Debates of Nov. 26th, 2020

Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to know what the hon. member thinks about the U.K. carbon budget law, because it binds all governments when they come into power.

The U.K. used to produce 25% more emissions than Canada, and now it produces 45% less emissions. The U.K. reduced emissions by 42% over 1990 levels, while Canadian emissions have increased by 21%. What does the hon. member think of having a binding law like what the U.K. carbon budget law does, so that we can meet our targets?

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith for his question.

I do not claim to be an expert on environmental matters. What I do know, however, is that some measures have been proposed, such as Bill C-215, that will allow us to set and achieve realistic targets that will be validated by the commissioner of the environment.

For instance, the commissioner of the environment could recommend various types of legally binding carbon exchanges. This is one thing that could be achieved through the bills we hope will pass.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join the House from my home in Canada's mining capital to talk about a bill that is so important to the future of our region and our economy.

As the member for Sudbury and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources, I get to work with all kinds of incredible people in our resource sector. I have heard about the hard days they have gone through and the long hours they work, not just to put food on the table but to benefit all Canadians. I am very proud of the work they are doing in the community and across the country.

I have never heard a worker tell me they were worried about the environment. I wanted to mention that because, in the course of my work with Natural Resources Canada, I have also heard one myth in particular over and over again.

There is a myth that a resource-rich country like Canada cannot be a leader in the fight against climate change, that industries such as mining, forestry and energy hold us back, that they stand in the way of reaching our goal of net-zero emissions, that trying to achieve net zero will kill our industries.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, these are the very industries leading the way. They are investing in innovation and developing new technologies to cut emissions, producing the raw materials for this clean-growth century, and proving to the world that the environment and the economy can indeed go hand in hand, all while creating good, middle-class jobs and advancing indigenous reconciliation.

The mining sector, for example—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Order.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons on a point of order.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, on a very quick point of order, I believe the member was going to share his time with the member for Guelph.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Yes, Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member of Parliament for Guelph.

As I was saying, the mining sector produces the minerals and metals essential to clean technologies. Our forests are the most sustainably managed in the world and provide the foundation of the emerging bio-economy. Our oil and gas sectors are on their way to placing among the lowest-emitting producers in the world, and major players like Cenovus have committed to achieving net-zero emissions in their operations. They understand that achieving net zero is not a regulatory burden, but an economic necessity at a time when our government is making historic investments in renewables such as wind, solar, tidal and geothermal energies.

Natural Resources Canada is supporting all these efforts, with over 900 clean technology projects across the country. In total, we are investing nearly $1 billion in Canadian clean-tech innovations. The total value of these projects is in fact more than four times that of private sector investments.

Climate change is real. It is an existential threat to our planet, our homes and our way of life. It is a moment that calls for action. The only question is how? How do we continue to meet our needs, power our cities, heat our homes and grow our economy while producing fewer emissions. In particular, with C-12, how do we enure we are pushing forward all the time toward reading our goal of net zero emissions.

Right now, our electricity grid is currently 82% non-emitting. We need to get that to 100% and then rapidly expand the clean supply as we electrify our economy. We do that by promoting transmission connections like the Atlantic loop; continuing to invest in renewables like solar, wind, geothermal and storage; supporting the development of new energy sources; and helping remote communities move off diesel.

We also understand the need to improve the energy efficiency of our homes and offices, factories, schools and hospitals. That means building an inclusive retrofit economy that hires thousands of Canadians across the country, creating a made-in-Canada low-carbon building supply chain and implementing net zero building codes for new homes.

Finally, we are also investing in emerging areas of energy production. Let me take a few minutes to talk about just one: hydrogen.

Global production in hydrogen is expected to increase at least tenfold in the coming decades, accounting for close to a quarter of all the energy used around the world by 2050, and creating an industry valued at as much as $11.7 trillion. Canada can and must capture its share. We are ideally positioned to do so. In fact, name any country where hydrogen is being developed and deployed in a significant way, and the odds are that Canadian technology is at the centre of it. The opportunities are as diverse as the country itself.

In Alberta and Saskatchewan, we can capitalize on our natural gas sectors to produce clean hydrogen with the help of world-leading carbon capture used in storage technologies, lowering the emissions of every ounce of oil we produce. In Newfoundland and Labrador, we can leverage the extra electricity we produce alongside wind and other renewables for clean hydrogen production.

