Honourable senators, I rise today to speak on Bill C-12, the “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act.”

I was initially excited when I saw this bill. What a change of pace, I thought, to actually receive a bill from the Trudeau government with the words “Accountability Act” in the title. My hopes were soon dashed, though, as it’s just more smoke and mirrors — fake accountability from an insincere government.

My Conservative caucus colleague MP Dan Albas aptly calls Bill C-12 the “Seinfeld” bill because it is about nothing. It is a bill of empty environmental promises, as he puts it, “largely devoid of details or costs.” Maybe the Trudeau government has taken guidance from Seinfeld’s George Costanza, who says, “Jerry, just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it!”

This Liberal government has a legacy of broken environmental promises. It keeps setting targets and failing to meet them, opting instead for performative politics. We’ve seen that play out in this very bill. Bill C-12 requires that the minister set emission targets for the milestone years of 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2045 to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by the year 2050.

When the Green Party proposed the creation of an additional milestone year of 2025, the Liberals made a deal with the NDP to instead pass an amendment to create only a progress check-in objective in 2026 — not even an accountable target.

Of course, what does that 2026 date also allow the Liberals to do? It lets them dodge accountability for failing to hit their environmental targets, not only in this pending election cycle, but in the next election cycle as well. The Liberals are so committed to dodging accountability, they’re now planning it years in advance. How about that? For the first time ever, I can actually say the Trudeau Liberals are overachievers. But my biggest problem with Bill C-12 is that, once again, it continues the Trudeau Liberal government’s legacy of sticking it to Western Canada. As the lone official opposition senator in Saskatchewan and Alberta, I refuse to let this bill sail through this Senate Chamber without voicing my region’s significant concerns.

The West has struggled greatly under Trudeau government policies punitive to our energy sector. The Liberal government’s infamous Bill C-69, the aptly nicknamed “no more pipelines bill,” established criteria for energy project impact assessments that had the practical consequence of stifling oil and gas investment in the West. Bill C-48, the tanker ban bill that banned oil tanker traffic only on the West Coast, effectively cut off new exports for Western Canada’s energy products.

The Trudeau government’s carbon tax has also had a detrimental impact on the West. It has driven up the cost of everything for everyone, from gas to groceries to home heating. The carbon tax hits farmers particularly hard. It costs them more to produce, because it is more expensive to dry grain and transport their agricultural products to market. Meanwhile, increased trucking prices also mean higher prices for consumer products, and farmers are squeezed at both ends.

In the 2019 federal election, the Liberals promised a cap on the carbon tax of $50 per tonne in the year 2022. Even as recently as February 2020, Senator Gold, as the Government Leader in the Senate, repeated that promise in this chamber. But, lo and behold, by last December, just after the House of Commons had adjourned for the Christmas break, the Trudeau Liberals announced they would, in fact, dramatically increase the carbon tax by a whopping 240%, to $170 per tonne in the year 2030. This is yet one more major broken promise from the Trudeau government.

The ways in which this government has failed the West are legion. A new Liberal fuel standard will mean yet another additional cost for consumers and a competitive disadvantage for Western Canadian energy producers — as though the huge carbon tax wasn’t punishment enough. The Trudeau government’s indecision, mismanagement and failure to support new pipeline infrastructure and development, combined with policies of regulatory uncertainty that contributed to a hostile investment environment, resulted in the loss of one pipeline project after another, each one cutting off yet one more potential export route. With each failure, more Western Canadians lose their jobs and our communities suffer.

As the West suffers, so does Canada. The oil and gas sector is the number one private sector employer in the entire country. It produces Canada’s number one export. Our fortunes are tied together, honourable senators. While we all share a common vision to work toward a clean environment and sustainable development for future generations, we cannot do that by sacrificing the economic well-being of an entire region of our country.

I want to address the creation of the Net-Zero Advisory Body contained in Bill C-12; a body to which, incredibly, the Trudeau government had the arrogance to appoint people in February, four months before the bill establishing it had even passed the House of Commons, much less the Senate. Frankly, I’m shocked to see that the Leader of the Government in the Senate couldn’t even be bothered to give a speech on this bill today, because I think he has some explaining to do about that.

Bill C-12 says:

The Governor in Council appoints the members of the advisory body on the recommendation of the Minister and fixes their remuneration.

