3.2 To a large extent, climate change involves questions about how energy is produced and consumed. Given that Canada is an energy-exporting country, and one with an economy heavily dependent on fossil fuel consumption, responding to climate change raises questions that go to the heart of how Canadians live and make their living. The economic dimension, coupled with the complexities and uncertainties of the science of climate change, provide ample room for vigorous debate about how Canada should respond to the threat of climate change.
3.3 Much of the domestic discussion around climate change has focussed on Canada's stabilization goal (stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by year 2000) established in 1990, and more recently on the Kyoto Protocol adopted in December 1997 by the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change . If this Protocol is ratified by Canada and enters into force, Canada will be obligated to reduce emissions of certain greenhouse gases to six percent below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012.
3.5 At the most general level, the federal government, along with the provinces and territories, has accepted that the threat of climate change poses significant risks to Canada. These risks have environmental, economic and social dimensions. The federal government has sought to work with Canadians and global partners to take precautionary action, both domestically and internationally, to manage these risks. In our view, using the precautionary principle as an overall strategy for responding to climate change is well suited to the problem.
3.6 Canada has taken a three-pronged approach to respond to climate change: mitigation - which essentially involves reducing emissions of greenhouse gases; adaptation - preparing to cope with potential climate change; and improving the science of climate change to better understand the problems to be faced. This appears to be a sensible approach.
3.7 While all three components are important, this audit placed emphasis on the mitigation efforts directed at achieving Canada's stabilization goal. The other components are potential subjects for future audit.
3.8 To date, most of the debate in Canada has focussed on the pace and on the costs of action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Less effort has been directed toward taking advantage of the opportunities in responding to climate change and the admittedly more difficult question of the costs of not taking action.
3.9 The federal government, in conjunction with other levels of government and major stakeholders, should increase its efforts to obtain a clearer understanding of the costs and benefits of inaction as well as the opportunities inherent in dealing with climate change, and should communicate these to Canadians (see paragraph 3.118) .
3.10 Work has been done in Canada on identifying various options that could be used to respond to climate change, but no agreement has been reached on a broad portfolio of measures designed to achieve Canada's stabilization goal. There needs to be a clearer understanding of the environmental, economic and social implications of these options.
3.11 The federal government, in conjunction with other levels of government and major stakeholders, should develop a clearer understanding of the environmental, economic and social costs and benefits of possible measures to address climate change, as well as the distribution of these costs and benefits among regions, sectors and individuals (see paragraph 3.119) .
3.13 In 1995, greenhouse gas emissions in Canada were about nine percent higher than in 1990. The federal government's April 1997 projection is that by the year 2000 these emissions will be about eight percent higher than 1990 levels.
3.14 Most other developed countries are forecasting that they will be unable to stabilize their greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000. In those few developed countries, such as Germany and the United Kingdom, that expect to meet the stabilization goal, good performance appears to be due, at least in part, to unique one-time circumstances that these countries have taken advantage of and reinforced in their national action programs and in their positioning on international climate change negotiations.
3.17 Although we recognize the challenges involved, we believe that the failure to meet Canada's climate change commitments has been primarily the result of poor planning and ineffective management. At this time, there is no clear indication that continuing to follow Canada's current approach will produce any better results in meeting its present and any future climate change commitments. In our opinion, the steps taken by Canada to implement the strategic direction of the NAPCC need to be substantially rethought.
3.18 If Canada is to meet its commitments, the federal government's first priority in addressing climate change must be adequate strategic planning for implementation. In our view, the federal government needs to:
3.20 The federal government should take the lead in making a concerted national effort, in conjunction with other levels of government and major stakeholders, to develop a formal, results-based implementation plan with performance expectations, including interim targets and a monitoring system, designed to achieve Canada's climate change commitments (see paragraph 3.152) .
3.22 In 1995, a federal task force reported on its review of 16 case studies of federal-provincial co-operation in policy work. It found that success depended on a number of factors: building trust, which requires openness and careful attention to the interests of all parties; working within existing mechanisms of co-operation such as standing committees of officials; and developing a shared sense of the need to collaborate.
3.23 The current approach to federal, provincial and territorial co-operation in responding to climate change is not expected to produce the results that the federal government promised to Canadians over seven years ago. All levels of government need to plan and work together much more effectively to meet Canada's climate change commitments. The federal government has a key role to play in leading this national effort.
3.24 In issues such as climate change that involve reconciliation of a wide range of political and economic interests, it is clear that effective and sustained central co-ordination will be necessary. Mechanisms must be in place that involve decision makers at the highest level to resolve issues as they arise. Such processes necessarily require that the government's central co-ordinating agencies play a strong and continuing role.