British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec will be able to use waste diversion for increased renewable natural gas production and leverage low-cost hydro power for large-scale clean hydrogen production.

Hydrogen and other low-carbon fuels also offer opportunities to reduce diesel dependency in Canada's north, giving largely indigenous remote and northern communities access to clean energy.

To capture the full range of hydrogen's potential, we are finalizing a national hydrogen strategy, a strategy that will serve as a catalyst for investments and strategic partnerships and make us a top three producer of hydrogen. That is just one example of the incredible opportunities out there.

We could talk about geothermal, tidal, biomass heating, SMRs, but I only have 10 minutes. Therefore, I will leave it at this.

Net zero is an economic opportunity for new jobs with new technologies and energy sources. The market is changing. Investors are making clear choices and putting their money into jurisdictions taking action on climate change. Canadian industry understands the direction markets are moving in and that our industries are following the money. They are already skating to where the puck is going.

Canada as a whole needs to get to net zero. To do that, we need a method for reporting and transparency, so we can achieve a net-zero economy by 2050, a national economy that continues to grow and a clean energy future that leaves no one behind. Canada's natural resources will be central to all of it.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to pick up where the member finished and talk about two things, transparency and accountability.

Let us start with transparency. The Liberal government would not share with the people's representatives when we asked for information about the carbon tax. In fact, the member for Carleton called it the “carbon tax cover-up”. The government would not tell us the cost of the carbon tax to the average consumer. It would not tell us about how much it would cost to a wholesaler, etc.

The Liberal government has been completely opaque, despite its promises of transparency.

Second, on accountability, this bill makes a government two full Parliaments, four and a half years-plus from now, accountable for what the Liberal government will do. Could the member explain how this has anything to do with transparency and accountability?

Furthermore, the member talked about the importance of industry and how it would get onside. Why will the Liberals not say that they will ensure our Canadian energy sector will have representation on the advisory council?

I would like to hear the member speak to those three items.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, one of the points the member raised was the price on pollution. In my role as the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources, I get to represent Canada among other countries around the world, and we are the envy. They look at Canada and cannot believe that the Canadian government was able to put this forward. A lot of my my Green friends also gave us kudos for putting it in and starting this process, which is so key for us in reaching our goals.

The fact is that at every point, the Conservatives tried to stop us. They basically tried to stop any coherent and proper plan to move on the environment and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

It is quite clear that, as we move forward with this plan, certainly with the framework of net zero, we know that a price on pollution is key to all of this as well as many other investments that we need to—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, we completely agree with the goals, but there needs to be action and a plan to go with them.

There is still a lot of direct and indirect support for fossil fuels, but I would like to look at something more specific. Greenhouse gas emissions expressed in megatonnes are higher today than they were in 1990 despite years of effort and years of talking about the environment.

When we signed the Kyoto protocol in 2002, the baseline year was 1990. Then Canada withdrew from the protocol. In 2015, the new government set a new greenhouse gas emissions reduction target, but used 2005 as the baseline year. Then it started bragging about a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, even though it moved the goalposts.

What is this if not statistical manipulation by every government and every party combined?

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, that is precisely why are proposing this plan and introducing Bill C-12.

This is about framing the discussion. The member said the government needs a plan. The first part of the plan was of course the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change introduced in 2016.

Now it is a matter of providing a framework for the regulations to be followed. When we achieve—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for North Island—Powell River.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Madam Speaker, one thing that really concerns me about the legislation is that we keep seeing the government push things further down the pike. When I think about the national housing strategy, we had a government put forward a plan that said the housing strategy would be delivered within the next 10 years, focusing on a housing crisis in 10 years. The housing crisis is not 10 years away; it is right now. When we look at the environment, it is the same thing.

The environmental crisis is right now. Why does the government persist in not addressing it today?

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I was saying, we are addressing it today with Bill C-12. We put a price on pollution. We are investing heavily in green transit across the country. We have made a lot of progress in our first mandate, but we know we need to continue.

One of the issues, quite frankly, is that the technology needs to be created as well as we go down this road. We need to work with industry and all stakeholders to make this happen. This will not just happen tomorrow, because the technology does not exist to get to net zero tomorrow. We are working toward that.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Health; the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Foreign Affairs.

