Debates of Dec. 13th, 2023

Carbon Pricing

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to take part in this debate.

As we know, Bill C-234 would remove farmers' obligation to pay a price for the greenhouse gas emissions they generate when they use propane and natural gas for farming activities, including to dry grain.

The government, of course, appreciates that farming is critical to our country. Of course, we must safeguard our ability to feed our citizens and many more around the world. However, Canada already has a host of programs to support and assist farmers. For example, we have supply management systems for milk, eggs, chicken and maple products. We have insurance programs for crops, and we have trade protections. In addition, we have financing programs for farms and farm equipment, and we have laws to prevent the seizure of farming assets.

The reality is that we are facing a climate crisis and we need to act now to mitigate a more serious situation.

Unfortunately, climate change already threatens farming operations, biodiversity and the health and well-being of so many individuals in Canada and around the world. As we all know, Canada can suffer deeply from the catastrophic consequences of the climate crisis. Just in the last few months, we have had to deal with historic wildfires, floods and storms. Canada simply cannot afford to not take decisive actions to fight climate change. In 2018, damages to Canadian farms resulting from severe weather reached $2 billion, the fourth-highest cost on record. For Alberta crop farmers, we must not forget about 2019, the “harvest from hell”. The Western Producer noted then that the estimated total value of unharvested crops in Alberta, due to the severe weather events, was $778 million. Clearly, not acting on climate change now would not help our farmers at all.

Experts tell us that the best way to tackle the climate crisis is through carbon pricing. That is what we are doing here in Canada.

Putting a price on greenhouse gas emissions is a logical way to induce behavioural changes that will lead to widespread reductions in emissions. When it comes to farming, the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act contains specific provisions to support Canadian farmers. In fact, most fuel used on farms is already relieved from the fuel charge, which would otherwise apply.

Furthermore, recognizing that many farmers use natural gas and propane in their operations, the government already implemented a refundable tax credit for farmers in provinces that are subject to the fuel charge, starting for the 2021-22 fuel charge year. The three-year-long exemption proposed in Bill C-234, as amended by the Senate, would eliminate an incentive to promptly adopt clean technologies that would undoubtedly emerge during that period.

[Richard Lehoux, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate what my colleague, the parliamentary secretary, said about the impacts of climate change. I completely agree with her on that. I was a farmer for more than 40 years.

However, I want people to understand the impacts of the tax on the cost of farm production. It is increasing the very high cost for chicken farmers, for example. We know that when baby chicks arrive at the chicken coop, the heating needs to be set quite high.

We are told that it is not true that the tax has an impact. Just this past Monday, we asked the president of Metro, Mr. La Flèche, whether the price of the carbon tax and propane, among others, had direct impacts—

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Madam Speaker, climate change is causing wildfires, natural disasters and other extreme weather events to become more frequent and more severe. The effects are widespread and devastating for communities across Canada. Of course, that has a price that our farmers will have to endure.

The impact of climate change on farming is terrible. We simply cannot afford not to fight the climate crisis. The Parliamentary Budget Officer agrees that the impact on a hundred dollars of groceries is significantly higher considering the impacts of climate change.

The reality is simple. Bill C-234 would delay much-needed programs while farmers should start transitioning toward greener technologies. I have seen first-hand the damage that is caused, with the loss of infrastructure and housing, specifically in indigenous communities, which are at the front lines of this. We cannot go backward. We have to keep moving forward.

Indigenous Affairs

[Kevin Vuong, Independent, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Madam Speaker, on November 24, I reminded the government that access to clean drinking water is a human right. More specifically, to facilitate access to potable water by first nations, I asked when the government will provide appropriate funding and technical resources to train and certify first nations people to become water infrastructure operators in their home communities. In terms of that goal, I also asked if the Minister of Indigenous Services could confirm that indigenous operators will be paid at a level that eliminates the wage gaps with operators in non-indigenous communities.

