Public Accounts Committee on June 11th, 2024

[Jean-François Tremblay]

This is something that was raised by the commissioner and by some countries: how fast they are able to actually provide information on the emissions for recent years. We are working on this. We said that we will be doing some work with Statistics Canada. The team is working on this. Our scientists are looking at it and looking at what could be done and what the cost-benefit of this would be.

Like everybody else, we would like to have the information as soon as possible, so we're looking at ways that we can accelerate the time it takes to get the information about emissions, emissions reductions or emissions issues.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Conrad, recommendation number 6.79 concerns the fragmentation of responsibilities regarding the reduction of emissions. How can the Canadian carbon neutrality accountability act be monitored when no minister or other party is responsible for meeting reduction targets?

[Alexis Conrad]

We worked with the commissioner on this recommendation. We agree that there is space to clarify accountabilities. We are going through a process to review those. It's actually an ongoing process at any given point in the work to make sure that ministerial accountabilities are clear.

Different ministers clearly have responsibility for different programs. They have legal responsibilities. They've been mandated through mandate letters by the Prime Minister. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change does have responsibility for the act and for parts of the act, but there are numerous contributions coming from different ministers, with clear accountabilities for their responsibilities given either by Parliament or directed by the Prime Minister.

We're confident that the system works, but we are also confident that there is opportunity for us to keep reviewing the process to make sure those lines of accountability are as clear as possible. That's something we're doing now and will continue to do over the months ahead. We committed to that through the management action plan.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

You mentioned that you're excited to implement some of the upcoming recommendations and prepare them for implementation. How do you ensure that implementing the recommendations leads to actually having them followed through?

[Alexis Conrad]

As we go through the process—for example, with ministerial mandate letters—we track very closely the responsibilities and the commitments that have been asked of ministers. As the PCO, we closely keep track of initiatives that are moving forward when timelines have been put in budgets or in policy documents.

We gather information when items come to cabinet. We make sure that they're vetted through that process.

We keep a very good, close eye on the commitments the government has made as well, and are very careful to make sure that ministerial accountabilities are kept where they're needed.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Why not proceed as the United Kingdom has, with monitoring under the responsibility of a committee reporting to Parliament? Why would such a change require a full year's reflection?

[Alexis Conrad]

I can't speak for the British system. It's something the commissioner flagged and it's something we agreed, through the process, to look at. I'm working with my colleagues in the machinery of government part of the Privy Council Office on that.

I wouldn't prejudge the outcome of their deliberations, but certainly, there are different models in different governments, and we often look at how the U.K. is doing things, given that the nature of its system is so closely mirrored by ours.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Bradford, your time is up.

If you have a follow-up question, I'll allow it, but not if it's something new.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

It is new.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay. You can hold that until the next round.

Thank you.

Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for joining us today.

Mr. DeMarco, in your well‑crafted report, we often find hidden nuggets in certain paragraphs. For example, in paragraph 6.40, you refer to a recommendation for the department. You say that you have repeatedly made similar recommendations over the past 20 years. From one report to the next, you make similar recommendations, only to find that the department agrees to them but doesn't take significant steps to address them.

Can you provide some examples? I don't have much time, but I think that it would be quite useful.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I can give you an example regarding the modelling that we just discussed. Our office and our principal, Ms. Leach, have made recommendations as part of a number of audits over the past two decades. We proposed a series of recommendations, which the department agreed to. However, we found that not enough progress had been made and that the situation wasn't improving.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Tremblay, how do you respond to that?

The issue is glaringly obvious. For the past 20 years, similar recommendations have been made. The department agrees to them but ultimately does little to address them.

Will there be any changes, or will you say that you'll act on them, but that similar recommendations will be made again next year?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

Modelling is constantly under review. As I said earlier, every two years we submit a report to the United Nations. This report is verified by our peers. After the audit in particular, we set up a forum of modelling experts from outside the department and we compare data and practices with them. We have been and will keep doing this. This doesn't mean that the modelling is perfect. We acknowledge that. However, we're constantly looking at how to do it.

As I was saying, all the experts accredited by the United Nations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or UNFCCC, who looked at our modelling found it accurate. The modelling passes the test every time, and it's getting better.

It's false to claim that we aren't trying to make improvements. We're constantly improving the quality of our modelling. It's an ongoing process. That's why the calculations sometimes change. The reason is that we take into account new approaches and new information from the experts consulted.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you.

However, everything you just described is considered insufficient by one of your peers who gives us information. This peer is the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. In paragraph 6.34 of his report, he refers to the lack of reliability of emission projections from economic modelling. In paragraph 6.37, he states that the peer review of the modelling was insufficient.

You said that you were doing certain things, but that it wasn't considered enough. Do you think that you could do more?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

We'll keep working hard so that the commissioner, at some point, will consider our efforts adequate. He said that efforts had been made, but that it wasn't enough. We'll continue to work to meet the highest standards. I hope that, sooner or later, the commissioner will agree with us.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Mr. DeMarco, do you think that, given the rate of change, you'll ever agree with what Mr. Tremblay just told us? Or, on the contrary, do you think that it won't happen?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I would like the department to reach a target and improve its modelling. However, I can't say whether this will happen and whether I'll agree with the department—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

One moment please.

Ms. Khalid, say “point of order” if you want attention. I don't just look for random comments.

Yes, I know you're anxious to get out. The bells are ringing for 30 minutes, so I'm looking for unanimous consent to continue for another 20 minutes before we suspend to vote.

Do I have unanimous consent to continue?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. DeMarco, you're welcome to take it from the top if you like. You have the time.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Thank you.

I can't say whether I'll agree with the department until I see what happens. We'll see.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

How confident are you? Are you quite confident, given what you have seen in recent years?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I'm not confident right now. I want to see a reduction in emissions from year to year to bring us closer to the target. We need to focus on results. We need to see results.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Tremblay, I'll ask you a quick question.

Do you know the approximate budget for your department for 2021‑22? Can you give us an order of magnitude?