Environment and Sustainable Development

The House of Commons environment committee met to discuss reports from the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. The reports focused on flood mapping, climate resilience of federal assets, and the federal response to avian influenza. Jerry DeMarco, the Commissioner, presented the reports, highlighting that the government was slow in producing and sharing flood maps, had gaps in overseeing climate resilience efforts, and needed to improve planning for future health and wildlife threats like avian influenza. Committee members questioned representatives from various departments, including Natural Resources Canada, Public Safety, and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, about the reports' findings. A key point of discussion was the slow progress and lack of publicly available flood maps, despite significant spending. There were also questions about a flood risk awareness portal developed by Public Safety, which was criticized for not including climate change considerations and for being difficult to update. The committee also discussed the government's response to avian influenza, including vaccine procurement and surveillance efforts. Several committee members expressed concern that the government was not doing enough to protect Canadians from the impacts of climate change and avian influenza. They questioned whether taxpayer money was being spent wisely and whether the government was prioritizing the right areas. The committee requested additional information from the departments, including contracts and data related to the flood mapping portal. No specific decisions were made during the meeting, but the discussion highlighted the need for the government to improve its efforts in these areas.

The Environment and Sustainable Development committee met to discuss Canada's strategy to protect nature. Secretary of State for Nature, Nathalie Provost, presented the plan to protect 30% of Canada's lands and waters by 2030. The strategy focuses on conserving ecosystems, integrating nature into infrastructure planning, and encouraging private investment in nature. Provost emphasized the importance of Indigenous leadership and knowledge in achieving these goals. Committee members questioned Provost on the specifics of the plan, including where the protected land would come from, whether hunting and fishing would be restricted, and how the strategy would affect economic development projects. Conservative members expressed concerns about the impact of the strategy on resource development and the rights of hunters and anglers. They questioned whether the plan would hinder projects like the Churchill port development in Manitoba. Liberal members highlighted the importance of local conservation efforts and asked how the government would support community-led projects. They also inquired about conserving land closer to urban areas to improve access to nature for more Canadians. Members from other parties questioned the budget and targets of the plan. Parks Canada representatives, including Interim President and CEO Andrew Campbell, then presented their plan and priorities for the coming year. They discussed the Canada Strong pass, which offers free admission to national parks, and its impact on tourism. They also outlined Parks Canada's role in protecting nature, establishing new protected areas, and recovering species at risk. Committee members questioned Parks Canada representatives on various issues, including the impact of the Canada Strong pass on local communities, wildfire management, and infrastructure projects in national parks. Parks Canada committed to providing additional information to the committee in writing.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss Canada's industrial carbon pricing system. The discussion included whether the current system helps or hurts Canadian businesses. Witnesses presented different views on the effectiveness and impact of the carbon tax. Some argued it's essential for reducing emissions and staying competitive in a global market that increasingly values low-carbon products. Others claimed it harms Canadian businesses, drives investment away, and doesn't significantly reduce global emissions. Mark Purdon, an associate professor, argued for a shift towards a cap-and-trade system similar to Quebec's, saying it offers more transparency and aligns better with international standards. Catherine Swift, representing manufacturers, said the carbon tax increases costs for businesses, makes them less competitive, and contributes to companies leaving Canada. Aaron Cosbey and Steven Haig from the International Institute for Sustainable Development, argued that industrial carbon pricing is effective and that a strong, rising carbon price is needed to meet climate goals. Ross McKitrick, an economics professor, presented a study suggesting the carbon tax will slow economic growth and reduce the standard of living. Heather Exner-Pirot argued that overzealous climate policy makes Canadian industry uncompetitive and shifts production to countries with lower environmental standards. Jason Clark, representing New Economy Canada, stated that a clear carbon price is a competitiveness benefit, not a cost, and that it drives innovation. Michael Bourque and Nadine Frost from Fertilizer Canada, expressed concerns about the carbon tax putting Canadian fertilizer producers at a disadvantage compared to international competitors. Committee members questioned the witnesses on the impacts of the carbon tax on various sectors, its effectiveness in reducing emissions, and its effects on Canada's competitiveness. The committee is expected to produce a report with recommendations based on the evidence presented. No specific decisions were made during the meeting, but the discussion will inform the committee's report.