Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 75
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
2021-06-16 17:29
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think I'm going to pick up where my colleague, Mr. Albas, left off.
Dr. Jones, you've had such a rich life, exploring and advocating. Your historical experience in this is vast. The knowledge we're gaining from you is tremendous with regard to your personal perspective on this.
Taking up where my colleague left off, I'd ask you this: How do we ensure that meaningful engagement occurs with marginalized communities in the development of environmental policy? In your wealth of experience, what are best practices you would recommend that we consider here in this discussion?
Lynn Jones
View Lynn Jones Profile
Lynn Jones
2021-06-16 17:30
Always, for me, it's to consult—because somebody has mentioned this in a different aspect—the communities concerned. They've been dealing with the land and that environment all their lives, and they might not do things the way you normally do things. They have different ways of getting together, different ways of talking and different ways of judging. It's a matter of putting people at a table and having them come up with strategies and ways they want to deal with their communities. Government has this terrible, terrible way—and I worked for government at one point—of thinking that it has all the answers in that it's the government's way or the highway. However, in actual fact, the most success we have had is when we put these communities together and they work through and come up with the best strategies. We could do that with this environmental racism bill.
In fact, as an aside, we're doing it with our Black Lives Matter fund, where the communities themselves are saying what they require and what their needs are. It's the most successful way.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
2021-06-16 17:32
I know.
I'd like to carry that a little further. I have extensive work in shared society building on another side of the world, in Israel and Palestine. One thing I've learned in this process when you consult with communities is that you learn a lot, but you also learn where the gaps are. We were talking earlier about the data, and I'll open this up to other witnesses who are here, as well. What information or knowledge gaps do we have right now when it comes to environmental justice and environmental racism as we move forward with this?
I may want to ask, Dr. Jones, if some of our other witnesses want to weigh in with you, of course.... Perhaps someone else will pick up.
Lynn Jones
View Lynn Jones Profile
Lynn Jones
2021-06-16 17:32
I could say so much. When we started on environmental racism through the ENRICH project, I still remember.... This is the truth. When I was bringing up the flooding issues in our community and was told that flooding was not an environmental racism issue, that's where we started. That was a gap. Even in the definition, there's this big, packed, long definition of environmental racism. My community wouldn't get their heads around those fancy definitions, but they know what happens when the flood waters come through their homes. They lose homes. They have prepared for generations, so they know all about that. There are so many gaps that, as we work through this—and I work on these concerns—the community's getting involved more, and the community is able to address its own concerns.
I'm concerned about some of the things around Quebec and issues that have been brought forward, but I'll just leave it. I won't go there.
View Dan Albas Profile
CPC (BC)
I'll just continue on, and perhaps Dr. Jones has already responded to it, so I'll just put it in a slightly different way. I would just say that, if you were in charge of doing these consultations.... It is a big country. There is a lot of history, and there are a lot of different communities, municipal governments, indigenous communities and the Black community she mentioned in Truro, for example. Where do you start?
Ms. Gue, if you were in charge, where would you start? To me, if I were working for Environment and Climate Change Canada, that would be the hard one.
Lisa Gue
View Lisa Gue Profile
Lisa Gue
2021-06-16 17:35
Just to come back to this point—and I know we've emphasized it a lot—the data collection requirement in this bill is going to be very important to help inform prioritization, to the extent that that needs to happen. I agree with Dr. Jones' earlier comments as well, that the purpose of a strategy is to be broad and broadly applicable. I think this bill very well sets out a broad scope and then also provides the tools with the requirement, again, for data collection and assessment to help to define priorities.
View Cathy McLeod Profile
CPC (BC)
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses.
Hopefully we will get a chance to hear from Mr. Heaps in the next panel, although it will then cut our opportunity for questioning a bit shorter.
I'm going to start with Mr. Wright.
I have spent the last five years on the indigenous affairs committee. I have spent very little time on this committee, but what is quite stunning to me is, first of all, that the officials indicated that there had been no dialogue with indigenous peoples in Canada prior to the tabling of this piece of legislation. If you look at the UN declaration, which the government says is a very important piece of legislation that it is moving forward, article 19 talks about the need to have those sorts of dialogues on issues that are important to indigenous peoples.