But the members of the Net-Zero Advisory Body were appointed by the minister in February, and there seems to be no order-in-council establishing the board. Certainly, as we stand here today, the bill has not even passed into law. Now we see that one of the Trudeau government’s new Senate appointees, Hassan Yussuff, was named to the Net-Zero Advisory Body four months ago. He’s still listed as an advisory body member and now he has also been appointed to this chamber.

What I would have liked to ask Senator Gold is: How much was Senator Yussuff getting paid as a member of this Net-Zero Advisory Body? Is he still getting paid for serving on that body while also being paid as a senator? How many federally appointed positions can Senator Yussuff hold at once? And under what authority did this advisory body get established in the first place? I would hope he knows these answers without needing to inquire.

In any case, the current membership of the Net-Zero Advisory Body lays bare a couple of the Trudeau government’s blind spots for Western interests in relation to environmental concerns; namely, those of the energy and agricultural sectors. It is obvious from the composition of this body that neither of these sectors were high on the government’s priority list for representation in the board’s membership. While there are only a few members with energy sector experience, none of the sitting board members come from the agricultural sector. That is shocking given that agriculture is an industry that can serve as a potential carbon sink. To meet the targets the federal government aspires to, it is crucial that the government hears the input of large-scale Canadian farmers — like those in Saskatchewan and Alberta — who are at the forefront of innovative and world-class agricultural techniques for carbon sequestration.

As witness and Saskatchewan farmer Corey Loessin testified before the House of Commons Environment Committee:

We need to have agricultural representation on the advisory panel to show how things are evolving and what can happen into the future specifically with respect to soil sequestration and how that will enable the country to meet its targets.

Quite frankly, the country can’t meet its targets without agriculture, and that’s just the reality of the situation. Why not have those involved who are actually doing it and find ways to perhaps do it better? The reality is that the country can’t meet the targets without agriculture’s being involved, so why not have them involved at the decision-making level and at the advisory level?

It would also be helpful to have representatives on the advisory board who could speak to the practicality of the government’s environmental targets in a rural, remote or agricultural area, for example. They could bring a certain experience and pragmatism that may be missing on an advisory board filled with members selected, as usual, from big cities. The realities in rural Canada are very different. In Alberta and Saskatchewan, for example, many smaller cities, towns and villages have no public transit. With recent changes at Greyhound and other bus services, many communities in the West are also no longer served by passenger buses. Given the inclement weather of a bitter Saskatchewan winter, for example, or the unforgiving terrain of northern Saskatchewan, year-round bicycle commuting is not only impractical, but obviously unsafe. Furthermore, sheer distances and cost can make reliance on electric vehicles or equipment unrealistic.

As I mentioned earlier, not many of the members of the Net‑Zero Advisory Body have energy sector experience. It is worth noting that many oil and gas companies have already committed to work toward a goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The federal government should be partnering with them and using world-class technology developed in Canada to find innovative ways to reduce emissions. In fact, much of that technology has been developed in my home province of Saskatchewan. My province is on the cutting edge of technologies in no-till farming, uranium development, land use management and carbon capture utilization and storage. In fact, we boast one of the few large carbon capture projects in the world, the Boundary Dam Carbon Capture Project in Estevan.

This project is dear to my heart. Not only did I live in Estevan for a few years, as it was my late husband Dave’s hometown, but the Boundary Dam Carbon Capture Project was originally funded by the Harper Conservative government in 2008. When Dave was a Conservative Member of Parliament from Saskatchewan, he accompanied former Prime Minister Harper to the formal announcement of $240 million in funding for this world-class clean coal project. It was one of the last trips Dave made as an MP before he got very sick and retired later that year. To remember that today has a special poignancy for me, because tomorrow is the anniversary of Dave’s tragic death, on June 29, 2009. But if he were here, I know he would be proudly standing up for Saskatchewan’s interests just as strongly as I am.

The people of Saskatchewan have a lot of knowledge and wisdom to offer the federal government about being good stewards of the land and finding solutions to climate change. The only question is: Is the Trudeau government listening? Unfortunately, we haven’t seen any evidence that it is. Not one minister at the cabinet table stands up for Saskatchewan or Alberta, and it’s reflected in the Trudeau government’s policies that too often harm Westerners. In fact, the ministers around the table don’t seem to know or care much at all about life outside the Laurentian triangle of Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa.

