44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 19, 2022 10:00AM
- May/19/22 10:21:45 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to introduce two petitions signed by constituents in Kitchener—Conestoga.
The first petition requests that the Government of Canada address the climate emergency by enacting just transition legislation, which would reduce emissions by 60% below 2005 levels by 2030, end fossil fuel subsidies and create good green jobs.
54 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 2:38:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, if the Paris climate change targets are not met, Canada and its carbon bombs will be partly to blame. These are projects that will result in billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. We are not talking megatonnes, but gigatonnes. These projects will create so much pollution that it will be impossible to limit global warming to 1.5°C.
Researchers have a solution. These projects must be cancelled. Will the Minister of the environment do it?
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 2:39:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
As she is well aware, just over a month ago we presented our plan to fight climate change. It clearly shows how Canada will meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets by 2030. Our plan will work regardless of whether oil production goes up, down or remains constant. Our emissions in 2019, before the pandemic, show that greenhouse gas emissions dropped, despite the increase in Canada's oil production.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 2:40:51 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would remind my hon. colleague that the issue of climate bombs is not new. When I was at Greenpeace in the 1990s, we actually published a report on this. This is not a new issue, for one thing.
The other thing is that we made a commitment to cap greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector, and we are working on that. This is one of the things that will allow Canada to meet its greenhouse gas emission targets by 2030. They include cutting emissions by 40% to 45%, whereas the IPCC is calling on countries to cut them by at least 43%. We are doing exactly what the science is telling us to do.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 6:35:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise tonight on this adjournment debate. I want to acknowledge I am standing here on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.
The question I am pursuing tonight I originally asked on April 27, so it had not been long since we had received the final chapter of the sixth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with its most dire warnings ever.
I asked the Prime Minister how it could be, given we had been told by the IPCC that emissions must peak globally by 2025 and drop dramatically from there to at least half by 2030, that two days later the government approved the Bay du Nord project, and how it could be that, three days later, the budget included continuing to build the Trans Mountain pipeline, while somehow transferring that monstrosity to indigenous ownership.
The Prime Minister's answer, as ever, was that the government was doing so much and had committed $100 billion to be spent between 2016 and 2030. One hundred billion dollars is a lot of money, but it does not save us. The government's plan does not come close to holding to 2°C or 1.5°C.
We are facing some very serious realities, and talking points will not do. I have to admit that I made an error in my question of April 27. On how bad things were, I quoted from the IPCC lead author, who said that it was “now or never”. I read the report of the IPCC as saying, as I just did, that we had until 2025 globally to ensure that emissions had peaked and dropped from there. I was wrong.
I went back and reread page 22 of the “Summary for Policymakers” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's sixth assessment report. We do not have until 2025; we have less time. The quote is that “global emissions must peak between 2020 and, at the latest, before 2025”.
This is not a political debate. I know the hon. parliamentary secretary is as good and decent a person as we are ever going to find in this place, and the minister is a good person and the Prime Minister is a good person, but it does not matter. The difference between policies developed by good people who fall short on climate change and policies by people who do not believe climate change exists, in the words of Bill McKibben, one of our leading champions for climate action globally, is losing more slowly.
The Liberal plan before us does not deal with the science. It does not. Setting net-zero by 2050 as if it means anything is spin. It is not science. Net-zero by 2050 is only relevant if global emissions peak before 2025 and drop rapidly from there.
I know what the hon. minister has said in this place about Bay du Nord and the emissions not being Canada's problem. Really? When did he lose his moral compass? The emissions do not matter if they happen somewhere else? Canada is to continue to increase producing oil and gas? It is not our problem if the emissions in other countries condemn our children to an unlivable world? That is what we are talking about; nothing less than that.
When we have a choice between now or never, please do not choose never.
579 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 6:39:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the points raised by the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands. I always like discussing this issue with her.
Fighting climate change is very important to me. It is an issue that really guides the work that I do in this place every day.
I would point out that we are at the point of seeing a flattening of emissions from this country, and that is a very big deal. In 2019, we began to see a decoupling, where the economy grew and emissions were flattening. They were not growing in the same way the economy was.