Does it surprise you that there was no formal consultation or conversation with Environment Canada? Is it appropriate, given the fact that the current government has said there's no relationship more important and that they're moving the UN declaration through? To me it talks symbolism, but it doesn't talk reality in terms of things that make a difference.
David V. Wright
View David V. Wright Profile
David V. Wright
2021-05-20 15:00
This is not an aspect that I anticipated speaking about today, but I welcome the question.
To be completely candid, I have not been tracking that aspect of the bill's development. I do recall the minister mentioning discussions with some of the representative indigenous bodies and organizations on Monday, to some degree, but I haven't been following that, so I can't say.
From a legal perspective, the case law is somewhat uneven, but it is relatively clear on the point that there's no duty to consult in the formulation of legislation. We're probably not in the realm of being offside of the law. However, as you say, commitments to implement the UN declaration go beyond what the current law requires in Canada. It's evolving and becoming law.
I would expect that as the bill's development and refinement move forward, and particularly as plans are then issued under the law, if it becomes law, there would be robust collaboration, co-operation and consultation with indigenous communities and representative indigenous organizations.
View Chris Bittle Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you so much.
I'll move to Dr. Anand.
I really liked your suggestion in terms of consulting beyond academia—that society needs to be consulted in a broader way. With the news, especially when I watch it, and in speaking with constituents, there seems to be only a narrow focus on a few issues.
I was wondering if you could expand on your comments on further consultation and consulting beyond academia.
Madhur Anand
View Madhur Anand Profile
Madhur Anand
2021-05-20 17:11
Yes. I think there should be consultation, definitely, but also engagement and communication. That can be a two-way street and it should be a two-way street.
Some of my thoughts on that have to do with looking at how people behave and looking at societal trends and societal changes. I know these are things government and business already do, but a lot of data that can be gained from those domains can then feed into our scenarios. There have been a few examples of unpredictable outcomes of how people might respond to interventions.
There's a bit of that in COVID. For the most part, I think, in terms of what the pandemic showed us, I was actually quite surprised at how quickly people responded to the required interventions that had to be taken and the changes in their lifestyles and behaviour. The same—
Geneviève Paul
View Geneviève Paul Profile
Geneviève Paul
2021-05-19 16:23
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank the members of the committee for having invited me to testify.
The adoption of a climate act is urgent and necessary, and we welcome the tabling of this bill. However, if the act is to have the means to achieve its ambitions, we believe that the bill must be improved. The bill would provide a much-needed roadmap. We propose the addition of a compass and the necessary landmarks so that we can arrive at our destination without getting lost along the way.
Here, then, are our five main recommendations.
Firstly, we believe that it is essential not to make the advisory body multipartite, but rather an independent body with the required expertise, something that is not guaranteed by the current provisions. As Quebec has just done with its advisory committee on climate change, we must draw inspiration from international best practices that have proven their worth.
We therefore propose that the selection process be independent. Members could be recommended by a diverse selection committee that would include indigenous representatives appointed by the Governor in Council. These members need to be independent, meaning that they ought not to have any relations or interests that could be harmful to the achievement of the committee's mission, as is already the case in Quebec.
We strongly recommend that scientists make up the majority on the advisory body, as is the case in France, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Quebec, among other jurisdictions. We propose that its terms of reference be clarified and broadened, and that they not be subject to the discretion of the Minister of the Environment, as is currently the case. For example, the body should be consulted on major issues such as setting interim targets.
To ensure that science guides our actions on climate issues, we suggest that the body be empowered to issue advice to all government entities. Such advice should be made public, and the body's annual report should be presented to Parliament, not the minister.
To improve subclause 22 (2), which is already a step in the right direction, we propose that the Minister of the Environment and any other minister who decides to disregard scientific advice from the advisory body be obliged to justify this decision, as is currently the case in the United Kingdom. Because the issues are so important and changing at such a rapid pace, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development should report every two years rather than every five.
To support the government in this admittedly complicated task, we propose the compulsory use of a climate analysis grid to be developed by the advisory body. This grid would help analyze government and administrative decisions on the basis of their impact on climate and on their achievement of targets to ensure that the actions of the entire state apparatus remain coherent.
