3.27 The IPCC has issued two major assessment reports. These reports involved the participation of many hundreds of specialists from around the world as contributing authors, as well as thousands of expert reviewers and reviews by governments. Canada has been actively involved in the process. The reports generally represent a broad international consensus on the issue of climate change.
3.28 In the IPCC's Second Assessment Report, issued in 1995, one of the key findings was that "the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate". The IPCC has concluded that there is a buildup of greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere. The IPCC believes that one of the contributors to the buildup of carbon dioxide is human activity such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation. The effect of the increase in the so-called greenhouse gases is to store heat that would otherwise escape the Earth's atmosphere. This could lead to climate change.
3.29 The Second Assessment Report concluded that failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could have potentially serious long-term impacts. These could include a rise in the mean or average annual global surface temperature, a change in weather and precipitation patterns, a change in crop yields and ecosystems, and a rise in sea levels, which could threaten coastal settlements. In addition, the report noted that climate change might have wide-ranging and serious impacts on human health. Such consequences transcend local and provincial boundaries and are becoming matters of national and, increasingly, international concern. The federal government has endorsed the findings of that report.
3.31 The uncertainties that lead to debate on whether climate change will have serious impacts cut both ways. The impacts could be less than predicted. They could also be worse. The fact that there are uncertainties does not make the problem go away.
3.34 The federal government has jurisdiction over air pollution that crosses international boundaries. It addresses national concerns about the environment and negotiates, signs and ratifies international treaties on behalf of Canada. It also has its own policy instruments or levers, such as fiscal and regulatory tools and voluntary instruments.
3.35 The provinces have jurisdiction over their natural resources, including energy production and use and local emissions. They have various levers related to their powers of taxation and their ability to develop energy policies and regulations. They also have control over such matters as power generation, provincial building codes and provincial transportation, including inspection and maintenance of vehicles on the road.
3.36 Municipal governments have important levers related to their governance of the local infrastructure, including urban planning, transportation and building codes.
3.37 The federal government does not need the agreement of other levels of government to ratify international environmental commitments such as those related to climate change. However, federal government officials have informed us that the Canadian practice is for the federal government to ratify an international commitment only after it is assured that Canada can meet its obligations under that commitment. In Canada, development of cost-effective responses to environmental matters that cross jurisdictional boundaries requires that all levels of government integrate their efforts and involve industry, non-governmental organizations and individual Canadians. Federal government officials indicate that different government policy priorities, available resources and concerns about regional economic impacts of certain actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can constrain the integration of these efforts.
3.39 Climate change is not just an environmental issue. It also has aspects related to the economy, including trade and competitiveness considerations, as well as social aspects. In addition, it raises concerns about equity between generations, and among Canadian jurisdictions and sectors as well as nations and regions of the world. These considerations and competing interests have to be taken into account in deciding how to respond. Climate change thus epitomizes the challenge of sustainable development.
3.40 Responding to climate change will require effort over a long period of time. As has been stated, the challenge is not to find the best policy today for dealing with climate change over the next century but rather to select a prudent strategy, begin moving in the right direction and adjust the strategy over time in the light of new information.
3.42 Given the scientific uncertainty, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others have suggested that efforts to address climate change should be guided by the precautionary principle. They generally interpret this principle to mean that where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
3.43 Despite the remaining uncertainties, the federal government has concluded that the science of climate change is sufficient to justify taking precautionary measures: the threat is real and the potential environmental, economic and human costs are simply too high to not take immediate action. In our view, using the precautionary principle as an overall strategy for responding to climate change is well suited to the problem.
3.45 The federal government has concluded that for informed decision making on future policy options, it is important to continue working on the science to better understand the climate system and to detect changes in it, and to better understand the potential socio-economic and environmental impacts on Canada.
3.46 Most greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for decades to centuries. Immediate reductions in emissions will likely be overshadowed initially by greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. Many scientists believe that it may take several decades before the effects of the reductions are noticeable, just as it took years to recognize the impact of incremental growth in greenhouse gas emissions. Even if immediate stabilization in emissions of greenhouse gases were achieved, the concentrations of these gases in the atmosphere will continue to increase for many years. Canada's position is that even with national and international mitigation measures, some degree of climate change is inevitable. Thus, Canada recognizes the need for a national adaptation strategy, designed to respond to projected or actual changes, such as increases in severe weather events and changes in water levels.