The hon. member for Guelph.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am thankful for the time I have been allowed to speak on the floor today. I also thank the member for Sudbury. I remember visiting his riding a few years ago. We were going to SNOLAB to look at innovations in the mining sector. I sat lakeside with him, talking about climate change and his passion for the environment, so I feel that conversation has moved into the House of Commons. I wish I was up in Sudbury at the lake with him right now having the conversation that way, but it is also great to be here today speaking on the record and having an opportunity to participate in this debate on Bill C-12, the Canadian net-zero emissions accountability act, from my riding here in Guelph.

I would like to start first by recognizing that Guelph is situated on the ancestral homelands of the Anishinabe people, specifically the traditional territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

Climate change is a key issue for many Guelphites. It goes across party lines. Today, I have seen members of the environment committee, where we have these discussions, all agreeing something needs to be done in the crisis we are facing right now. The legislation in front of us takes us to 2030 in a 10-year increment, then goes beyond to 2050 in a 30-year increment to ensure we hit the proper points on the graph now and in the future.

When we are looking at things to help get us to those targets and how we will achieve those targets together, some of the technologies do not exist yet, as the member for Sudbury said. Some of them are accelerating faster than legislation is keeping pace with, such as the move toward electronic vehicles. My constituents in Guelph are really excited to see the banning of single-use plastics, the commitment to plant two billion trees and the work we are doing to conserve our natural spaces. That being said, Guelphites are also challenging me and reminding me that better is always possible.

This legislation gives us some key reference points as we go forward to see how we are doing in the future to see if we are meeting our goals to net zero by 2050. I am proud the government is acknowledging that Canadians want to be bold on climate action now. The government has to continue to deliver on this call to action and act in direct response to it. I have heard from younger constituents, I have held climate change town halls with high school students, I have worked with people at the University of Guelph who are researching, and everyone wants to see action. This legislation is a way of tracking the progress of the actions we are undertaking.

Back in December 2015, I can remember being a new member of Parliament and being so proud of Canada signing, along with 194 other countries, the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement included the goal of limiting a global average temperature rise to well below 2°C to pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5°C over pre-industrial levels.

According to the 2018 special report “Global Warming of 1.5ºC” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, global emissions must reach carbon neutrality by 2050 in order to limit global warming to the 1.5°C goal identified in the Paris Agreement. Reaching carbon neutrality means achieving a state where human-induced carbon emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere are balanced by the removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Achieving net zero will require a careful calibration to reflect Canada's unique circumstances, including geography, the importance of the traditional resource economy, shared jurisdiction on the environment, and the natural and technical solutions we will bring forward to hit that balance.

The Canadian net-zero emissions accountability act does just that. It would help us meet our emissions reduction targets, grow the economy and build resilience to a changing climate. It would also enshrine in legislation Canada’s commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, which is also a goal of Guelph's city council. To help achieve this goal, emissions reduction targets would be set at five-year intervals for the years 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2045 on a rolling basis, and we have targets going to 2030 to hit our Paris agreements as well that would need to be tabled within six months of this legislation before us today coming into effect.

When we set the target for each of these milestone years, the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change must consider the long-term objective of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. In addition, the minister must take into account the best scientific information available, Canada’s international commitments with respect to climate change and submissions from interested persons from across the country, including young people in Canada, technical experts and others who want to be part of the conversation. These targets would be set at least five years before the beginning of the next related milestone year, with the exception of 2030, which would be set within nine months after Bill C-12 reaches royal assent.

Bill C-12 would also require the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change to develop emissions reduction plans that would outline how the Government of Canada intends to take action to achieve the targets for each of the milestone years and 2050. These plans would contain the relevant greenhouse gas emissions target, a description of the key emissions reduction measures intended to achieve that target, a description of relevant sectoral strategies and a development of emissions reduction strategies for the federal government operations. The plan would also include an explanation of how each of these elements would contribute to Canada achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

To ensure transparency and accountability reflecting the full range of relevant circumstances, these plans would be created in consultation with other federal ministers who have duties or functions relating to the measures that are being taken to achieve the target.

In terms of accountability, the Canadian net-zero emissions accountability act would require the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change to prepare two types of reports: progress reports and assessment reports. Progress reports would be used to provide interim updates on Canada’s progress toward achieving the target for the next milestone year. They would contain updates on the progress that has been made toward achieving the relevant target and on the implementation status of federal measures, sectoral strategies and federal government operations strategies outlined in the emissions reduction plan.