In 2020, our emissions in fact dropped, but that was a different year. We all know that because we were not travelling the way we had before. However, I will point out that some of that drop is a permanent piece that comes from the work that we have done to remove coal-fired electricity from the electrical grid, as we are doing, so there are positives steps. I think it is really important to highlight some of that as well because I feel the anxiety, as I think so many people do, and it is important to point out that progress is being made.
The member has also raised the Bay du Nord project. I have pointed out that we are making progress. There is work being done. It is hard work. We put a price on carbon pollution. That was a big deal. We had to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada to make it stick. That was a lot of hard work, and it is a having an impact. It is a very strong market mechanism.
If we look toward next things, we are mandating zero-emission vehicles so that 100% of all new light-duty vehicles sold by 2035 will be zero emission. We are retrofitting buildings as set out in the emissions reduction plan. As quickly as we seek to make that transition, there are many logistical challenges that we are overcoming to make that happen quickly.
Currently, we are still in a place where we rely on oil and gas for our homes and transportation. Even as we transition from the combustion of fossil fuels, and this was something that was a big learning for me, there is going to remain a need for non-combustion related uses. For example, I was at my bike shop talking to someone about my bike. Right now, there is no other quality way to lubricate the chain on my bicycle than to use oil. It is also used for plastics in a medical context. Those are needs that are still there. Therefore, the world will still need some fossil fuels, but not necessarily for combustion, which brings me to the question of Bay du Nord.
The federal government accepted the environmental assessment of the Impact Assessment Agency regarding the Baie du Nord project after four years of consideration and scrutiny by scientific experts. The projected emissions from Baie du Nord are 10 times less than the oil sands on average and five times less than the average oil and gas project. Ultimately, I am going to highlight this, because it is something that is important to me as I look at all of this: The atmosphere sees emissions, but it does not see production barrel numbers.
What we are doing is driving down the combustion of fossil fuels in our own country through the work I have outlined above, and there is so much work being done. We are also putting a cap on emissions from the oil and gas sector. Those are all steps we are taking that are important steps forward. I would say we are making tremendous progress. It is a hard mountain to move, but we are doing it.
I thank the hon. member for all of her feedback and work on this issue.
658 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 6:43:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I did not say in my four minutes up here that the government is not working. I did not say that individuals are not working hard. I did not say the government is not making progress. I said that the totality of what it has proposed does not protect my grandchildren from the Mad Max dystopian future that awaits them on if we stay on the trajectory we are on, so we must be sure we do more.
There is no excuse for the government wasting billions of dollars on the Trans Mountain pipeline. There is no excuse for an emissions reduction plan that includes an increase of 21% by 2030 of oil and gas production. There is no excuse for approving Baie du Nord.
My Liberal friends, who claim to be climate active, should hang their heads in shame. They must do more. We stand on the edge of too late, but it is not yet too late.
161 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 6:44:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I do understand the urgency. It is, in fact, something I take very seriously in the work I do. It is something that I take to heart, and there is urgency in the work we are doing. In only looking through the emissions reduction plan, it goes through every sector of our economy, putting forward projections to reduce our emissions.
We have signed on to international agreements. Canada joined over 100 countries in signing the global methane pledge to reduce global anthropogenic methane emissions by 30% by 2030. If we look at all of the work put together, including reducing emissions by 40% to 45% from 2005 levels by 2030, then we are on a path to net zero by 2050.
It is urgent, I absolutely agree, and we are working with that urgency. We will continue to do so.
142 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 9:01:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, to begin, I would like to confirm that we are committed to real action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from our buildings, as is outlined in my mandate letter. We have opportunities here, and we want to seize these opportunities and demonstrate leadership.
This past year alone, we reported a 57.6% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from our buildings, as compared to the baseline laid out in 2005 and 2006. This is a result of important actions to improve buildings' energy efficiency, electricity grid improvements and the procurement of renewable energy credits. A decrease of 19% of the remaining emissions is expected by 2025 through the procurement of clean electricity. That is the national clean electricity initiative.
