Environment and Sustainable Development

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.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss the Environment Minister's mandate and review additional spending plans for 2025-2026. Minister Julie Dabrusin highlighted the government's climate competitiveness strategy, emphasizing both environmental responsibility and economic opportunities in the shift to a low-carbon economy. She pointed to investments in clean energy projects, like the Iqaluit hydroelectric project, and international collaborations to combat climate change. Committee members questioned the Minister on various topics, including a proposed carbon tax on shipping, the feasibility of emissions reduction targets, and the government's approach to electric vehicle mandates. Conservative members pressed the Minister on the potential costs of climate policies for Canadians and challenged the government's ability to meet its emissions reduction goals. They questioned the consistency of the government's climate policies, citing delays and revisions to key initiatives. Liberal members focused on the economic benefits of climate action, the importance of consistent policies, and the role of impact assessments in protecting the environment and Indigenous rights. They also inquired about job creation in the clean economy and the government's efforts to support a transition to low-carbon energy. Bloc Québécois members questioned the Minister about a proposed new oil pipeline from Alberta and its potential impact on greenhouse gas emissions. They challenged the Minister on whether she agreed with previous Environment Minister Guilbeault's assessment that Canada would not meet its 2030 emissions targets. The committee also discussed the implementation of the National Strategy Respecting Environmental Racism and Environmental Justice Act, focusing on addressing disproportionate environmental impacts on marginalized communities. Officials from Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) and the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) provided additional information on various topics, including chemical management, impact assessments, and international climate finance. Committee members voted to approve the supplementary spending estimates on division, indicating disagreement among members. Next steps include the tabling of the emissions reduction plan progress report, and further work with Alberta to determine a path forward on emissions reductions.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss the electric vehicle (EV) availability standard. Witnesses from the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association, the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, and the Macdonald-Laurier Institute shared their perspectives. The general consensus was that the current EV mandate is unrealistic and potentially harmful to the Canadian auto industry and consumers. They suggested suspending or repealing the mandate, focusing on building charging infrastructure, and taking a technology-neutral approach to emissions reduction. They argued the mandate could raise costs for consumers, especially in rural areas, and that current regulations already reduce emissions effectively. Tim Reuss and Charles Bernard from the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association highlighted that the mandated pace of EV adoption doesn't match consumer demand or logistical realities. They proposed suspending the EV mandate, revising targets to align with consumer preferences, including all hybrid vehicles in targets, and preventing companies without a significant Canadian footprint from profiting from credit sales. Brian Kingston from the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association emphasized the industry's commitment to electrification but argued that the EV mandate is unachievable and duplicates existing greenhouse gas emission standards. He recommended repealing the mandate and focusing on incentives and infrastructure development. Jerome Gessaroli from the Macdonald-Laurier Institute raised concerns about the uneven costs of the EV transition for lower-income households and rural communities. During the meeting, committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of the EV mandate, including its impact on consumer choice, affordability, and the competitiveness of the Canadian auto industry. There was discussion about the potential for the mandate to drive up vehicle prices and limit the availability of certain types of vehicles, particularly in rural areas. The committee also explored the role of government incentives and infrastructure investments in supporting EV adoption. A motion was introduced to request information from Tesla on the sale of compliance credits to Canadian corporations, aiming to clarify the financial implications of the EV mandate. The committee voted to request information from Tesla, Ford, Toyota, Honda, General Motors and Stellantis regarding the sale of compliance credits to Canadian corporations. The goal is to understand the financial impact of the EV mandate on the Canadian auto industry and whether Canadian companies are sending money to American automakers to comply with the regulations. The committee hopes to use this information to inform future policy decisions related to electric vehicle adoption and emissions reduction.

The Canadian parliamentary committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss the proposed law on electric vehicle (EV) availability. The main question was whether Canada should continue with its plan to require a certain percentage of all new car sales to be electric vehicles. Witnesses gave different opinions on the proposed law. Evan Wiseman from The Atmospheric Fund argued strongly in favor of the proposed law, saying it would have major health and economic benefits for Canadians, like cleaner air and fewer deaths. He said that delaying or weakening the law would cost Canadians billions of dollars. Cherith Sinasac from Electro-Federation Canada agreed, saying that the proposed law gives companies the certainty they need to invest in EV infrastructure and manufacturing in Canada. Blandine Sebileau from Équiterre pointed to Quebec's success with a similar law, which has led to high EV adoption rates. However, Carol Anstey, a committee member, raised concerns about how the proposed law would affect rural communities where EVs may not be practical. She said that people in her district can't afford the higher upfront costs of EVs and that there isn't enough charging infrastructure in rural areas. David Adams from Global Automakers of Canada suggested pausing the proposed law to allow time to develop realistic regulations. He argued that the current targets are not achievable and that the government should focus on incentives for consumers rather than mandates for manufacturers. Sébastien Côté from the Association des véhicules électriques du Québec said the proposed law ensures access to affordable EV models. Ultimately, the committee discussed a motion to invite the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development to discuss audit reports. Several amendments were proposed and voted on, with some passing. The committee agreed to invite the commissioner to appear to discuss reports from June and November 2025. No decisions were made about the EV availability standard itself, but the committee heard a range of perspectives that will likely inform future discussions.