Assessment reports are the other type of reports, and they would be used to reflect on the last target, the actions of the government, and whether or not Canada has achieved this target. Assessment reports would contain a summary of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions inventory for the relevant year and a statement on whether Canada achieved its target for that year. They would also assess how the federal government measures relevant sectoral strategies and the federal government operations emissions reduction strategies described in the relevant emissions reduction plan contributing to Canada’s efforts to achieve the target for that year.

I will also add that this would be audited by the office of the Auditor General of Canada through the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development.

Finally, the assessment reports would include any information relating to adjustments that could be made to subsequent emissions reduction plans in order to increase the probability of meeting subsequent national greenhouse gas emissions targets and any other information the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change considers appropriate. Assessment reports would be prepared no later than 30 days after the day on which Canada submits its greenhouse gas emissions inventory report to the United Nations FCCC for every milestone year or to 2050.

What if we miss the target? The accountability of this piece is that if Canada were to fall behind on meeting the targets for the milestone year of 2050, the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change at that time would include in the assessment report an explanation of why Canada did not meet the target and a description of any actions the Government of Canada would take to address the target further. That is typical of what we see from reports coming from our Auditor General. This would ensure the transparency and accountability of the government’s action for all Canadians, as assessment reports would be made public after they had been tabled with either the House of Senate or both the Senate and the House of Commons. On that note, all original and amended targets, emissions reduction plans as well as progress reports and assessment reports would be tabled in both Houses of Parliament, as I said.

Following the tabling of any target of any of these documents in either House of Parliament, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change must make them available to the public as soon as possible to ensure transparency toward Canadian—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Questions and comments, the hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I must say, I feel like I am watching an episode of Yes Minister with that display of bureaucratic doublespeak, hoop jumping and targets. Let me see if I can get this straight. Nine months after this bill receives royal assent, the government is going to establish targets for 2030.

[An hon. member]

Six months.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Sorry, six months after, but it will be set for 2030. Nine years later and then every five years after that they will be set. Today, that is like sitting down and saying we have a budget deficit and we are going to start to balance it in 2030. Forget about the next nine years of work, we will just look far down and try and come up with magical numbers that might look good today. The government could do much to help the environment by simply not cutting down all these trees it will use for all these reports.

What is the purpose of having targets nine years after this bill receives royal assent?

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate some parts of the humour the hon. member presented to us. When we look at the targets to 2030 and the targets to 2050, within six to nine months we need to know how we are progressing toward 2030 and then review those targets again within five years to see that we are progressing toward the end result of getting to net zero by 2050.

It is very important to have those interim reports. It is not bureaucracy or doublespeak. It is a good business practice to know whether we are on track within the timelines we are outlining in this bill.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Madam Speaker, there is the climate emergency, but I would say it is more like a pathetic emergency. This bill is missing important pieces of the puzzle.

First, there are no greenhouse gas reduction targets. The government will set its own targets every five years. It already does this, but it is not working. What will it take for the government to change its method?

Second, the government will assess its own performance. It will be giving itself its own gold stars. It will give itself an A+ and say that everything is fine, and then carry on as though there were no emergency. This is a joke. It is not a plan. It takes mechanisms to ensure real accountability. The provisions in this bill are just cosmetic. The commissioner of the environment will not even be able to evaluate the department's action plan—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Order. Before I recognize the hon. parliamentary secretary, I want to remind the hon. member that any props in the House must be neutral, if possible.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Madam Speaker, just to correct the record, I am not the parliamentary secretary; I am the member for Guelph. I was also referred to as the minister. I appreciate the roles and promotions, but I really appreciate the job I am able to do as the member of Parliament for Guelph.

The method of setting the targets is included within this legislation. The goal, first of all, is to reach our 2030 targets, and those have been agreed on with the 193 nations that are still within the agreement done in Paris. The next target is zero by 2050. We will review those on a regular basis, both through Parliament and through the work of the Auditor General.

The hon. member across the way sits on the public accounts committee with me, and I know we will see the action items for not reaching the targets that have been set—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

We have time for one last question, from the hon. member for Hamilton Centre.