Instead, all the Trudeau Liberals offer up is lots of talk and no action. Former Finance Minister Bill Morneau promised aid to the oil and gas sector at the start of the COVID pandemic. He sat right in this very chamber and promised us that help would be coming within days. Those words seemingly evaporated into thin air, and no help came.

This government’s environmental policy has also been an endless jumble of empty promises. Their climate goals bounce from year to year, from percentage to percentage. Bill C-12 is just one more example. Juggling numbers and shifting targets, objectives and years are more ways for Prime Minister Trudeau to do the very thing he does best: avoid taking responsibility for his actions; confuse people into thinking you’re taking action; conjure up pretty words, talk about lofty goals and shove off accountability until after the next campaign, maybe even beyond, until, hopefully, it’s someone else’s problem when the deliverables are due.

In the meantime, of course, all of the confusion creates massive uncertainty for businesses, economic investment and our export markets.

But fixing the problem was never the intent; being seen to be concerned about it was. As always with Prime Minister Trudeau, only the virtue signal matters. You can tell that net-zero emissions aren’t really a priority for this government by the very way they have handled Bill C-12 in Parliament. They promised net zero in the 2019 election campaign, but this bill — essentially a plan to have a plan — wasn’t even introduced until last fall, and even then, it wasn’t called forward for further debate for months.

It is telling that Bill C-12 wasn’t even called for report-stage debate until June 22, a full week after MPs’ farewell speeches in the House of Commons. No sooner was the bill back in the House than the Trudeau government started ramming it through, invoking time allocation to shut down substantial debate and force it through before an election.

Prime Minister Trudeau is relying on the fact that he has now appointed a majority of senators to treat our Senate Chamber like a rubber stamp. He expects that the bills his government forces through the House of Commons at the very last minute will also be shoved through the Senate according to his whim. That is not how a reasonable government should be treating this equal and complementary chamber of Parliament. I call upon you, honourable senators, to not let yourselves and your votes be taken for granted.

To my fellow senators from the West, particularly from the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, please ask yourselves the following: Will this bill do anything to help my region? Are these the kinds of climate solutions the people of my province need? Does this bill take their interests into account? Will it capitalize on the West’s industrial and technical innovation, our farmers’ and Indigenous people’s knowledge of the land, our commitment to conservation and our pioneering spirit, or are these just more empty Liberal promises that will evaporate in a trail of hot air after the looming election?

I certainly know how the people of Saskatchewan view this bill and the Trudeau government’s continued insincere commitments. That’s why I hope you will join me in voting against Bill C-12.

Thank you.

Honourable senators, I am pleased to support Bill C-12, the “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act.”

We all know why we need to address climate change, and knowing the “why,” it’s now time to turn to the “how.” Bill C-12 will require the country to figure out the “how,” formulating and following an emissions plan aimed at the key dates of 2030 and 2050, a blueprint for the accountability of our national leaders.

Debating the bill’s principle, I submit three thoughts for your consideration as to how we as a country deal with climate change: first, Indigenous leadership and traditional knowledge around environmental protection; second, the need to consider regional and community differences, and available options in government planning; and third, the need for massive investment in green jobs in Western Canada.

On the first point, Bill C-15 received Royal Assent last week, meaning that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples will become national law through changes to federal statutes. This shift will require further legal recognition of Indigenous jurisdictions and self-governance in Canada, breathing life into section 35 constitutional rights, including treaties. This shift will encourage similar measures in other countries.

With Indigenous peoples’ inherent rights now recognized in Canada, the country has unlocked huge opportunities for Indigenous leadership to contribute to both environmental protection, and sustainable development and resiliency. Indigenous nations and ideas can positively influence Canada’s laws of general application, as well as bring responsible decision making to managing ancestral lands and waters.

The preamble of Bill C-15 states:

. . . the Declaration can contribute to supporting sustainable development and responding to growing concerns relating to climate change and its impacts on Indigenous peoples . . . .

Senators, Indigenous peoples around the world have generations of values and traditional knowledge based upon environmental respect and stewardship, values and knowledge that can benefit all societies, practically and spiritually. Important aspects of reconciliation will involve sharing and learning Indigenous knowledge and laws, and interpreting ancient wisdom into modern policies and practices.

