Debates of May 15th, 2012

Environment—Main Estimates, 2012-13

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is there unanimous consent of the House for the hon. member to split her time?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like to ask the minister about the Gothenburg protocol. In particular, why was that a watershed agreement for Canada to be a part of? Why is it important for Canadians and the health of Canadians?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I know we have limited time, but the protocol is important, as are all international treaties and agreements with which we comply to better serve the interests of Canadians in the protection of the environment.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, as I know the minister will want to give the fullest and most complete answers possible, I thought I would let him know that I will be asking questions about the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and schedule II of the act.

First, I would like to ask a question. In calculating the impact of this budget in the context of long-term prosperity, as in the title of the budget, has the department estimated what it will cost to meet the government's Copenhagen target, yes or no?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, as I answered earlier this evening, the objective of the responsible resource development legislation, as all of the other integral parts of the jobs, growth and prosperity budget that is before Parliament, is aimed at improving the climate for job creation in Canada while at the same time ensuring the protection of the environment.

The economic benefits will be abundant, multi-dimensional in any number of areas, as will the benefits, for example, with regard to our climate change sectoral regulatory process, which is already reducing costs to Canadian taxpayers.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, does the minister have an estimate of the cost of climate change to the Canadian economy, yes or no?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

No, Mr. Chair. That is an unrealistic expectation. The cost of climate change, as I have explained, comes in many forms and situations. It will be billions of dollars in the years ahead, both in terms of the impact on our Canadian Arctic and in terms of measures which will be required to be taken in mitigation in the south.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, regarding greenhouse gas limits for oil and gas, the minister has repeated that he is consulting with industry in advance of introducing regulations for the oil and gas sector, and before him, minister Prentice said the same thing. We still have no regulations.

When will the minister announce regulations for this sector?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, we are now in calendar year 2012. Our Copenhagen commitments are for calendar year 2020. As I have explained in the House any number of times, our sector by sector regulatory approach started with transportation, which contributes fully one-quarter of Canada's annual greenhouse gas emissions. We are about to finalize the coal-fired electricity sector regulations in the next few weeks. We are in the consultation process with oil and gas, both conventional and the oil sands. We will continue to work our way around that pie chart.

I believe my colleague is somewhat impatient in her expectation of short-term and immediate answers.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, consultations have been going on since 2007. Could the minister just answer the question, when will we actually see these regulations?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I must again correct my colleague. The consultations with the oil and gas industry with regard to eventual regulation began less than a year ago in material terms and in real terms. They are continuing. We would expect in not too many months from now to have draft regulations which will be published in Canada Gazette Part I.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, I would like to know from the minister how much the department has spent on industry consultations in the past five years.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I do not have that number at hand. That is not an impossible number to quantify, but it would mean breaking down all sorts of day to day operational costs.

There are some who believe I may have spoken--

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, on a point of order, I asked a simple question and it was very short. I would expect that the minister would follow the timelines as were set out at the beginning of committee of the whole.

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I appreciate members' patience on this issue. It is correct that members should do their very best to try to make the responses equally timed to the length of the question. I appreciate that some of these questions can compel a more fulsome response, and I would seek the minister's and other respondents' co-operation in doing their best in terms of keeping the responses short.

The hon. Minister of the Environment.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, a reasonable response to a reasonable question is certainly in order. The question my friend asked is somewhat off in the weeds and I do not have that number at hand. We can endeavour to find that number.

I would like to continue on a point of clarification. Earlier I said I was willing to appear before the finance committee this week. I believe I still am. There is some concern that there may be an agenda issue, but I am enthusiastically available to appear before both the finance subcommittee as well as the standing committee.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, my next question is, how much did the ministry spend on consultations in the last fiscal year? The minister has several binders of information in front of him. I am sure he can find the answer.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, that figure is not a budget item. It is not a line item. It is a dollar figure which would be found in any number of operations of any number of sub areas of Environment Canada. That is not a reasonable request.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, well, the budget does have dollar numbers in it, so how much is budgeted for industry consultations for the coming fiscal year?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, industry consultations are not a line item. They are part of an ongoing process which involves consultations across the spectrum of stakeholders, of provinces and territories. It is not in itself an identifiable line item.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, on all of these questions about the estimates, so far we have had zero answers on dollars.

I am going to switch to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. The environment commissioner is seriously concerned about provisions that restrict public participation and decision making. He said that public consultation has always been a bedrock of environmental policy in Canada and that there will be a significant narrowing of public participation in the budget bill. I would like to know how much of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency's budget for 2012-13 is dedicated to public consultation.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, it varies from project to project.

I would ask my friend what is the cost of her leader's divisive tactics in trying to turn provinces against provinces over the legitimate and well-regulated resource development of many of our God-given resources?

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, surely the Minister of the Environment could tell us how much of the budget is dedicated to public consultation. It is a very straightforward question.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, the consultation dollars that are a line item, which are specifically allocated, are within the area of aboriginal consultation. In terms of industry consultation and stakeholder consultation, that is a broad spectrum of work that is done by folks within the agency, but it is not identified and need not be identified by any reasonable measure as a line item.