Opening Statement to the Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development

Chapter 3 - Responding to Climate Change - Time to Rethink Canada's Implementation Strategy

Brian Emmett, Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to be here today. With me is Ellen Shillabeer, the Principal in charge of the preparation of our chapter on climate change, which was tabled in Parliament in May this year.

The federal government's assessment of the consequences of climate change indicates that they will be potentially severe for Canada. According to the government's own projections, every region of the country and every sector will be affected, especially agriculture, forestry and fisheries. The environment and the health of Canadians may be seriously affected. The government has concluded that the problem is real, serious and warrants immediate precautionary action.

The focus of our chapter in May was on Canada's domestic commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. We noted that Canada was not on track to meet these commitments. We wanted to examine why.

Our work showed that in attempting to act on its commitments, the federal government had not applied sound management principles. Of the 19 elements we described as key to effective management, our review found that work on only three had been completed. (I have provided a table with further details.) It is little wonder that the government itself was then estimating that Canada would miss its target by 11 percent in 2000.

We found:

• no clear assignment of roles and responsibilities;
• no national communication program;
• no implementation plan;
• limited provision for regular monitoring of results; and
• no summary-level reporting to Parliament.

There were no written agreements with other levels of government and with other partners on the contributions they would make. In essence, no real partnership was ever set up to deliver on the promises made to Canadians.

The federal government had failed to devise an acceptable means by which it could be held responsible for its leadership in responding to climate change. Establishing responsibility was further complicated by the absence of a clearly designated party to take the federal lead.

Canada's problem does not appear to be a lack of ideas about what should be done, but a lack of agreement on a broad national portfolio of practical measures designed to achieve specific targets.

Our recommendations call for a fundamental rethinking of the federal government's approach to climate change, one that places as much emphasis on implementation and sound management as it does on innovative and visionary policy. Failure to meet its goal of stabilizing emissions in the year 2000 has put Canada in a difficult position to meet the more challenging goal agreed to at Kyoto. An effective management structure is badly needed.

These are big challenges - and I am very much aware of how hard the government and its officials are working on these issues. But it troubles me that the departments did not provide specific responses to each of the 11 recommendations we made.

Thus, there is still no clear commitment to rectify the deficiencies we identified. This gives the impression that the environment does not warrant the same attention to management fundamentals and due diligence that would be expected in any business partnership.

Climate change has continued to be a subject of intense interest and activity, both in Canada and internationally - and there have been many developments. For example, Canada has signed the Kyoto Protocol, which commits it to reducing its emissions to 6 percent below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012. As recently as this week, federal, provincial and territorial ministers of Environment and Energy met to co-ordinate their efforts.

Nevertheless, underlying realities remain largely unchanged. Canada's greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to increase and by the year 2000, Canadians will face a formidable challenge in trying to meet its new goals. Unless significant progress is made in responding to the problems we identified in May, Canada will not have the tools to meet its commitments.

There have been many promises to respond to climate change, but promises are not enough to get the job done. Now is the time for concrete and meaningful action to close the implementation gap. The federal government has the responsibility to protect the interests of all Canadians.

Our work on climate change is a continuing effort.

• We began with a chapter on energy efficiency initiatives in Natural Resources Canada, published in the Auditor General's April 1997 report.
• Work to be presented in my own May 2000 report is well under way; we are examining the extent to which energy sources in Canada have a level playing field. We are also working on a major report on air pollution or smog.
• In 2000, we will begin to revisit climate change, including an examination of the proposed national implementation strategy.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. We would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.