This is a practical example of reconciliation where all Canadians can benefit from the traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples and Western science combined to help shape our nation’s plan to address climate change.

We have heard Indigenous values about nature referenced in this chamber by our colleagues. Examples include Senators Francis and Christmas discussing the Mi’kmaq principle of Netukulimk around fisheries management, and Senators McCallum and Boyer speaking on the concept of “all my relations” in debates on animal cruelty. Indeed, the preamble of Bill S-218, the “Jane Goodall Act”, would acknowledge the concept of “All My Relations” in federal law.

As the current sponsor of that important animal-protection bill based in Indigenous values, I look forward to our productive deliberations and debate in the fall, and to sharing updates from work under way.

As a legislator, I view reconciliation and environmental stewardship as being inextricably linked. From that viewpoint, Bill C-12 is an important advancement in reconciliation — or it has that potential.

As the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s report states:

Reconciliation between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians, from an Aboriginal perspective, also requires reconciliation with the natural world. . . .

. . . Indigenous laws stress that humans must journey through life in conversation and negotiation with all creation. Reciprocity and mutual respect help sustain our survival. . . .

In 2020, Mongabay, an environmental science publication, reported that Indigenous people currently manage or have tenure on 40% of the world’s protected areas and remaining intact ecosystems. With meaningful jurisdiction, you can imagine the difference that Indigenous leadership can make around the world in preserving biodiversity and critical ecosystems, and in mitigating the effects of climate change.

In Canada, many Indigenous people live in communities in remote areas. With generations of traditional knowledge around natural cycles and geography, these communities are best positioned to monitor and manage resources in collaboration with modern science.

Such systems of stewardship have increasingly become formalized, such as through the Guardians land and water management programs. Those programs have shown excellent returns on investment in terms of social benefits, as demonstrated by studies in the Northwest Territories and northern B.C. These programs can help to protect Canada’s natural carbon sinks, to restore areas impacted by logging and extractive activities, and to bolster the resilience of wildlife populations against climate change.

Here are a few examples of Indigenous-led conservation efforts that contribute to Canada’s environmental protection goals. In 2019, Thaidene Nëné came into existence as a 14,000‑square-kilometre national reserve park in the Northwest Territories, co-managed by the Lutsel K’e Dene First Nation and the Canadian government. Other examples include the 64,000‑square-kilometre Great Bear Rainforest in B.C.; the 29,000‑square-kilometre Pimachiowin Aki in Manitoba and Ontario, being the largest protected area in the North American boreal shield; and the 108,000-square-kilometre Tallurutiup Imanga National Marine Conservation Area in Nunavut.

Another interesting Indigenous environmental innovation has come through collaborative efforts in Quebec between the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit and the regional municipality of Minganie. This year, these jurisdictions collaborated to recognize the Magpie River as a legal person with nine legal rights, including the rights to flow, to maintain its biodiversity and to take legal action.

Bodies of water have also received legal rights in New Zealand, India, Bangladesh and Ohio. Bolivia and Ecuador have legally protected the rights of nature.

In thinking about Bill C-12, and Canada’s climate plan and environmental goals going forward, I would urge colleagues to contemplate that Indigenous leadership and jurisdictions will be huge advantages towards a mutually beneficial shared success.

My second point for your consideration today is to emphasize that the government should consider regional and local community differences and available options in formulating the climate plan. In this regard, I am encouraged by section 10(3) of Bill C-12, which provides that the plan can contain:

. . . information on initiatives or other measures undertaken by the governments of the provinces, Indigenous peoples of Canada, municipal governments or the private sector that may contribute to achieving the greenhouse gas emissions target.

To paraphrase, we need to pull out all the stops and consider all the measures available to us and double down on achieving our climate goals.

In Regina, Saskatchewan, in a 2018 survey report, local executives imagined an audacious vision for 2050. Respondents believe our city’s future economy will be driven by entrepreneurs and small business, with an increase in agri-value food processing and manufacturing sectors. Sustainable plant-based proteins represent one massive area of opportunity. Another area of economic focus and importance will be the information technology sector.