It is 2023; Canada is a G7 country, and the government is still trying to claim that it deeply cares about first nations. First nations people must be empowered with the training, the skills and the jobs to provide their own communities with qualified personnel and clean water. Before the parliamentary secretary regurgitates their government talking points on the new bill, Bill C-61, let us take a few moments to examine this alleged legislative miracle.

In spite of the government's recent announcements, it is clear that it has been unable to provide access to potable water for all first nations. The CBC reported that Chief Chris Moonias of the Neskantaga First Nation, a community that has been under a 28-year boil water advisory, did not even get an opportunity to consult with respect to the bill. Given the bill's far-reaching goals, it is odd that a first nation under a boil water advisory for almost three decades had no prior knowledge of or input on Bill C-61.

I will save the parliamentary secretary some time in waxing poetic about Bill C-61. I will note that the bill touches on supporting first nations to be involved with developing and operating water infrastructure in their communities. Again, hopefully this would be at a salary that eliminates the wage gap with non-indigenous operators. Therefore, yes, Bill C-61 seeks relief for first nations water problems, one day. However, when it would occur is debatable.

Let us be clear: Bill C-61 is not the product of the government's concern for first nations. The government was compelled to introduce the bill because of an $8-billion drinking water class action settlement for first nations. Bill C-61 contains $1.5 billion to compensate first nations and their communities that were deprived of clean drinking water for at least one year between November 1995 and March 2024, along with $6 billion for construction and maintenance of water infrastructure. It is in this water infrastructure development that my initial question resides. I hope the new legislation will indeed provide more clean water access to first nations communities and that the salary gap between indigenous and non-indigenous operators will be finally resolved.

I recognize that the government lifted 143 first nations boil water advisories since 2015. However, there are still 28 advisories in 26 first nations communities. That too must end.

Therefore, I would like to ask the parliamentary secretary yet again: When will the government provide appropriate funding and technical resources to train and certify first nations people to become water infrastructure operators in their home communities? Will indigenous operators be paid at a level that eliminates the wage gap, yes or no?

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, I think there will be lots of good things for the member to hear in my comments this evening. I would like to acknowledge that we are standing on the unceded traditional territory of the Anishinaabe Algonquin people.

I want to start by emphasizing that Indigenous Services Canada is working in full partnership with first nations communities to support sustainable first nations-led approaches to ensure that on-reserve water systems are safe. Whether it is water, health, housing or infrastructure, first nations communities must have the tools to decide for themselves.

That is why Indigenous Services Canada and first nations are working to transfer the care and control of water and waste water services to first nation bodies. Service transfer, in partnership with first nations, not only leads to better outcomes, but it is critical to supporting indigenous self-determination. It is the basis of our work on access to safe drinking water.

Since 2015, the federal government has committed over $5.6 billion to first nations to build, repair, and support effective management and maintenance of water systems in first nations communities. By 2025-26, the federal government will have increased, by almost 400%, the annual funding it provides to support the operations and maintenance of water and waste water systems on a permanent basis.

First nations have lifted 143 long-term drinking water advisories and prevented 265 short-term advisories from becoming long-term, with support from Indigenous Services Canada.

This week, Bill C-61, the first nations clean water act, was introduced. It would affirm the inherent right of first nations to self-government. It would also ensure that first nations have more tools necessary to protect source water, and to maintain drinking water and waste water infrastructure in a self-determined way. It would hold the federal government accountable to continued funding investments in water infrastructure. It would also lead to the application of minimum standards for clean drinking water in every first nation and lay the groundwork for the creation of a first nations-led water institution to support those communities.

As the member's question acknowledges, water operators are key to ensuring communities have access to clean and safe drinking water and reliable infrastructure. The federal government supports first nations to recruit, train, certify and retain qualified water system operators in their communities, while also improving or maintaining water infrastructure to ensure longer life cycles for water assets.

However, as the member suggests, there is a wage gap. The department conducted an analysis using 2016 census data comparing on-reserve and off-reserve water and waste water operator salaries, and found a 42% wage gap. Recent investments in operations and maintenance funding will enable first nations, who determine the salary levels of their water operators, to support improved operator retention through wage increases and/or other support measures.