3.48 The interim objective of the FCCC called on Annex I Parties, primarily the developed and Eastern European countries, to aim to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. The ultimate objective, however, is the stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous human-induced interference with the climate system. The FCCC states that such a level should be achieved within a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner. The Parties to the FCCC agreed to hold a series of follow-up meetings, referred to as the Conferences of the Parties, to assess their progress toward the objectives set forth in the Convention.
3.49 While the FCCC does not include legally binding targets and schedules to control greenhouse gas emissions, it does require Annex I Parties to undertake a number of actions within a range of options. The FCCC commits Canada and other countries to, among other things, implement policies and measures to mitigate climate change; adopt policies and measures to facilitate adaptation to climate change; promote and co-operate in the exchange of information related to climate change; and develop and implement educational and public awareness programs on climate change. These commitments are to take into account the specific national and regional priorities of the countries. These undertakings collectively represent Canada's international commitment to respond to climate change.
3.51 As Canada's response to the FCCC, the National Action Program on Climate Change (NAPCC) was approved by federal, provincial and territorial ministers of energy and the environment in February 1995. The NAPCC reaffirmed the endorsement of the precautionary principle and the commitment to Canada's stabilization goal.
3.52 Thus, for over seven years Canada has had a domestic policy commitment to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000. This domestic commitment is tougher than the interim objective of the FCCC, which is only to aim to stabilize.
3.55 Environment Canada reports that total Canadian greenhouse gas emissions in carbon dioxide equivalents, the common unit of measurement, were 567 megatonnes in 1990 (one megatonne of carbon dioxide emissions is equivalent to the annual carbon dioxide emissions of about 200,000 cars). In 1995 (the latest year for which data are available), total Canadian greenhouse gas emissions were reported to be about 9 percent higher than in 1990. Exhibit 3.1 shows the upward trend.
3.56 The federal government attributes the sustained growth in emissions largely to population growth, increased energy consumption and an increase in economic activity, particularly oil and natural gas production and exports. Mitigation efforts, including Canada's improved energy efficiency, have helped to reduce the rate of increase in greenhouse gas emissions but have not been sufficient to halt their growth overall.
3.57 Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , all Annex I Parties are required to report annually on their inventories of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities. Using the most recent reports available, we compared Canada's progress between 1990 and 1995 with that of seven other industrialized countries.
3.58 Greenhouse gas emissions have grown more slowly in Canada than in the Netherlands but more rapidly than in six of the countries: Australia, Germany, Japan, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States. In Germany and the United Kingdom, emissions actually fell in the same time period. This appears to be due, at least in part, to unique one-time circumstances that those countries have taken advantage of and reinforced in their national action programs and in their positioning on international climate change negotiations. In the case of Germany, the unique circumstance relates to the industrial restructuring of East Germany. For the United Kingdom, it relates to the switch from coal to natural gas as a result of the liberalization of energy markets.
3.60 In its April 1997 report, Canada's Energy Outlook: 1996-2020, NRCan projected that the gap would be narrowed to eight percent above 1990 levels in the year 2000, although it indicates that the projected range could be from 5 to 11 percent (Exhibit 3.1) . Canada's Second National Report on Climate Change - Actions to Meet Commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (May 1997) indicated that progress in lowering the gap is being made as a result of the impact of the NAPCC response strategies and other forecasting assumptions. This national report also noted that most other developed countries were, like Canada, forecasting that they would not stabilize their greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by 2000.
3.61 Since the April 1997 projection was made, a development occurred that could have a further significant impact on Canada's ability to meet its stabilization goal. In August 1997, Ontario Hydro announced that it would be temporarily laying up some of its nuclear generating capacity and replacing it with fossil fuel generation. If this proposed shift to fossil fuels occurs, it will temporarily increase the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by Ontario Hydro when compared with the projections included in the report, Canada's Energy Outlook: 1996-2020. Based on this temporary increase in fossil fuel generation, NRCan estimates that Canada's greenhouse gas emissions could increase to about 11 percent above 1990 levels in 2000. Ontario Hydro, however, has informed us that it is committed to stabilizing its net greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000 and plans to honor this commitment even during the period of reduced nuclear generation.