With climate goals in mind, the Regina of 2050 must be sustainable and resilient. In thinking about the transition to green energy sources, local executives saw entrepreneurs playing the most critical role. They viewed the keys to the clean energy transition as being the financial viability of green energy, the city’s ability to leverage its abundance of wind and solar energy, municipal leadership in green planning and construction, better education on the importance of renewables and better utilization of non-renewables in a more effective manner.

In approaching this part of the climate solution, with other jurisdictions and the private sector, the federal government should be sensitive to and prolific in building public acceptance in all parts of this country. The federal government needs to be mindful of the undeniable regional and community differences across this vast country and accept that one-size-fits-all solutions may not work. For example, some communities may fully electrify, while others may make progress with clean options like hydrogen, biogas and waste heat capture and usage.

The point here is that government needs to understand the importance of including and respecting people in all regions. This must be achieved by cooperative approaches, not top-down edicts. At the same time, all Canadians must acknowledge that climate change is a shared emergency, and all jurisdictions must contribute to a successful plan, as must the private sector.

In closing, the third point I submit for your consideration today is that the government should invest substantially in green jobs in Western Canada. On May 27, at the National Finance Committee I had the opportunity to raise this issue with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, the Honourable Chrystia Freeland.

I asked Minister Freeland about the language in the budget highlighting near-term potential to advance carbon capture, utilization and storage technologies in Alberta and Saskatchewan. I also raised the point that the Fall Economic Statement 2020 mentioned projects like zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, restoring natural carbon sinks like wetlands, green farming investments and small modular reactors, including interest from Saskatchewan.

Specifically, in terms of gaining public buy-in in the West on a climate plan, I asked Minister Freeland whether the government will need to demonstrate major creation of green jobs in the West and whether the minister views this as important to national unity.

I was pleased to hear Minister Freeland’s response to this priority, as she said:

Canada will only be successful in acting on climate change if we have a plan that involves the whole country and that creates great green jobs across the country, and also . . . a plan which recognizes the diversity of our country.

In this way — and thinking as a business person — all regions of Canada need to see the economic opportunity in addressing climate change. The public sector needs to be there to make major investments in green jobs in the West. I am confident that our energy sectors will prove versatile and adaptable in becoming leaders in green options, as well as in technology to mitigate emissions from oil and gas.

Climate change is a problem that needs to be solved. Innovations in green practices and technology are going to generate a lot of wealth, and I would like to see that prosperity occur in Saskatchewan and right across Canada from coast to coast to coast. I am confident that Canadian businesses can compete and lead in innovation on the global stage.

The Financial Post reported last week that jobs in Canada’s clean energy sector are forecast to grow 50% to reach 640,000 positions by 2030, according to a report from Clean Energy Canada at Simon Fraser University. This sector already employs over 430,000 people, and is projected to grow at roughly 4% annually over the next decade.

The clean energy sector’s gross domestic product is also projected to increase by 58% between 2020 and 2030, reaching roughly $100 billion by the end of the decade, and 29% of Canada’s GDP.

As senators, in the critical years ahead, we can all be voices for our regions in the growth of the green economy. If Canadians can prosper while making valued contributions to saving the planet, I would call that a win-win.

Bill C-12 will give not only the current federal government, but any government in the coming decades, the framework for an organized national climate plan. Success through such a plan will require commitment and determination at all levels of society.

As parliamentarians, we can play our part through scrutiny of government actions, the contribution of legislative and other policy ideas, and public advocacy towards greater climate action when it’s needed. When it comes to climate change, we are all part of the problem, and we must all be part of the solution.

Thank you. Hiy kitatamîhin.

Honourable senators, I rise today to speak with you from Antigonish, in the unceded territories of the Mi’kmaq people, in support of Bill C-12, An Act respecting transparency and accountability in Canada’s efforts to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2050.

Thank you to Senators Galvez and Klyne for your compelling speeches in support of this important bill, and thank you to Senator Batters for your cautionary remarks.

Introduced in the House of Commons on November 19, 2020, Bill C-12 requires the Government of Canada to set national targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and establishes a planning, reporting and assessment process with the aim of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

In Shawn McCarthy’s recent iPolitics article entitled, “Senators should pass the Liberals’ imperfect climate bill,” he doesn’t mince words:

After more than two decades of fecklessness, Canada is finally on the threshold of having a climate-change-accountability law that would impose some discipline on the federal government to ensure it has a real plan to meet its emission targets.