3.25 The federal government should take the lead in working with the provinces and territories to set up a partnering arrangement, with written agreements on roles, responsibilities and contributions for meeting Canada's climate change commitments (see paragraph 3.94) .
The NAPCC was intended to be a living plan that pursues sectoral and broad-based opportunities through the appropriate development of actions and measures by governments and the private sector, while providing for periodic reviews of progress, and adjustments to the plan as required. While the NAPCC focussed on emission mitigation, it also called for action in the areas of science and adaptation. Federal, provincial and territorial governments have all engaged in developing plans to contribute to the NAPCC.
The federal government has developed an extensive federal portfolio of measures to help meet Canada's climate change commitments, including voluntary measures, regulations, research and development, and the provision of information to the public. NAPCC outlines a national portfolio of measures that cover all major sectors of the economy and focus on energy efficiency, promotion of and investment in renewable energy sources, and research and development in energy technology. By 2010, NAPCC initiatives are predicted to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 66 megatonnes.
The NAPCC responded to the Framework Convention and was the first iteration of Canada's plan to address climate change. It included principles to guide actions and decisions. The guiding principles include the precautionary principle, shared responsibility, effectiveness, competitiveness, transparency and accountability, flexibility and international co-operation.
An independent review of NAPCC undertaken by consultants concluded, ``NAPCC represents a balancing of competing policy goals and therefore political compromise to which all jurisdictions could agree. This compromise reflects differences in Canadian society over both the goal that Canada should pursue and the means it should apply to reach this goal." (Reviewing Progress Under NAPCC - Final Report, November 19, 1996, page 8-1).
At the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention in 1995, the Parties agreed that the initial aim of the Framework Convention was inadequate. They agreed that new commitments for the post-2000 period should be concluded by the third Conference of the Parties in Kyoto in December 1997. At their fall 1996 meeting, federal and provincial energy and environment ministers acknowledged that Canada would not meet its domestic commitment to stabilize emissions at 1990 levels by 2000. Since then, the focus of much of the federal and provincial governments' efforts on climate change have been on the negotiation of new international commitments and their domestic implementation.
The Kyoto Protocol calls for Canada to reduce its emissions by 6 percent below 1990 levels for the period between 2008 and 2012. This is similar to the commitments of our major trading partners, including the United States. For all developed countries as a group, the Kyoto Protocol will result in an overall emissions reduction of 5.2 percent below 1990 levels.
In addition to emission reduction commitments, the Kyoto Protocol commits Parties to co-operate in scientific and technical research and promote the maintenance and the development of systematic observation systems, and development of data archives to reduce uncertainties related to the climate system, the adverse impacts of climate change, and the economic and social consequences of various response strategies.
At their 11-12 December 1997 meeting, first ministers discussed the Kyoto Protocol and they agreed that:
To assist in strengthening the management structure, a Federal Climate Change Secretariat was created in February 1998. Its mandate is to co-ordinate federal government actions and to work with provincial governments and industry to develop a national implementation strategy by the end of 1999, to address climate change commitments in the post-2000 period.
The roles and responsibilities of the various federal players are determined through the interdepartmental Core Assistant Deputy Ministers' Climate Change Committee, which was formed in June 1997 to co-ordinate the federal government's preparations for Kyoto and to manage the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. The Core Committee is chaired by the head of the Federal Climate Change Secretariat, and is used to develop federal consensus on key issues and strategies, and to co-ordinate the management of federal government responses. There are currently 11 government departments and agencies and the Federal Climate Change Secretariat represented on this Committee. This Committee reports to a Deputy Ministers' Committee on Climate Change, co-chaired by the Deputy Ministers of Environment and Natural Resources. Cabinet is reviewing progress on the issue on a regular basis.
Recently, the federal government has announced that it will be taking a key role in co-ordinating the implementation of a national public awareness and education program on climate change and is now taking steps to establish a new national process to guide its development and implementation. Also, in its 1998 Budget, the Government of Canada committed $150 million over the next three years to build momentum toward concrete action and results on climate change. This initial allocation of funds will be used for early government actions to engage Canadians, public education initiatives to improve understanding of climate change, and research into the major challenges and opportunities for Canadian businesses, including sharing of best practices.
There are currently two House of Commons standing committees that are involved in examining the federal government's response to the climate change issue - the Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development and the Committee on Natural Resources and Government Operations. Both committees have written a number of reports with recommendations on how to enhance the federal government's handling of environmental and resource-based issues, including climate change.