Opening Statement to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development

Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to the House of Commons—2002

20 February 2003

Johanne Gélinas,
Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I will make a brief statement and then would be pleased to answer any questions.

I am joined at the table today by John Reed, the principal responsible for the audit work on sustainable development strategies discussed in my 2002 Report.

I will start by briefly mentioning some of the major audit findings from that Report, tabled last October. As you may recall, we found that the federal government

• has been very slow to reduce the releases and health risks of toxic substances and pesticides or to act on the recommendations of our 1999 audit;
• has failed to assess, let alone clean up, the thousands of contaminated sites it owns, despite 13 years of commitments;
• is not prepared to deal with the financial and environmental implications of heavily contaminated abandoned mines in Canada's North; and
• has not dealt effectively with invasive species that threaten Canada's ecosystems, habitats, and native species, despite long-standing commitments to do so.

These findings have disturbing implications for our health and our pocketbook. I hope that in due course this Committee, or perhaps other parliamentary committees, will investigate the specific issues we have reported to find out from the government what action it plans to take, what resources it will provide, who will be accountable for results, and how Parliament and Canadians will be kept informed of progress.

My October 2002 Report also looked at the government's overall track record in sustainable development over the past decade. My conclusion was plain: The federal government is not investing enough to fulfil its sustainable development promises — not enough of its human and financial resources, its legislative and economic powers, or its leadership. This has created a growing ecological, health, and financial burden for us and our children — an environment and sustainable development "deficit", so to speak.

Mr. Chairman and members, with this deficit in mind, my objective today is to focus on the future, not the past, in two other areas addressed in my report, namely

• the government's response to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development held in Johannesburg, and
• the sustainable development strategies of federal departments and agencies.

In both areas, I believe concerted action is needed by the government and I think that this Committee could help drive that action.

Johannesburg World Summit

The major output of the Johannesburg Summit was the so-called "Plan of Implementation." I know there are mixed views out there on how meaningful this Summit really was. My own view is that the Summit was and is of vital importance for the world. For all of its weaknesses, compromises, and diplomatic language, the Johannesburg Plan does contain important and noble ideas and commitments. It is the current global plan to protect our planet and build a better world for its people.

But dealing with the Johannesburg plan needs a different approach from the response to the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Rio, too, produced many noble ideas. But governments failed, by and large, to implement them. We cannot make that mistake again.

Success, in my view, depends on three conditions. First, the federal government must develop a concrete, prioritized, and resourced action plan for the future. Progress against this plan must be tracked; departments and their ministers must be held accountable for that progress.

Second, there need to be audits by my Office of the federal government's performance against selected Johannesburg commitments. I plan to carry them out. And I can tell you that national audit offices around the world are taking a great interest in the Johannesburg Plan. We are working on a strategy to collectively address our respective governments' performance.

Third, ongoing oversight by Parliament is needed. I will return to this point.

Sustainable development strategies

The second area of focus I raised is the sustainable development strategies. As the Committee that stewarded the amendments to the Auditor General Act in 1995 and created the requirement that departments develop the strategies, you know that these are important tools in the machinery of the federal government. They were intended to drive changes in federal policies and decision-making.

But we have found that the current strategies are largely a catalogue of the status quo and not creating significant change, as Parliament intended. In my view, departments are floundering. There is no overall direction or support from the centre — the guidance to departments that does exist is discretionary and outdated. There is no overall federal perspective or set of priorities, although I understand that an overall federal strategy of some sort is being developed. And leadership and accountability are unclear: Everyone is in charge, so effectively no one is in charge.

That's the bad news. The good news is that the government has many strengths to build on. I believe we have a leading edge, 'made in Canada' approach to sustainable development that is both innovative and unique. The approach has evolved over time as we and departments have learned what works, what doesn't, and what more is needed. And I know that there is a commitment to continuously improve the approach and the results achieved.