3.63 This audit focussed on Canada's current domestic policy commitment to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by the year 2000 and on the federal government's role in implementing Canada's National Action Program on Climate Change. The NAPCC sets strategic directions in pursuit of the stabilization goal and provides guidance for actions beyond 2000. Our audit placed emphasis on mitigation efforts directed at achieving Canada's stabilization goal.
3.64 The overall objective of this audit was to assess the adequacy of the federal government's management of the implementation of Canada's domestic policy commitment on climate change. To do so, we examined what we consider to be key elements in managing climate change commitments. The exhibit in the Executive Summary provides a checklist of these key elements and provides our assessment of progress. The Observations and Recommendations section provides our detailed observations in the same order as the checklist.
3.65 If, as the federal government predicts, Canada does not have a reasonable chance of meeting its stabilization goal, we wanted to find out some of the reasons why. This could identify lessons to be learned from the perspective of management for achieving future targets.
3.66 We examined the federal role associated with translating the strategic direction of the NAPCC into explicit and concrete actions to enable Canada to reach its stabilization goal. We also examined the related information provided to Parliament. Given the domestic and federal focus of our audit, our work involved mainly the federal environment and energy departments, Environment Canada and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), although we recognize that aspects of climate change concern all federal departments, agencies and other federal entities and are therefore sectoral in nature.
3.67 Our audit work took into consideration the three key themes that the first report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development described as weaknesses in the federal government's management of environmental and sustainable development issues. Those themes are:
1 Risks associated with climate change recognized - Done
2 National climate change goal established - Done
3 Strategic direction established to meet the goal - Done
3.71 The federal, provincial and territorial governments have long acknowledged the importance of accountability arrangements when working in partnership to deal with environmental matters. For example, the National Action Strategy on Global Warming, released in November 1990, proposed that a strategic framework for actions be undertaken jointly by governments and all other sectors of the economy to combat global warming (one aspect of climate change). It also stated that the principles and elements of the national action strategy should be codified in federal-provincial agreements.
3.72 The NAPCC identifies a number of principles to guide the selection of measures for dealing with climate change. The transparency and accountability principle states, "Clear accountability should be established regarding who will be responsible for taking action, what actions are being taken, the expected impact of these measures, and how well the measures actually performed."
3.74 We found that while the NAPCC provides strategic direction for Canada's action on climate change, it does not define the specific roles and responsibilities of the various jurisdictions or parties to it. Federal government officials have informed us that, as a national consensus document, the NAPCC provides a guide for actions that the different levels of government may choose to implement according to their jurisdictional responsibilities and resource capabilities. These officials also informed us that the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of energy and environment have overall joint responsibility for meeting the stabilization goal through the federal-provincial/ territorial co-ordinating framework and the related national co-ordinating mechanism (described in Appendix B ).
3.75 We recognize that there are various agreements between the federal government and the provinces to promote co-operation in voluntary initiatives and research and development, which support Canada's response to climate change. However, there are no clear and transparent agreements or arrangements between the federal government and the provinces and territories that specifically define their respective roles and responsibilities in achieving the stabilization goal.
3.76 We noted that although municipalities hold some important policy levers, they are under the jurisdiction of the provinces and therefore are not included in the current national co-ordinating mechanism, except as stakeholders.
3.77 In summary, despite the long-standing acknowledgment of the importance of accountability arrangements to deal with environmental matters, the respective roles and responsibilities of all levels of government for dealing with climate change have not yet been clarified and agreed to.
4 Roles and responsibilities agreed to by all levels of government - Some progress
3.79 Two federal departments are co-leading, but their leadership role is unclear. Environment Canada and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) have many activities under their own mandates that support Canada's domestic and international response to climate change by helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improving scientific understanding of the issue, and adapting to potential climate change (see Appendices C and D ). Several of these activities provide elements of national leadership.