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Environment and Sustainable Development (ENVI) met to discuss industrial carbon pricing. The committee heard from various witnesses, including Caroline Brouillette from Climate Action Network Canada, Jim Keating from the Oil and Gas Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador, Jennifer Winter from the University of Calgary, Adam Auer from the Cement Association of Canada, and Thomas Green from the David Suzuki Foundation. Brouillette argued for strengthening industrial carbon pricing to hold polluters accountable and drive emissions reductions, emphasizing that it doesn't significantly impact household costs. Keating expressed concerns about Canada's competitiveness in attracting offshore exploration investment due to carbon pricing, suggesting learning from Norway's approach of offsetting carbon costs with fiscal measures. Winter highlighted that existing systems incentivize emissions reductions while protecting competitiveness but could be improved through harmonization across provinces. Auer supported well-designed industrial carbon pricing to attract investment and accelerate decarbonization in the cement industry, noting the need for a harmonized national market. Green emphasized that industrial carbon pricing is essential for climate competitiveness and that the government should ensure a robust system with a strong, rising carbon price. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of industrial carbon pricing, including its impact on competitiveness, investment, and household costs. Some members expressed concerns about carbon leakage and the need for a level playing field across provinces. Others emphasized the importance of industrial carbon pricing as a tool for reducing emissions and driving clean energy investment. The committee discussed the potential for carbon border adjustments and the need for a stable, long-term carbon price trajectory. The committee agreed to request additional information from the witnesses, including reports on industrial carbon pricing and the road map for decarbonization in the cement industry. The committee will continue its study of industrial carbon pricing at its next meeting.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss Canada's approach to electric vehicle (EV) adoption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards for light-duty vehicles. Witnesses from the Department of Industry, the Department of the Environment, and the Department of Natural Resources provided opening statements and answered questions from committee members. Benoit Tessier from the Department of Industry outlined the government's automotive strategy, which aims to support the auto sector's transition to electric vehicle manufacturing. He mentioned the government's plan to repeal the electric vehicle availability standard and introduce new GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles. Mark Cauchi from the Department of the Environment emphasized the importance of reducing emissions in the transportation sector while supporting jobs and affordability for Canadians. He explained that the government is moving towards a performance-based standard that gives the auto industry flexibility in how they reduce emissions. Anna van der Kamp from the Department of Natural Resources discussed the challenges and opportunities related to EV charging infrastructure. She highlighted the importance of home charging and the need to address gaps in public charging, particularly in urban areas and remote corridors. Committee members raised concerns about the affordability of EVs, the impact of the new standards on the auto industry, and the availability of charging infrastructure in rural areas. Several committee members expressed concerns about the practicality and affordability of EVs in rural and northern communities, as well as the potential impact of diverging from U.S. emission standards. The committee discussed the government's targets for EV sales, the availability of rebates, and the role of the Canada Infrastructure Bank in supporting charging infrastructure. The committee requested additional data and modeling from the government to better understand the impact of the new policies.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss industrial carbon pricing in Canada. The committee heard from witnesses from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the Pembina Institute, and Resource Works Society. Franco Terrazzano from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation argued that carbon taxes make life more expensive for Canadians and drive businesses to the United States. Tim Weis from the Pembina Institute stated that industrial carbon pricing is the most important policy for reducing emissions and driving investment in clean industries, and that it has enjoyed support from various sectors in Alberta for nearly two decades. Margareta Dovgal from Resource Works Society said that the current output-based pricing system (OBPS) is built on assumptions that constrain production rather than enable it, and that it needs to be reformed to reflect the actual trade exposure of the energy sector. During the meeting, committee members questioned the witnesses on the impact of industrial carbon pricing on food prices, competitiveness, and investment in Canada. Carol Anstey (Conservative) asked about the impact on food prices and carbon leakage. Eric St-Pierre (Liberal) inquired about industry support for carbon pricing and the misinformation surrounding it. Patrick Bonin (Bloc Québécois) questioned the witnesses on the transparency of the carbon pricing system and the need for government intervention. David Bexte (Conservative) asked about the equity of emissions thresholds across different industries and the impact of carbon border adjustments. Charles Séguin, Dale Beugin, and Etienne Rainville also testified. Séguin spoke about the need to account for the growing divergence between Quebec's approach and that of other provinces. Beugin argued that industrial carbon pricing is Canada's most important climate and clean growth policy, and that modernizing industrial carbon pricing systems across Canada is hugely important. Rainville stated that industrial emissions pricing is expected to drive as much as 50% of Canada’s emissions reductions by 2030. The committee did not make any decisions during the meeting, but the discussion will likely inform future policy recommendations related to Canada's emissions reduction plan. The meeting was adjourned early due to upcoming votes in the House of Commons.