Across the country, water operators are using innovation to improve access to clean and safe drinking water, advocate for source water protection and water conservation, as well as train and mentor the next generation of water operators.

Six years ago, Indigenous Services Canada established the National First Nations Water Leadership Award to recognize leadership in and outstanding dedication to the advancement of clean and safe drinking water in first nation communities. I would like to end with an acknowledgement of the 2023 award recipient, Warren Brown, who operates 13 drinking water systems and has led work to lift six long-term drinking water advisories.

When wildfires threatened Lytton first nation in 2021, Warren Brown was essential in protecting his community's water supply by staying behind to ensure the water treatment plant remained up and running as others evacuated to safety. He wanted to do everything he could to ensure his community had safe and clean drinking water to come home to. Not only did he save the water systems in his own community, but he also helped the village of Lytton and continues to lead conversations about best practices for water services in other communities.

It is through remarkable first nations leadership such as this, with support from federal funding and policies, that we will ensure all first nations communities have access to clean and safe drinking water.

[Kevin Vuong, Independent, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to begin by reiterating to the parliamentary secretary the indigenous services minister's own admission that, “For decades, First Nations did not receive the same amount of money as a community of that size to provide clean water in terms of operating dollars, maintenance dollars, training dollars,” and I fully agree with that. That discrepancy must end once and for all. I look forward to a day when every existing water advisory is lifted in first nation communities that still have them.

Until then, I would like to ask the parliamentary secretary if the government could assist me in obtaining ground water maps for the Grand River watershed and provide them at no cost to the Six Nations of the Grand River.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the concern of the member. Everyone should have access to clean and safe drinking water, and waste water operators are a critical part of making this a reality.

Indigenous Services Canada continues to actively support building operator capacity to ensure first nations communities have access to sustainable drinking water. Annually, the department spends approximately $24 million to support first nations water and waste water operating training. It also supports innovative solutions to improve the retention, recruitment and capacity building of water and waste water operators working on-reserve.

For example, last year, the department launched a call for proposals to identify innovative capacity-building measures to support water and waste water operators on-reserve. There were 32 projects funded, which included training workshops for operators and managers, community outreach and awareness raising, internship programs, source water protection planning, youth education and outreach and the development of a variety of training materials.

On the specific piece the member just mention in his rebuttal, we will certainly look into that. I will have to get back to him.

Climate Change

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am glad to be back again tonight, this time to raise the alarm on the need for the government, not only to replenish but also to expand the greener homes grant program.

I would like to start with where I expect the parliamentary secretary and I agree, which is that this is a critical program. Launched in May 2021, it provides up to $5,000 in grants to homeowners for specific upgrades, starting with a home energy evaluation, then completing a retrofit and then a post-retrofit evaluation. These evaluations are done by charities in the green communities Canada network, like REEP Green Solutions in the Waterloo region.

These incentives are kind of like the climate action no-brainer. They save homeowners money, they reduce emissions, they create good green jobs in completing the retrofits and they actually pay for themselves, returning $2 to $5 for every dollar invested through increased revenue from taxation. They have begun to work. In 2020, homeowners across the country completed almost 32,000 retrofits and once the program was launched that went up to almost 112,000.

This is where the issues begin. First of all, the program itself only planned to do 700,000 retrofits, far too slowly, over seven years. At this slow pace it would take more than a century to retrofit the more than 11 million homes in Canada that require retrofits. Worse still, in its current form, the program only saw greenhouse gas reduction increases from 22% before the program existed to 26% afterward.

Worse still, and the reason I asked about this in question period a few weeks ago, is that the CBC is reporting that the program is running out of money three years too early. Organizations like REEP have been here before, three times in the past, having to wind down popular energy efficiency incentive programs like the greener homes grant program.