A decrease of 40% of the remaining emissions is expected by 2025, by modernizing the heating and cooling systems for up to 80 buildings in the national capital region. This is referred to as the energy services acquisition program. Additional greenhouse gas emissions reductions are expected as we continue to modernize buildings.
These ongoing actions, in conjunction with achievements to date, will lead us towards achieving over 82% of greenhouse gas emissions reductions by 2025 and put us in a very good position to achieve net-zero carbon by 2030 in our buildings portfolio.
We also have the Buy Clean strategy. As outlined in my mandate letter, we are committed to reducing the carbon footprint and encouraging green procurement strategies. This includes strengthening federal procurement practices to prioritize reusable and recyclable products in support of our goal of zero plastic waste.
We will also work with our colleagues to introduce a new Buy Clean strategy to support and prioritize the use of made-in-Canada low-carbon products. Protecting our planet is a top priority for our government, and we will continue to do our part in promoting ecofriendly practices.
We also have made efforts on the electric vehicle front. We are committed to greening government at all levels of procurement. As the manager of the government fleet, we have standing offers for light-duty vehicles that include electric, hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles.
In the past three years, we have procured 1,187 zero-emission and hybrid vehicles. We will continue working with industry to ensure we are finding new ways to support green procurement opportunities.
388 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:31:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I would like to start by recognizing that the minister has been answering questions for many hours now. I respect her, and I appreciate her contributions this evening.
I would like to ask about the greening government strategy, which the minister spoke about earlier. A signature commitment of this strategy is net-zero emissions by 2050. Does the minister realize that net-zero emissions by 2050 is not equivalent to our Paris commitment to limit global temperature increase to no more than 1.5°C?
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:31:47 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I want to thank the hon. member for acknowledging my stamina this evening, but I am also surrounded by an amazing team, so I have great gratitude for all those who are here and, as I said previously, spread out all over in order to assist me this evening. For the work of my team, I am just so grateful.
In the answers that I did give previously, I actually stated that, with the initiatives we are undertaking, we would be achieving reductions of 82% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, and we are in a very good position to achieve net zero by 2030 for our building portfolio.
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:33:11 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, with respect to PSPC, I can talk about initiatives that we are undertaking. In addition to the figures I gave on what we have done in our strategies with reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, we are also undertaking other efforts, which include procurement practices that prioritize reusable and recyclable products and our goal of net-zero plastic waste. We are going to continue also to work with our colleagues to introduce a new buy clean strategy and support and prioritize made-in-Canada, low-carbon products.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:35:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, again, I have spoken about that this evening and have gone over a number of times the efforts we are making in procurement with respect to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and ensuring that we are minimizing plastic and waste.
One of the other things I would like to add is electric vehicles. We know there is the ability for us to act there too, and we are. In the past three years, we have procured 1,187 zero-emission and hybrid vehicles, another area where we can show leadership and do our part with respect to meeting targets.
100 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:37:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I would put forward the stat that we have accomplished to date as evidence of the initiatives that we are taking and the progress we are making, which is a 57.6% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from our buildings as compared to the baseline laid out in 2005-06. We are going to continue to work on these and other important initiatives in PSPC in order to reach the targets.
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:50:40 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, Canada's target of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 requires substantial carbon reductions across all economic sectors. Changing how we look at public infrastructure can unlock previously overlooked pollution-reduction opportunities while supporting Canadian manufacturers and creating the conditions for them to thrive in the low-carbon global marketplace.
This government committed to buy clean in the last election, and creating a buy clean strategy was identified as a priority in the mandate letters of three ministers. However, creating a buy clean strategy is not mentioned in the minister's departmental plan for 2022-23. Can she speak to that?
103 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/19/22 10:51:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, as I have said, we have taken significant steps in procurement. We know that there is work that we can do, and we are undertaking that work.
The work has led to a 57.6% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, a 19% reduction in the remaining emissions expected by 2025 with our national clean electricity initiative, and an additional decrease of 40% by 2025 by modernizing the heating and cooling systems of buildings in the national capital region through the energy services acquisition program.
86 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