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Environment and Sustainable Development (ENVI) met to discuss the 2025-26 supplementary estimates for Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, and the Parks Canada Agency. Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature, Julie Dabrusin, presented the spending adjustments, highlighting their role in strengthening Canada's economy, protecting nature, and advancing climate goals. She noted increases for high-performance computing operations and climate initiative awareness, as well as reallocations for Parks Canada and the Impact Assessment Agency. During the meeting, committee members questioned Minister Dabrusin on various topics. These included concerns about hunting and fishing rights related to the proposed Seal River national park reserve, wildfire risk reduction in national parks, the government's net-zero advisory body, fertilizer use by farmers, and the tanker ban off Canada's west coast. Members also inquired about industrial carbon pricing, the automotive strategy, public transit projects, environmental assessment agreements with provinces, and funding for fossil fuels. Later in the meeting, committee members questioned government officials from Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, and Parks Canada Agency. Questions focused on fire mitigation in national parks, rebuilding efforts in Jasper, funding for the Canada Nature Fund, spending cuts in the 2026-27 budget, wildfire management in Gros Morne National Park, and the Blue Mountain-Birch Cove Lakes park. A Conservative member introduced a motion to invite former members of the Net-Zero Advisory Body to appear before the committee and to request related documents, leading to procedural debate and the meeting's adjournment due to lack of interpretation services.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss protecting Canadians from extreme weather events. The committee heard from representatives from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and the town of Parson's Pond, Newfoundland, about the challenges they face and the support they need. Later in the meeting, the committee heard from experts on flood risk management and insurance. They talked about the need for better adaptation measures, risk awareness, and financial incentives to protect communities.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss proposed changes to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and related topics. Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature, Julie Dabrusin, presented the proposed amendments, which aim to improve collaboration between the federal government and provinces on environmental regulations by removing the five-year limit on administrative and equivalency agreements. These agreements allow the federal government to recognize provincial regulations as equivalent to federal ones, reducing duplication and streamlining processes for businesses. The proposed changes also clarify that provincial regulations must be "equivalent in effect" to CEPA regulations.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss how to protect Canadians from extreme weather. They heard from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), and Statistics Canada. CMHC talked about how climate change is making extreme weather more common and severe. They offer ways to finance new homes that are designed to withstand climate events. They also advise Public Safety Canada on the national flood insurance program. Public Safety Canada is working on a national flood insurance program to help people in high-risk areas get insurance. They are also creating a website to show people if their homes are in a flood-risk area. The PBO discussed a report projecting the costs of the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA) program, estimating it will cost $1.8 billion per year between 2025 and 2034. Statistics Canada shared data on how extreme weather affects the economy, noting that almost a quarter of Canadian households were affected by a weather-related emergency in the past year. They also mentioned that rural areas are more affected by flooding than urban areas. Committee members asked about the rising costs of construction, insurance, and disaster relief. They also discussed how to help First Nations communities, which are often at high risk from extreme weather. The committee wants to find ways to encourage people to build homes that can withstand extreme weather and to avoid building in high-risk areas.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss protecting Canadians from extreme weather events. Witnesses from the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA), the City of Grand Forks, and the Town of Princeton shared their experiences and recommendations. The committee also heard from Investors for Paris Compliance and Ouranos, who discussed cost recovery from polluters and climate change adaptation strategies. The committee adopted several study budgets at the end of the meeting. Janice Myers, CEO of CREA, spoke about the impact of climate change on homeowners and the real estate market. She emphasized the need for a national flood insurance program and tax incentives for resilient home construction. Duncan Redfearn, Chief Administrative Officer for the City of Grand Forks, shared the city's experience with a major flood event and recommended annual funding for communities experiencing extreme weather. Mayor Spencer Coyne of Princeton highlighted the economic impact of extreme weather on his community and called for a national program to bring resources and funding to the table. Kiera Taylor from Investors for Paris Compliance advocated for cost recovery from major polluters to compensate victims and invest in adaptation. Alain Bourque, Executive Director of Ouranos, emphasized the importance of proactive risk reduction and shared responsibility in addressing climate change. He also noted that existing scientific data is underutilized in decision-making. Committee members discussed the need for accurate hazard mapping, the role of municipalities in disaster preparedness, and the potential for a national insurance program. They also explored the idea of taxing oil and gas companies to fund climate change adaptation. The committee agreed to continue its study on extreme weather events with government officials and to review recommendations for a proposed law related to budget implementation.