3.80 These two departments have publicly stated that they have taken the lead domestically on the climate change issue. Departmental officials also indicated to us that they are jointly responsible for leading the federal government's actions to implement the NAPCC, including establishing joint federal, provincial and territorial mechanisms, encouraging the involvement of the many players and engaging all Canadians to take action. However, the two departments have limited authority and capability to ensure that action is taken in other federal entities, in other jurisdictions, in industry, in non-governmental organizations, or by individuals.
3.81 In general, Environment Canada holds primary responsibility for the development of overall environmental policy on climate change, including climate science and public education. NRCan is more involved in developing and co-ordinating Canada's domestic implementation strategy, including dealing with the industrial sectors. The two departments also share responsibility for developing new policy options and measures to deal with climate change, and for leading the federal government's efforts to reduce its own greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, in our view, these two federal departments share responsibility for championing or co-leading Canada's response to climate change.
3.82 However, in reviewing departmental documents submitted to Parliament by Environment Canada and NRCan, we found that they were silent on the exact nature of their co-leadership role and their responsibilities for implementing the NAPCC. For example, the Reports on Plans and Priorities (formerly Part III of the Estimates), Performance Reports and Sustainable Development Strategies for both departments describe their roles and responsibilities for climate change issues as they relate specifically to their own departmental mandates.
3.83 Roles and responsibilities of other federal players are not specified. We would expect the federal government to assign roles and responsibilities to the various federal players and to be able to tell Parliament who in the federal government is accountable for federal actions supporting the implementation of the NAPCC. To determine roles and responsibilities, we examined the interdepartmental co-ordinating mechanisms and agreements related to climate change.
3.84 In addition to Environment Canada and NRCan, many other federal departments and agencies have roles and activities under their own mandates that support Canada's response to climate change. These include Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), Department of Finance, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Health Canada, Industry Canada, the Privy Council Office, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Transport Canada, and the Treasury Board Secretariat. All federal entities also have a responsibility to make a contribution to implementing the NAPCC by reducing greenhouse gas emissions in their own operations. Therefore, the federal and national response to climate change requires co-ordination at the federal level.
3.85 In January 1995, the four federal resource departments - Agriculture and Agri-Food, Environment, Fisheries and Oceans and Natural Resources - signed a three-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU's purpose is to help the departments increase co-ordination, work together on joint projects and implement a framework for sustainable development science and technology in the natural resource sectors. Climate change is identified as a priority issue for collaboration and research. The MOU calls for finding the best ways for the four departments, individually and together, to address scientific uncertainties and communicate the significance of climate change to Canadians. The climate change and variability component of this MOU covers climate science and, to an increasing degree, impacts and adaptation. The latter were added to the mandate of the MOU in the fall of 1997. An extension to this MOU was being negotiated at the time of our audit.
3.86 In addition, the interdepartmental Program of Energy Research and Development (PERD) helps 12 federal departments to co-ordinate their energy research and development, including the areas of energy efficiency, renewable energy and technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Since April 1996, PERD has increased its support to the climate change issue.
3.87 An Interdepartmental Core Assistant Deputy Ministers Committee, established in June 1997, serves as the main mechanism of federal co-ordination for the climate change issue in connection with the federal government's preparation for Kyoto and to manage the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol . The Committee currently comprises representatives from 10 departments and agencies - Agriculture and Agri-Food, CIDA, Environment, Finance, Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Industry, Natural Resources, the Privy Council Office, Transport, and Treasury Board Secretariat. This Core Committee, co-chaired by Environment Canada and NRCan, is used to develop federal consensus on key issues and strategies related to climate change and to co-ordinate the management of the federal activities . However, it has no documented terms of reference.
3.88 In summary, we were unable to find any documentation providing a substantive definition of the nature of the federal government's leadership role in relation to climate change. Neither the interdepartmental co-ordinating mechanisms nor agreements have helped to clarify federal roles and responsibilities in implementing the NAPCC, including requirements for reporting to Parliament on the climate change sectoral activity. Federal departmental officials were unable to provide us with any other relevant documentation. In our opinion, the federal government has failed to devise an acceptable means by which it can be held accountable for its leadership of the climate change issue, and for federal participation in implementing the NAPCC.