Colleagues, Mr. McCarthy is right. We truly are at a point of no return. Canada is very late in introducing this important bill, which requires the government to seek credible scientific help, make an ambitious and realistic plan, share the plan publicly, be held accountable for the plan and adjust along the way to ensure we meet targets that simply cannot be missed.

Bill C-12 outlines a long-term goal to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and establishes milestone years for interim targets. These are 2030, 2035, 2040 and 2045.

When setting the emissions targets, the minister must consider the best available scientific information and Canada’s commitments regarding climate change. The bill also includes sections on reporting, the advisory body, accountability to both houses of Parliament and the public, as well as a timeline.

Honourable senators, we know this legislation is urgently required because effective climate action in this decade — now — will be critical to our success in meeting our 2050 goal. Young people are demanding climate action and they remind us of the historic debt we owe to them. Climate activists, scientists, members of the Canadian public and environmental organizations have worked tirelessly to push the federal government to introduce a climate law that holds decision makers accountable for reducing emissions and puts Canada once and for all on the path to net zero by 2050, at the very latest.

Baroness Worthington of the U.K. House of Lords, principal author of the U.K. Climate Change Act 2008, reminded us last week that a good climate accountability law should be seen as a legal metronome, ensuring a steady pace and pulse of action towards meeting ambitious goals. Bill C-12 was lauded when it was introduced, but it was also criticized for falling short of meeting acceptable and expected standards.

Honourable senators, fortunately, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainability was able to significantly improve the bill with their amendments. Most of my remarks today will focus on those improvements.

The House of Commons committee passed 28 amendments. Most were introduced by NDP and Liberal members, and one was introduced by a member of the Bloc Québécois. These amendments have improved the legislation in a number of key ways. First, they improve the bill’s accountability mechanisms. Second, they increase the emphasis on the need to take early action. Third, they serve to strengthen the advisory body. And, finally, new wording has been added to ensure a more detailed engagement process with Indigenous peoples. These amendments do respond in large part to what the committee had heard from witnesses was needed to strengthen Bill C-12 and do provide a much better bill for us to consider here in the Senate of Canada. Bill C-12 also now includes a comprehensive parliamentary review of the act five years after coming into force by a committee of the Senate, a committee of the House or a joint committee.

Honourable colleagues, this could provide an opportunity for important engagement and oversight by our chamber. We know that ambitious long-term targets, supported by interim targets, are a key feature of climate accountability legislation. An amendment has been introduced to legislate the 2030 target, which will take effect immediately when the act comes into force. This will represent Canada’s latest Nationally Determined Contribution, or NDC, for 2030. It’s expected to be in the 40% to 45% range, Prime Minister Trudeau announced at the global leaders’ Earth Day summit. This target will be reviewed in 2025. Milestone targets will now be set for 10 years in advance, instead of 5, which will provide greater medium-term certainty for industry, the government and for others.

The first emission reduction plan for 2030 must now include a greenhouse gas emissions reduction objective for 2026, which will be subject to progress reports. In addition to the amendment to include Canada’s NDC as the 2030 target, several other amendments were made to ensure greater alignment with the Paris Agreement.

Now, colleagues, let’s look at planning and reporting. The obligation on the minister to prepare a plan for achieving the targets and to recalibrate the plan, if needed, is foundational in this legislation. In order to strengthen the planning and reporting contained in Bill C-12, several amendments were introduced. Canadian governments of every stripe have missed every climate target committed to since 1992 — those set at Rio, Kyoto, Copenhagen and Paris. Now, why is that? This is because governments were not compelled by law to have a plan that they were accountable for.

Amendments made in committee to Bill C-12 now require more detail to be contained in emission reduction plans as well as in progress and assessment reports. A stronger early warning system has been created by requiring the minister to set out the additional measures that could be taken to increase the probability that a target will be achieved if progress reports indicate that achievement is unlikely.

Progress reports must now be tabled by the end of 2023, 2025 and 2027. This is to help ensure the effectiveness of the first plan, with three opportunities to course-correct during this period if there are signs that the 2030 target could be missed.