This is a crucial time in the evolution of the strategies, with the third revision due to be tabled in Parliament by the end of this year. I plan to set out formally by the end of February what I expect in this third round of strategies. You will find in an appendix a brief summary of my expectations. My expectations will build on the findings in my last report. Among other things, I will be urging the government to

• define clearer sustainable development priorities,
• develop a long-term vision,
• focus on results and not activities,
• track results and report on them, and
• improve co-ordination on horizontal issues.

Mr. Chairman, in previous hearings you have asked how this Committee can help me do my job. I have a request. I would like you and your Committee to take a special interest in both the Johannesburg Summit Plan and the third generation of the sustainable development strategies.

I believe that if the government knows we are together watching it, action will follow—and action is needed on both fronts.

To start, we need answers from the government to some important questions. Regarding the Johannesburg summit,

• Will the government develop a post-Johannesburg action plan, as I called for in my Report? If so, by when?
• What role will the Privy Council Office play? And the Deputy Ministers Coordinating Committee on Sustainable Development?
• How will individual ministers and departments be held accountable?
• What will happen to the World Summit Secretariat after March 31, 2003? It played a key role in preparing for Johannesburg but its future is uncertain.

And with respect to the sustainable development strategies,

• Will the government set long-term direction and priorities by painting a clear picture of the type of sustainable economy and society it seeks?
• And who will drive this—the Privy Council Office? The Deputy Ministers Co-ordinating Committee?
• What is the status of the government's overall federal strategy, and when will it be completed?
• How will a federal strategy link with the strategies of individual departments, and will Johannesburg be reflected?

Mr. Chairman, I hope that you can help me get answers to these and many other questions, and soon. That would help me shape my future work plan. I'd be happy to share my thoughts on how this can be done, if you wish. And of course, I'm also happy to answer any other questions the Committee may have about my last report. Thank you.

Appendix

Sustainable Development Strategies: Preparing for the Third Round

Summary of Past Findings

Since 1998, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development has produced several reports focusing on sustainable development strategies. We have found that commitments in the sustainable development strategies are generally not measurable nor "meaningful", management systems supporting the sustainable development strategies are weak, and senior management leadership is critical but often missing. We have also found that there is too much focus on short term activities and not enough on long term results, performance reporting has been incomplete and inconsistent, and overall the sustainable development strategies are neither strategic nor driving change necessary to achieve sustainable development.

Expectations for the Third Round of Sustainable Development Strategies

In summary, we expect the following for the next round of sustainable development strategies:

• Departments and agencies would clearly indicate the role played by their sustainable development strategy and how the strategy fits with other plans and strategies within the organization.
• The sustainable development strategies would contain a smaller number of goals and objectives. These goals and objectives would be written in plain language and clearly express the long-term results that departments and agencies are trying to achieve.
• Targets (and actions) would be clearly linked to the goals and objectives.
• Targets would be clear, understandable, and measurable.
• Performance reporting would be strengthened.
• Departments and agencies would evaluate their second strategy and highlight the changes that occur between their 2001 and 2003 strategies.
• Horizontal goals would be more consistent across strategies.

Our last expectation is directed at the federal government as a whole. It refers to the need for the federal government to create a vision of a sustainable Canada and clarify its priorities for sustainable development.

The Commissioner's future approach to monitoring the sustainable development strategies

The Commissioner's 2003 Report will represent a shift in the way the sustainable development strategies are monitored. The approach being taken will focus more on the objectives in the strategies and the results that are being achieved in relation to these objectives. In particular, we will be monitoring the strategies in an attempt to answer questions such as:

• Have departments and agencies established sustainable development objectives that represent a clear statement of the results to be accomplished?
• Have departments and agencies established clear and sufficient performance expectations (including targets) and indicators for their sustainable development objectives?
• To what extent are departments and agencies meeting their performance expectations?
• Are departments and agencies measuring the results they are achieving with respect to their sustainable development objectives (including the achievement of targets, short-term outcomes, and intermediate and longer-term outcomes)?
• Are departments and agencies using results information to improve performance?
• Are departments and agencies effectively reporting performance related to their sustainable development objectives?

For horizontal sustainable development objectives, we will also be addressing whether the objectives have been defined and agreed to by the various organizations involved and whether these objectives are being pursued in a coordinated manner.