Here is what we need and what I am going to continue to advocate for. First, we need sustained, predictable funding for retrofits, a clear continuation of the greener homes grant program, which the government could do by putting funds in place in budget 2024. Second, we need the program to keep up with inflation. The greener homes grant program is modelled after a similar program that was put in place by the Harper government called ecoENERGY back in 2007. It also provided $5,000 with, of course, huge differences between then and now when it comes to the cost of completing retrofits. Third, and most importantly, we need to see a boost to the program for deep retrofits to get at least 50% energy savings through insulation, thermal efficiencies of one's home through electrifying and I know there is an excellent program in place for heat pumps, for example, and then possibly adding solar on top.

In other jurisdictions, for example in Ireland and Germany, grants can be up to $50,000. The green budget coalition, lucky for us, has already priced it out. It would be $20 billion over five years to do it. Where could we possibly find that money? I put forward a motion that prices out what we could generate just by having a windfall profit tax on the oil and gas companies that are gouging us at the pumps. It is just over the exact same amount. It is $4 billion a year. $4.2 billion, in fact, just by applying the Canada recovery dividend to big oil.

My question to the parliamentary secretary is this. Will the government, first of all, commit to continuing the greener homes grant program? Will the government expand it to focus on deep energy—

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question that was brought forward by my friend from Kitchener Centre.

If we are going to be talking about things like the greener homes grant, I think that, first of all, we should give a shout-out to how successful it has been and how wonderful it is that we have seen so many Canadians who are interested in this program. It has been a tremendous success, so it is good to see that as one part of what we are doing to reduce emissions from buildings.

It is not the only one and, as the member opposite mentioned, we also have the oil to heat pump program, which, in fact, just recently, was expanded. That is a really important program because it is going to help people, particularly people with lower incomes, to transition their form of energy away from oil, which is not only worse for the environment but is also much more expensive for them on a day-to-day basis and has more variables in its cost. They are able to then have, effectively, free heat pumps as part of this program, where provinces are actually working with us and setting up bilateral agreements.

I think we should also talk about some of the other programs that our government has worked on to help with reducing emissions from buildings. In fact, the built environment across our country is the third-largest source of emissions in our country. It is a really important piece to tackle. In my home city of Toronto, the largest source of emissions is, in fact, our buildings. It is a bit of a surprise sometimes when I say that.

We are working with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, FCM. It has a green municipal fund that is supporting municipalities to do retrofits to buildings. For example, in Toronto, there was a tower renewal project that was recently funded that is actually going to be helping the buildings of people with lower income, so that those buildings can be retrofitted. It helps with affordability for the people who live in those homes but it also is reducing emissions at the same time. It is a win-win.

There are other programs, as well, that have been funded through the FCM, to help people to get larger loans to make retrofits in Toronto. There was one of those programs through the FCM just recently.

We also have programs that have been helping people in cities to retrofit community centres and other buildings through our infrastructure department.

We can take many different steps at the same time. The built environment is very large and it is a large source of our emissions. I think it is important that we look at the totality of all of the programs that we are doing, because it is a commitment for us to take these actions.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am a bit concerned. The parliamentary secretary spent so much time talking about other programs this government has in place. It concerns me that I am not hearing a commitment to continue the bare minimum.

Home energy retrofits need to be incentivized by the federal government. Even the Conservatives were doing it about 20 years ago. We need to see this government commit to continue the greener homes grant program, so that homeowners can count on this funding, to continue to do really critical work to retrofit their homes.

If Liberals are looking to be climate leaders, they should recapitalize it at a rate that would actually allow for deep energy retrofits that return more back to our economy than folks would spend.

Are they going to do it?

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Madam Speaker, we have already supported hundreds of thousands of Canadians across our country in their retrofits, through the greener home grants. It is supporting affordability. It is supporting these retrofits.

As with all government programs, there is an allotted investment to support Canadians. There has been significant interest in the program, which is amazing. I want to also highlight, as we have this program, that the program officials continue to welcome new applications. They will continue to do so while the funding is on the table. The program is still there. It is still accepting applications and we are very committed to all of the programs across the suite that support reducing emissions from our built environment.

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

The motion to adjourn the House is deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:08 p.m.)