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss Canada's climate competitiveness strategy, focusing on industrial carbon pricing. Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature, Julie Dabrusin, presented the government's plan to strengthen the industrial carbon pricing system to help Canada compete in the global clean technology market. She emphasized that industrial carbon pricing encourages businesses to reduce emissions and incentivizes innovation, and that revenue does not go to the federal government, but back to the province or jurisdiction where it was collected. Minister Dabrusin also highlighted the importance of working with provinces, territories, and Indigenous peoples to achieve climate goals. Committee members raised concerns about the economic impact of the carbon tax and its effect on competitiveness, particularly compared to countries like the United States, Russia, and China that do not have similar systems. David Bexte (CPC) questioned the total revenue generated by the carbon tax annually, while Carol Anstey (CPC) voiced concerns from Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore oil and gas sector about the proposed carbon price. Minister Dabrusin defended the carbon pricing system, arguing that it incentivizes cleaner production and provides access to international markets with carbon border adjustments. Wade Grant (Lib) discussed the MOU with Alberta, emphasizing collaboration and addressing misinformation about industrial carbon pricing. Patrick Bonin (BQ) questioned the Minister about the effectiveness and details of the carbon pricing plan, referencing concerns raised by a former Minister of Environment and Climate Change. Ellis Ross (CPC) brought up potential layoffs in the steel industry due to the transition to electric arc furnaces. Shannon Miedema (Lib) highlighted the importance of industrial carbon pricing for Canada's economic competitiveness and addressed misinformation surrounding its impact on food costs. The committee discussed the need for a clear and predictable carbon price trajectory to encourage investment in clean technologies. Minister Dabrusin committed to working with provinces and territories to refine the carbon pricing benchmark and ensure a consistent approach across Canada. The committee agreed to continue its study of the output-based pricing system at future meetings.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss how to protect Canadians from extreme weather events. Witnesses from Aviva Canada, the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction, and the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation shared their expertise. They talked about the rising costs of damage from things like floods and wildfires and how important it is to prepare for these events. They suggested things like updating building codes, investing in ways to reduce risks, and making sure people have flood insurance. They also talked about the need for better coordination between different levels of government to handle disasters. Susan Penwarden from Aviva Canada emphasized the need to shift from just fixing things after a disaster to investing in ways to prevent them in the first place. She also talked about the need for a national emergency management agency to better coordinate disaster response. Paul Kovacs and Sophie Guilbault from the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction shared data showing that damage from extreme weather is increasing and that many of these losses could be prevented by taking simple actions to protect homes. Blair Feltmate from the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation focused on how Canadians can protect themselves from basement flooding and wildfires. He suggested simple steps homeowners can take, like checking sump pumps and removing shrubs near houses. He also pointed out that Canada spends a lot more money on trying to stop climate change than on adapting to its effects. Committee members discussed ideas like tax credits for home renovations to protect against floods and fires, and the status of a national flood insurance policy. The committee discussed the need for a national flood insurance program to help those who can't get flood insurance right now. They also talked about the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements (DFAA) program and how it's being changed to focus more on reducing risks. Witnesses emphasized that investing in adaptation can save money in the long run by preventing damage from extreme weather. They also talked about the importance of having updated flood maps to help people make informed decisions about where to build. The committee agreed to undertake a study on freshwater without receiving new testimony, using the testimony and documents received by the committee during the First Session of the 44th Parliament. A Conservative committee member gave notice of a motion to introduce a Canada sovereignty act that would repeal federal measures that block or penalize development, reward provinces, businesses and workers who build and invest in Canada, and protect Canadian innovation.