5 Leadership role of federal government clearly defined - No progress
6 Roles and responsibilities for all federal players related to climate change specified - Some progress
3.90 Because specific roles and responsibilities of the various players in the NAPCC have not been established, we were unable to determine their individual contribution to achieving Canada's stabilization goal or the true nature of the federal, provincial and territorial relationship involved. In our opinion, no true partnership has been set up between the various levels of government to reach Canada's stabilization goal.
3.91 We believe that undefined and diffused accountability erodes the authority and responsibility of the federal, provincial and territorial governments and their officials and makes it difficult for anyone to measure their respective performance. It also means that accountability for Canada's progress toward its stabilization goal is obscured. Nevertheless, in our opinion the federal government remains accountable to Parliament for establishing an effective management structure to respond to climate change.
7 Establishment of clear contributions (expected of the various parties) designed to achieve the overall goal - No progress
3.93 The federal government, working with other levels of government and major stakeholders, should make a concerted effort to develop an effective management structure to respond to climate change.
3.94 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.
3.98 Canada's Second National Report on Climate Change (1997) noted that surveys consistently show a lack of awareness about what individuals can do to help reduce the levels of greenhouse gas emissions produced by Canada. We also found in interviews with a wide variety of stakeholders that virtually all of them strongly agree on the need to increase public awareness and education.
3.99 Government documents and our interviews with stakeholders identified several reasons why a public awareness and education program is needed. These include the need to:
3.102 In addition to those efforts, we noted that a number of other initiatives have been proposed. For example:
3.104 Canada's Second National Report (1997) identified several individual initiatives and stated that they are in keeping with Canada's commitment to develop a national communication program on climate change. However, despite the many individual efforts to inform and educate the public, we found that to date there has been inadequate national leadership and co-ordination of these efforts. Over the last seven years Canada has, in our opinion, lost an opportunity to increase public awareness and education on climate change, to prepare the public for a national debate on policy options and to ensure that Canadians support policies designed to meet the challenges presented by climate change.
8 National communication initiative for public awareness and education delivered - No progress
3.106 The federal government should then take a key role in co-ordinating the implementation of a national public awareness and education program on climate change, in conjunction with other levels of government and major stakeholders where necessary.
3.108 However, at this time the federal government has ruled out one of the many possible types of taxation-a carbon tax on fossil fuels-as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. To date, it has chosen to employ only a limited number of policy measures and has favoured voluntary approaches. Also, given recent fiscal restraints, fewer resources have been available for major grant and contribution programs. In addition, in recent times the government has generally been reluctant to make extensive use of regulations as a major policy tool.
3.109 Efforts to develop new measures to meet Canada's stabilization goal have, for the most part, been based on consensus among all levels of government. Mechanisms have been set up between the federal government and the provincial and territorial governments (see Appendix B) , and within the federal government, to co-ordinate national action on climate change and to develop new options to meet the current commitment. Various consultation mechanisms have also been set up over time to involve municipalities and other stakeholders in the decision-making process and to help identify solutions.
3.110 There is a long-recognized need to develop new options. As illustrated in Exhibit 3.3 , the federal government has long recognized the need to develop new options and measures to meet the stabilization goal.
3.111 Since 1993, the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of energy and the environment, at their annual Joint Ministers Meeting, have repeatedly called for their officials to develop new options and measures to meet the stabilization goal. Moreover, these ministers agreed in November 1997 that Canada's response to climate change needs to be based on a clear understanding of the implications of any package of measures-their environmental and economic impacts, costs and benefits.
3.112 Work has been done in Canada on identifying various options that could be used to respond to climate change. Different economic models have been used to examine the effects of implementing some of these. These models forecast the potential costs of some of these options, with a wide range of results. While providing an important source of information, these models are only one input into the selection of options.
3.113 In summary, notwithstanding the federal-provincial/territorial co-ordinating framework and the work done on various options, no agreement has been reached on a broad portfolio of measures designed to achieve Canada's stabilization goal. The challenge is not to find the best set of measures today that will deal with climate change over the next century. Rather, it is to select a prudent strategy supported by a broad portfolio of measures, begin moving in the right direction and adjust the strategy and measures over time in the light of new information. The federal position is that the policy measures currently employed to address climate change will not achieve Canada's stabilization goal on their own; that is, the current approach with its heavy emphasis on voluntary measures is not sufficient to deal with the problem.
