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

One of the other things we heard as part of our consultations is that there's a significant amount of private woodlot ownership as opposed to crown ownership in a lot of the other provinces. That's particularly specific to Atlantic Canada and also Quebec. In order to secure our long-term future, one of the items that were stated in last spring's report was on the tremendous potential of the forest industry, as long as we guard its future well. Silviculture was one of those investment opportunities.

My question is on that. Would there be that opportunity, either as part of our community adjustment fund or on some other basis? Where do you see the department going on supporting silviculture in our forests?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Certainly I agree with your analysis of what people asked for. When I met with my counterparts, the ministers in the provinces, in Halifax at the beginning of January and then again in Edmonton with the western part, it was very clear across the country how important reforestation, silviculture, is to the industry itself. Even though we're in an economic recession now and we're having troubled times for the forestry sector, I would say they are prospectively very, very positive about where the industry is going. They fully expect, and are preparing, to come out of that downturn.

Something like silviculture is a tool to make sure the product is there in a smart way for the forest products industries to utilize, to be stewards of, and to make products from as we go forward. We've taken that back into the department in terms of developing ideas around the community adjustment fund, as well as talking to FPInnovations and to the Forest Products Association of Canada, to all of those industries, on the awareness and importance of silviculture.

It came up as well in a number of interviews that I've done with media outlets. The desire is there within municipalities, regions, and provinces not only to hone the resource and make sure the resource is there for the future but also to get people back to work, quite frankly, and to make sure there is an ability to keep people within the forestry segment working in that area while we're experiencing the economic downturn.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have two minutes.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

The other side of this is one of the things that were commented on and talked about a lot when we were doing our report last year. It is that Canada would probably always have a base of sawed lumber on which to leverage future markets, whether they be international or whatever they happen to be, but ultimately, at the end of day, we're going to have to innovate our way out of this, I think. On the $170 million over two years, I expect FPInnovations is going to be a major player in that. Can you discuss how you see that rolling out and how quickly you see that rolling out as part of a budget?