The minister must also publish a description of key measures one year after each milestone target is set, so nine years before the target itself. It must include projections of the emissions reductions that are expected to be achieved.

Honourable colleagues, the advisory body described in Bill C-12 is an essential element of the getting-to-net-zero plan. An independent, arm’s-length expert advisory body is seen as an essential component of any climate accountability framework. Amendments made at the House committee have formally named the advisory body the Net-Zero Advisory Body, or NZAB. Amendments have expanded its statutory mandate to include advising on the five-year milestone targets and measures and strategies that could be included in emission reduction plans. They’ve clarified the areas of expertise that should be taken into account in future appointments to the Net-Zero Advisory Body, and these include a whole range of climate change science, other relevant sciences including economic analysis and forecasting, Indigenous knowledge, climate policy, energy supply-and-demand and relevant technologies. Amendments have detailed a range of factors that the Net-Zero Advisory Body should consider, including environmental, economic, social and technological, the best available scientific information and Indigenous knowledge.

They’ve added the requirement that the minister must publicly respond to advice given by the NZAB. This is particularly important if the minister adopts milestone targets that differ from what the body has recommended. As noted previously, indigenous knowledge has been added to several sections of the bill, including as a factor to be considered by the Net-Zero Advisory Body in their deliberations and as a factor to be considered in the appointment process for those who sit on the expert body.

Bill C-12 also now requires the minister when establishing an emissions reduction plan to take into account the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Honourable colleagues, given that early action in the next few years is crucial to avoiding even more catastrophic climate change, the amendments adopted compel short-term action. I would like to briefly highlight for you the requirements of the next five years. Annual reports will be prepared by the advisory body and the Minister of Finance. In 2022, the government will produce its first emissions reduction plan for achieving the 2030 target, including a 2026 interim objective and projections of the annual emissions reductions it will deliver. This will give us a year-by-year trajectory to the target.

In 2023, the government will table a progress report on the 2030 target. In 2024, the first assessment report from the federal Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development will be tabled. In 2025, we will have reached the deadline to set the target for 2035, and we should also see the second government progress report on the 2030 target, including a review of that target.

Finally, in 2026, there will be a statutory review by a committee of the Senate or the House of Commons or both, as I mentioned earlier.

These various requirements constitute a stronger early warning system. They should help Canada avoid our unacceptable tradition of missing targets and provide an opportunity to course-correct swiftly if needed. Colleagues, our Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources was able to complete a thorough pre-study of Bill C-12, which is why we are able to consider this important legislation at this very late date.

That committee’s report was tabled in the Senate last week by Senator Massicotte, the committee chair. That report highlighted that, “The need for a national climate accountability framework in Canada is pressing.” It went on to say that, “. . . the country will require immediate, deliberate, and ambitious new national policies. . . .” Although the committee was clear in pointing out the deficiencies in the bill, the report said, “. . . there can be no delay in implementing a national climate accountability framework.”

Honourable senators, in the many emails we have received imploring us to act quickly and pass Bill C-12, several are from medical doctors who are members of MD Moms 4 Healthy Recovery. They have reminded us that, “The World Health Organization has identified Climate Change as the number one threat to human health.” They go on to say:

We are asking for your support of Bill C-12 so we can act boldly to secure a healthy and sustainable world where future generations can thrive.

Colleagues, in one of my favourite Dr. Seuss books, the book’s namesake, the Lorax, says, “I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.” Someone needs to speak for the trees, for the oceans, for the permafrost, for the Arctic sea ice, for the atmosphere, for the rich and diverse flora and fauna of our precious planet earth and for our children and future generations. The Lorax goes on to say, “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”

Honourable senators, it’s our job as senators to care a whole awful lot and to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves. Let’s advance and pass this historic climate accountability and transparency bill and get on with the planning, decision making and ambitious action required to get to net zero by 2050, while ensuring a just transition for all Canadians.

Honourable senators, let’s demonstrate our climate leadership. Canadians and the people with whom we share this planet expect this of us. If we don’t, we will have to heed the Lorax’s words and acknowledge, “nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” Thank you. Welalioq.

Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.

An Hon. Senator: On division.

(Motion agreed to and bill read second time, on division.)

Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read the third time?

(On motion of Senator Galvez, bill placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading at the next sitting of the Senate.)