9 A broad portfolio of measures developed - Some progress
10 Interjurisdictional agreement on measures designed to achieve the goal - No progress
3.115 The current federal position is that all Canadians will incur costs to respond to climate change but they will also incur costs if Canada and the global community do not take action. The NAPCC recognized the need to comprehensively assess the costs-the environmental, economic and social consequences-of not taking action to address climate change. Yet a 1996 review of the NAPCC reported that little or no work was under way in Canada to assess the economic implications of inaction.
3.116 In our opinion, governments need additional information on the costs and benefits of inaction as well as the costs and benefits of action - both in qualitative terms and, where cost-effective and feasible, in quantitative terms. Such information is needed at regional, sectoral and individual levels and is required to make a sound cost/benefit decision on a portfolio of measures to address climate change. This information, an essential element for policy development and decision making, has not yet been fully developed and consequently cannot be communicated to Canadians.
3.117 The Canada Country Study (1997), prepared by Environment Canada in conjunction with stakeholders, represents the first national assessment of potential socio-economic and environmental impacts of climate change on Canada. While it does not quantify the potential costs to Canada of inaction, it does point out that a great deal of work remains to be done before the costs can be estimated.
11 Costs and benefits of action and inaction analyzed - Some progress
3.119 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.
3.120 The federal government should increase its efforts to develop a federal portfolio of measures to help meet Canada's climate change commitments, in consultation with other levels of government and major stakeholders.
3.121 The federal government, in conjunction with the other levels of government and major stakeholders, should make a concerted effort to obtain agreement on a broad national portfolio of measures designed to meet Canada's climate change commitments.
3.123 As already noted, the NAPCC itself is silent on how its strategic direction is to be implemented. Further, no agreements have been reached between federal and provincial or territorial governments or among federal entities on how a plan will be developed or progress monitored.
3.124 While all Canadians have a role in implementing the NAPCC, we found that nobody has been assigned overall responsibility for ensuring that Canada has a workable plan designed to meet the stabilization goal.
3.125 The 1996 review of the NAPCC found that, for some actions, no responsible decision makers had been identified or no action taken by any jurisdiction. Work done as part of the review also found that the NAPCC does not encompass all of the actions that are being undertaken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
3.126 Our own examination of the NAPCC found that the strategic direction for mitigation activities in four sectors (transportation, industry, residential and commercial, and agriculture and forestry) indicated that "Canada" would undertake certain actions. In our opinion, a plan is needed that indicates who specifically will undertake each of those actions.
3.127 However, we found no written plan to implement the strategic direction of the NAPCC. Furthermore, the fact that the list of actions under the NAPCC is not comprehensive makes it difficult to know who is working on other actions and what the actions are designed to accomplish.
12 National implementation plan developed - No progress
3.129 The 1996 review of the NAPCC found that performance expectations in the form of measurable results to be achieved had been developed for only a few of the individual actions under way. We believe that more work needs to be done in this area.
13 Clear performance expectations established for individual actions - Some progress
14 Implementation milestones and interim targets identified -
No progress
3.132 The 1996 review of the NAPCC identified a total of 475 actions (policies and programs or measures) by various levels of government. It noted that while the actions may not achieve short-term reductions in emissions, they may nevertheless be significant for other purposes, such as setting the basis for future action.
3.133 In November 1995, the federal government issued its Federal Action Program on Climate Change: Leading the Way Forward. It sets out the Government of Canada's agenda and concrete actions planned in pursuit of its long-term commitment to address climate change under the NAPCC, including leading by example by getting its own house in order. The Federal Action Program pertains only to federal departments and agencies.
3.134 At the same time, the federal government submitted its plan (Emission Reductions from Federal Operations) to the VCR Program. The expected contribution has been established only for federal operations as a whole and not for individual entities. The expected federal contribution is to surpass the stabilization goal for its operations by the year 2000 and to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by at least 20 percent by the year 2005.