In addition to a strong advisory body, the bill must also provide for interim targets and five-year federal carbon budgets. The bill mentions that one of the objectives is to ensure compliance with Canada's international commitments. This means that the act should refer directly to the Paris Agreement's flagship standards by setting normative benchmarks for GHG emission reductions and providing for means-based obligations, in addition to a milestone target as early as 2025 rather than 2020, as provided for in the Paris Agreement and on the basis of the best available scientific data. Furthermore, the act should include a performance obligation to ensure compliance with targets. Quite simply, we can no longer afford to miss the targets we set for ourselves because we have some catching up to do.
We felt reassured earlier this week to hear that there was a desire to strengthen accountability in the bill, and we hope that this will be reflected in the amendments.
Last but not least comes public participation. The bill falls short of Canada's international obligations concerning rights related to participation in public affairs and access to information, which must amount to more than an opportunity for the public to comment. In addition to making it obligatory to consult the provinces, as is the case in other legislation, we would like to see the act provide mechanisms for public engagement, awareness, training, and education. If we are to withstand the climate crisis, everybody must rally to the cause.
The Minister of Environment and Climate Change said this week that saving the planet shouldn't be political, and that it was rather a matter of believing or not believing in science. The goal of our proposals is to make science central to the bill while ensuring that the necessary guidelines are in place to fully address the crisis. It is in everyone's interest, and we are counting on both chambers to do what is required. We are submitting proposed amendments to you in the appendix to our brief and remain available to provide the legislator with guidance and support so that we can respond as required to the greatest threat currently facing humanity.
Thank you for your attention.
View Lloyd Longfield Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Lloyd Longfield Profile
2021-05-17 14:43
Yes, that's correct, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Thank you to the minister for being here and to the officials who will be speaking in the last half-hour of this panel.
Over the last several months, I've been hearing from a lot of Guelphites on C-12, many of whom have offered their support for this legislation. They're lending ideas already. They've told me that the bill needs to be prioritized and passed as soon as possible. They're offering meaningful support for us to have these discussions.
Of particular interest to my constituents was the piece in this legislation that offers a greater opportunity for the participation of Canadians on the climate objectives in the climate crisis. Could the minister elaborate on this by letting us know how we're going to be engaging with Canadians on this legislation as we move forward with it?
View Jonathan Wilkinson Profile
Lib. (BC)
Thank you for that very important question.
Hearing from Canadians, scientists and experts is extremely important. It's important in a whole range of perspectives in terms of getting to the right answers. It's also important in terms of building consensus in the decisions that are going to be made going forward.
Clause 13 of the bill provides that the Minister of Environment must, when setting or amending a national greenhouse gas emissions target or an emissions reduction plan, provide an opportunity for Canadians, experts, indigenous peoples and other governments to contribute their thoughts and perspectives. For instance, those opportunities could be virtual—for instance in a webinar or through social media—or in person with round tables and assemblies.
In addition, the independent net-zero advisory body is mandated to engage Canadians in a transparent and inclusive process and provide advice to the minister on pathways to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. We think this is very important.
View Brad Redekopp Profile
CPC (SK)
Thank you.
Thanks, Minister, for being here.
I just want to carry on right there. You talked about the targets and the way they're changing. Of course, you would know that it was 30% with no carbon tax, then we added a carbon tax or you increased the carbon tax, and then you came out with the budget that said 36%, and I still think it's a typo because a few days later the Prime Minister corrected it to 40% to 45%. I was speaking with some stakeholders who were caught unaware of these increases until they saw them on social media.
You speak of collaboration. Between when the budget was released on April 19 and when the Prime Minister announced the targets on April 22, who specifically did you consult and who did you collaborate with during that 60-hour window on these new increased targets?
View Jonathan Wilkinson Profile
Lib. (BC)
Certainly we had lots of conversations with respect to Canadians about what they expect of their government with respect to climate ambition. I will tell you that in the online survey that was developed and implemented, over 90% of Canadians were looking for a much more ambitious target. However, beyond that, we consulted with provinces and territories and with the major indigenous organizations, discussing the need for enhanced ambition, and at the end of the day we've made significant progress in the budget to get to 36%, which is well below the initial target.
Canadians would just think that we were crazy, in the face of a climate crisis, if we said, “Oh, we're done; we're not going to do anything for the next nine years.” That would just be ridiculous. There is a need for ambition and it needs to be attainable. There's a need for ambition and that's what the new target represents.
Results: 1 - 15 of 75 | Page: 1 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data