Why hasn't Canada hit its climate targets? 'Because we never tried,' says environment minister

As It Happens6:36Environment minister says cap-and-trade plan will reduce oil and gas pollution without limiting production

Canada hasn't historically "stepped up to the plate" when it comes to reducing carbon emissions, says Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault. But that, he says, is changing.

The Liberal government announced a proposed planon Thursday to reducecarbon emissions in the oil and gas sector. It would cap 2030 emissions at 35 to 38 per cent below 2019 levels, in order to reach the government's goal of reducing emissions in the sector to net zero by 2050.

Oil and gas facilities would get an allowance for each tonne of carbon they emit, and those allowances will be reduced over time. Known as cap and trade, it means facilities either have to reduce their emissions, or buy allowances from other facilities that have already reduced theirs.

Guilbeault says this limits emissions without limiting production, all while protecting jobs. But not everyone agrees.

In reaction to the plan,Alberta Premier Danielle Smith called the minister an "eco-extremist" and accused him and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of "risking hundreds of billions of dollars in investment in Alberta's and Canada's economy and core social programs."

"They're devaluing the retirement investments of millions of Canadians, and they're threatening the jobs of hundreds of thousands of Albertans," she said.

Guilbeault spoke to As It Happens host Nil Kksal. Here is part of their conversation.

What do you say to Premier Smith, but also to people who are genuinely concerned about their jobs?

This reaction from the premier has no basis in reality. It's not based on fact. It's based on hyperbole. It's based on fear and fear mongering.

And she is the premier who has put in place a moratorium on the development of renewable energy in Alberta. She's putting at risk billions of dollars of investment in her province. Thousands of jobs are at risk because of what she's doing, and she's accusing me of this. It's quite fascinating.

There are others, though, who agree with her. [Saskatchewan Premier] Scott Moe is one of them. Others in the industry are concerned about this. But, specifically,Premier Smith also said in that statement that Alberta has its own strategy investments in emissions-reducing technology, she said today, practical emissions offsets, as she put it. So why is that not a sound strategy, in your view? Why is your plan better?

Because her plan is not aimed at reducing the overall pollution that we're seeing in Canada. And I think many, many Canadians, and the listeners of your show, want their government to show leadership when it comes to tackling pollution, and particularly climate change.

After the summer we've seen withrecord forest fires that have forced the evacuation of tens of thousands of Canadians record hurricanes on the East Coast of Canada, atmospheric rivers in British Columbia that have created havoc they want the government to intervene in a responsible manner. And that's exactly what we're doing.

Premier Smith says that Alberta is going to take your plan to court. Are you concerned that your plan might not survive that challenge?

I'm not.

Why?

In the 2021 Supreme Court case on carbon pricing, the Supreme Court was very clear that the federal government can and, in fact, should intervene when it comes to fighting climate change and fighting climate change pollution. And that's exactly what we're doing.

We're not going after the production of oil and gas in Canada; we're going after the pollution. And that's what we're putting in place a cap on pollution, and ...those levels of pollution will have to go down over time.

We've introduced in the regulation some flexibility mechanisms, because we understand that deploying the technology that is necessary in the oil and gas sector will take some time.

WATCH | Liberal ministers on cap-and-trade plan:

Federal ministers defend timing of emissions cap

9 months ago

Duration 2:29

Energy Minister Jonathan Wilkinson and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault say it takes time to come up with a cap framework and for the sector to reach certain targets.

Ensign Energy Services president Bob Geddes was quoted in the Calgary Herald saying a cap on production is the "biggest existential threat" to the sector. You're saying it's not a cap on production? They are saying it is. How can both things be true?

Because those comments are based on no analysis whatsoever.

We've provided analysis in the framework that we presented today that actually shows that production could increase by 2030 compared to 2019 levels, while the levels of pollution go down.

So I would like to see the evidence, I would like to see the data, I would like to see the studies that lead those people to say that it will result in reduction [of] production.

We know from the federal environmental commissioner [Jerry DeMarco] that Canada has never met any of the emission reduction goals it has set since 1990. We are the only G7 country whose emissions are now higher than they were in 1990. And Mr. DeMarco said last month that your government is not on track to meet its 2030 goal right now. So why should Canadians have confidence that it's actually going to work?

We've never met any targets because we never tried, because we've never deployed the necessary efforts and legislation and regulation and investment to do that.

So it is true that, historically, we haven't stepped up to the plate. That is changing. But we will only be able to achieve our targets if we continue working on it. Because we're not there yet, and there's much more work that is needed.

And, unfortunately, none of this will be possible under a government led by Pierre Polievre, because he doesn't believe that climate change is an issue, and he doesn't believe we should do anything.

Just back to a question I asked earlier, what do you say to people who are concerned about their jobs?

The only future for the oil and gas sector in Canada is a sector where we invest in decarbonization. Because the world will still be using oil in 2050, but far less than we are now. And if we don't invest, then the level of pollution of the oil and gas we produce will simply have no takers on markets. People will want to buy oil that is low-emitting or almost zero-emitting in 2050.

What we're doing is, in fact, ensuring that workers and communities still have a place in this economy of the 21st century, and are not outpaced by other cleaner producers of oil in the world.