3.135 In its October 1997 progress report to the VCR Program, it estimated that through various actions, and taking into account the effects of downsizing, total federal greenhouse gas emissions decreased by about 8 percent during the period 1990 to 1996. It also projected that its total emissions would be 18 percent lower in 2000 than in 1990, and 27 percent lower in 2005. While it is important for the federal government to set an example, its operations account for less than one percent of Canada's total greenhouse gas emissions.
3.136 The plan the federal government submitted to the VCR Program indicated that federal Crown corporations are excluded, noting that they are responsible for submitting their own action plans. Departmental officials have informed us that as of 1 January 1998, no federal Crown corporations are included in the VCR Program registry. If the federal government is to provide national leadership by example, we would expect to see broader participation in the VCR Program by federal Crown corporations. It was beyond the scope of this audit to determine whether Crown corporations have action plans in place to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.
3.137 In our opinion, while many actions are being undertaken under the NAPCC, what matters is the results of the actions and whether the results will be sufficient to reach Canada's stabilization goal.
15 Actions undertaken to achieve the goal - Some progress
3.139 The 1996 review of the NAPCC assessed the performance information for another of its key elements, the VCR Program. The 1996 review stated that the VCR Program had so far focussed on increasing participation and not on results expected or results achieved from action on the submitted plans. It noted that only about half of the action plans had quantified their achievements to date.
3.140 The 1996 review noted that the nature of the information provided on each NAPCC action makes it impossible in most cases to determine the quantitative impact of the action, but there was some qualitative information to indicate progress. Canada's Second National Report (1997) provided an overview of some of the actions being taken by all levels of government. For most of the individual actions, no information was provided on the results expected by the year 2000 or achieved to date. However, the report does provide limited aggregate information on expectations and achievements on a sector basis. In our view, additional qualitative information as well as quantitative information, where cost-effective and feasible to gather, would help decision makers judge whether the actions are succeeding and to what extent they can be relied upon to contribute to Canada's stabilization goal.
16 Results-based information on performance made available to decision makers - Some progress
3.142 The NAPCC states that the ultimate indicator of progress will be the overall reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that the Program achieves, as demonstrated by the national greenhouse gas inventory. It also says that other broad-based socio-economic or environmental indicators of progress will be considered to ensure that Canada remains on track with the strategic directions established.
3.143 As part of the 1996 review of the NAPCC, work was done to identify potential indicators related to climate change from data that were currently available. Information presented in the review included number of households, commercial floor area, gross output of industry and vehicle kilometres travelled. Two other reports provide information on potential indicators related to greenhouse gas emissions and energy use - Trends in Canada's Greenhouse Gas Emissions, prepared by Environment Canada, and Energy Efficiency Trends in Canada Report, prepared by NRCan.
3.144 In our opinion, the existence of a variety of performance indicators in a number of documents does not constitute a national consensus on the standard set of broad-based socio-economic or environmental performance indicators that could be used by Canada to assess its overall progress.
17 Development of broad-based performance indicators to be used to measure progress - Some progress
3.146 Although the NAPCC stipulates that action plans are to be verifiable, it is silent on the regime to be put in place to measure and monitor results. The National Air Issues Co-ordinating Committee was given responsibility for undertaking formal reviews of the NAPCC every two years. These reviews are intended to inform stakeholders and policy makers of progress being made toward Canada's stabilization goal and to identify opportunities for further actions. The 1996 review of the NAPCC was its first review.
3.147 Some indicators of progress are reported in the two reports on trends referred to in paragraph 3.143, and also through the VCR Program. However, the 1996 review found that there was no procedure for regular and uniform reporting on all individual actions under the NAPCC. Work done as part of that review indicated that such a reporting procedure is essential for measuring progress and would lay a solid foundation for informed decision making and future evaluations.
3.148 The review concluded that while governments are building on previous initiatives and identifying new opportunities for action, there is little evidence of a systematic approach to sharing experience among jurisdictions on the benefits of individual measures. The review found that the NAPCC's overall effectiveness, as well as the usefulness of efforts to review it, are compromised by inadequate program co-ordination. Although the review recommended changes to the program's co-ordinating mechanism, we found no evidence of any such changes.