The Environment and Sustainable Development committee met to discuss electric vehicle (EV) availability standards in Canada. The committee heard from several witnesses, including representatives from the Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council, Edison Motors, and Greenpeace Canada. Travis Allan from the Charging Infrastructure Council emphasized the importance of the proposed law in attracting investment for EV charging stations. Eric Little, CEO of Edison Motors, discussed the challenges his company faces with current regulations that prevent them from building hybrid trucks in Canada. Keith Stewart from Greenpeace Canada argued for a strong EV availability standard to reduce emissions and make EVs more affordable. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of EV adoption, including affordability, infrastructure, and the role of government regulation. Some members expressed concerns about the potential costs of transitioning to EVs, particularly for rural communities. Others emphasized the benefits of EVs in terms of reducing emissions and saving consumers money on fuel. There was discussion about the need for more education and awareness programs to address myths and misinformation about EVs. Edison Motors requested a simple amendment to CEPA regulations to allow them to use already certified diesel engines in their hybrid trucks. Greenpeace Canada recommended prioritizing a strong Canadian availability standard, keeping the 2030 and 2050 targets, and building in measures to make EVs more affordable. The committee also discussed a motion to study industrial carbon pricing, including Canada's Output Based Pricing System (OBPS). The committee agreed to limit the study to a maximum of four meetings and invite the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to appear within two weeks of an announcement regarding changes to the industrial carbon tax.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss the environmental assessment and expansion of the Port of Montreal's terminal in Contrecoeur. Witnesses included representatives from the Department of Natural Resources, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC), the Major Projects Office (MPO), and the Montreal Port Authority. The discussion focused on the project's impact on the copper redhorse, a species at risk, and the compensatory measures being taken to protect its habitat. Patricia Brady from the IAAC explained the agency's limited role in federal lands assessments, while Julie Gascon from the Montreal Port Authority highlighted the economic benefits of the expansion, including job creation and increased trade capacity. Dawn Farrell from the MPO discussed the office's role in structuring financing for the project. Committee members questioned the witnesses about the consultation process with First Nations, the effectiveness of the habitat compensation plan, and the regulatory streamlining efforts of the MPO. Several committee members raised concerns about the adequacy of public consultations regarding the habitat compensation plan, particularly the lack of public alerts and feedback. The Bloc Québécois proposed a motion to suspend work affecting the copper redhorse habitat to allow for proper public consultation, but the motion was defeated. The committee also discussed the financing of the project and the role of the MPO in facilitating it.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss the electric vehicle (EV) availability standard in Canada. The committee heard from several witnesses representing different perspectives on the proposed law. Joanna Kyriazis from Clean Energy Canada argued the EV standard is needed to lower costs for families and help Canadian industries. Daniel Breton from Electric Mobility Canada spoke about the benefits of EVs and addressed what he called 'fake news' about the proposed law. Doug Green, a car dealer from rural Alberta, shared his struggles selling EVs due to lack of demand and infrastructure in his area. He believes the government is pushing too hard, too fast. Committee members asked questions about the impact of the proposed law on consumers, the auto industry, and the environment. Carol Anstey, a Conservative member, focused on the challenges faced by rural dealerships and questioned whether Canadians want to be told what kind of vehicle to drive. Liberal members, such as Wade Grant, explored incentives to make EVs more affordable and the potential for job creation in the EV industry. Members also discussed the role of Chinese EVs in the Canadian market and the need for Canadian content requirements in the EV supply chain. Matthew Fortier from the Canadian ZEV Supply Chain Alliance suggested modifying the EV standard to include incentives for automakers to invest in Canadian manufacturing and critical mineral mining. Barry Penner from the Energy Futures Institute raised concerns about the declining EV market, the cost of electricity infrastructure, and the potential for social inequality. Merran Smith from New Economy Canada argued that the EV standard is crucial for modernizing Canada's auto sector and attracting investment. Overall, the committee members explored the pros and cons of the EV availability standard and considered potential changes to make it more effective and beneficial for Canada. The committee agreed to a motion to allow associate members to receive notices of meetings and motions and have access to digital binders until January 26, 2026.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development met to discuss the electric vehicle (EV) availability standard, a proposed law that aims to increase the number of EVs available to Canadians. Officials from the Department of the Environment, including Megan Nichols and Mark Cauchi, provided a technical briefing on the standard, explaining its purpose, how it works, and the current review underway. The standard sets annual EV sales requirements, starting at 20% in 2026 and increasing to 100% by 2035. The officials highlighted the environmental and health benefits of EVs, as well as potential cost savings for consumers. Committee members raised concerns about the impact of the standard on rural dealerships, the cost of compliance credits for manufacturers, and the need for more charging infrastructure. Carol Anstey (Conservative) questioned why the government was mandating EV sales instead of letting the market determine demand. Megan Nichols explained that the mandate was intended to ensure a sufficient supply of EVs and a wider range of choices for Canadians. Branden Leslie (Conservative) asked about the cost of compliance credits and who would bear those costs, suggesting it could be passed on to consumers. Shannon Miedema (Liberal) inquired about the scope of the current review of the EV availability standard and the risks of slowing down the transition to EVs. Mark Cauchi noted that the review is considering potential amendments to the sales targets and additional flexibilities for automakers. Patrick Bonin (Bloc Québécois) pointed out what he sees as misinformation about the standard, such as the claim that it imposes a $20,000 tax on automakers. After the witness testimony, the committee discussed future business. Shannon Miedema (Liberal) put forward a motion to invite the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to appear before the committee to discuss her mandate and priorities, which was agreed to. Patrick Bonin (Bloc Québécois) moved a motion to invite officials from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the Montreal Port Authority to discuss environmental assessments related to the Port of Montreal's expansion project, which was also agreed to after amendments. The committee also discussed the upcoming report on the emissions reduction plan study.