3.149 A review of the progress reports on action plans submitted to the VCR Program is being undertaken by NRCan.
3.150 In our opinion, the burden of proof is on the federal government, as national leader, to demonstrate that progress is being made as a result of the NAPCC, to assess what is working and what is not, to promote the sharing of lessons learned, and to encourage timely corrections as necessary. The current activity-based and informal performance monitoring does not achieve this.
18 Performance monitored for results at regular intervals - Some progress
3.152 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.
3.154 The Auditor General's 1994 Report chapter on information for Parliament stated that in any group of activities defined by the government as a sectoral activity and carried out by more than one department or agency, one department has to be given the lead responsibility to provide a summary-level report to Parliament on the activity overall. We would expect that a consolidated summary-level report on the progress being made on Canada's national response to climate change, including references to additional information, would be tabled in Parliament.
3.155 As we have already noted, there is no written agreement on the specific roles and responsibilities of federal players for reporting to Parliament on the climate change sectoral activity, including the lead role to consolidate the information.
3.157 These reports contain several references to various federal initiatives related to climate change and provide general information on them. They also contain some cross-references to climate change matters in other documents, some of which have been tabled in Parliament.
3.158 We noted that although the amount of information to Parliament on the climate change issue has increased over the last few years, it has been reported in isolated segments scattered throughout several documents. In our view, this fragmented and piecemeal reporting makes it difficult for Parliament to oversee the climate change sectoral activity.
3.159 There are numerous other documents that provide general information on climate change and information on Canada's related initiatives. These documents are not tabled in Parliament but are in the public domain. We have already referred to several of them in this chapter. Four of the most significant are the National Action Program on Climate Change (NAPCC), the 1996 review of the NAPCC and Canada's 1994 and 1997 National Reports on Climate Change - Actions to Meet Commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change .
3.161 In our opinion, this lack of consolidated summary-level reporting to Parliament could hinder its ability to provide effective oversight of Canada's response to climate change.
19 Summary-level reports tabled in Parliament - No progress
3.164 Our assessment of the federal government's management of the implementation of Canada's domestic policy commitment on climate change has been provided throughout the chapter as well as in the exhibit in the Executive Summary . Overall, we found that the federal government has not applied sound management principles. The result is an implementation gap, with Canada's performance falling far short of its long-standing domestic policy commitment. This gap reflects the failure to translate policy direction into effective action. The federal government's leadership role in the climate change issue has not been clearly defined, and appears to be largely a passive one.
3.165 In our opinion, if Canada is to meet its climate change commitments, strong federal leadership is required to build upon the strategic direction of the NAPCC. The federal government has a responsibility to lead the nation in developing a realistic, broad-based and cost-effective response to climate change that minimizes any negative impact and maximizes any positive impact on Canada's economy and international competitiveness.
3.166 We noted that the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of energy and the environment agreed, in November 1997, to work collaboratively to develop a national implementation plan following the December 1997 Kyoto Conference on climate change. Since then, the federal government has agreed to take the lead in developing such a plan.
3.167 In this chapter, we have made a number of recommendations based on our examination of Canada's attempts to reach its stabilization goal. These recommendations are also relevant to meeting any new climate change commitments that Canada may set, and thus can serve as lessons learned for the future.
3.169 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.
3.170 In our opinion, the federal government needs to develop a more appropriate and comprehensive process for providing federal leadership and management of climate change, a horizontal issue that falls into an area of shared jurisdiction and shared accountability.
3.171 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.
3.172 In future work, our Office will continue to identify factors and principles that support accountable management and effective accountability relationships in federal partnering arrangements on issues that cut across departmental mandates and political issues.
The quantitative information in this chapter has been drawn from the various government sources indicated in the text. Although this quantitative information has been checked for reasonableness, it has not been audited unless otherwise indicated.
As a result of this and of other audit work, a number of potential issues related to climate change were identified, not all of which could be dealt with in this first audit. We expect to conduct future climate change work in such areas as auditing the management of the science of climate change and assessing whether there is a level playing field between fossil fuels and other forms of energy. Other potential issues for audit work include implementation of Canada's adaptation strategy, federal leadership related to alternative sources of energy and assessing the extent to which the federal government has its own house in order in responding to climate change.
Ian Campbell
Stephanie Taylor
Marie Williams
For information, please contact Ellen Shillabeer or Robert Pelland.