Rodrigo Estrada Patiño is program director at Greenpeace Canada. Stephen Hazell is president of Ecovision Law and was executive director of both Sierra Club Canada and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.

Earlier this summer, the federal government introduced in Parliament Bill C-73, the Nature Accountability Act, meant to hold the country to its nature and biodiversity commitments. Full marks to Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault for shepherding the bill to secure tabling before Parliament’s summer break. However, the question is whether it is good enough to put Canada on track to achieving its biodiversity objectives.  

Canada is in the middle of a dire nature crisis caused by habitat destruction, unsustainable use, pollution, invasive species and climate change. More than 2,000 species across the country are currently facing a risk of extinction. For instance, the population of the northern spotted owl in Canada, which some call an “umbrella species” for the health of a vast forest ecosystem, has already dwindled to just one female. This is far from being an isolated case. Some boreal caribou herds in Quebec have already crossed the “threshold of near disappearance.” Furthermore, the population of the American bumblebee has also plummeted by a staggering 99 per cent over just the past 30 years, putting our entire food system at risk. 

“The current version of Bill C-73 is not good enough — akin to a bucket brigade throwing pails of water on a burning house.”

Despite the crisis, Canada has consistently failed to meet its obligations to protect nature over the three decades since the Convention on Biological Diversity came into force. A 2018 report from Canada’s environment commissioner concluded that the federal government “had no plan for achieving Canada’s biodiversity targets.”  The performance of provincial governments generally has been even worse and the constant delays in delivering a caribou strategy by the government of Quebec is just one of many examples.

Given this dismal record, recent federal action to halt and reverse nature loss is positive. Canada has been hailed internationally for convincing 196 nations to sign on to the United Nations’ Global Biodiversity Framework in Montreal in December 2022. The framework has four goals and 23 targets to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. Key targets include: ensuring an effective restoration of 30 per cent of degraded ecosystems; protecting 30 per cent of terrestrial and marine areas; and halting human-induced extinction of threatened species. As well as other signatories, Canada must submit a so-called national biodiversity strategy and action plan at the next Conference of the Parties — known as COP16 — in Cali, Colombia, in October 2024.   

The Global Biodiversity Framework is a major achievement but does not necessarily mean that Canadian governments will take action. Too often, Canada talks big internationally and walks small domestically. Accountability is required to ensure progress is achieved, and legislation is needed to ensure accountability.  

The Nature Accountability Act originated in a paper written by lawyer David Geselbracht, and was tabled as Bill C-73 after tens of thousands of people called on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to pass such a law to protect nature in a Greenpeace petition. Unfortunately, the current version of Bill C-73 is not good enough — akin to a bucket brigade throwing pails of water on a burning house. 

“Too often, Canada talks big internationally and walks small domestically.”

On the one hand, it affirms Canada’s commitment to contribute to attaining the Global Biodiversity Framework’s targets and goals and requires the government to make plans to meet targets and publicly report on progress. On the other hand, the bill does not legally entrench domestic targets linked to those of the framework, nor does it set legally enforceable standards to ensure consistency and accountability in required plans and reports. 

Bill C-73 also misses the opportunity to ensure that policies respect Indigenous Rights, support Indigenous-led initiatives and ensure that federal decisions to develop natural resources do not undermine Canada’s ability to meet its Global Biodiversity Framework commitments. That is why Greenpeace Canada and other civil society groups are calling on the federal government to work with political parties to achieve consensus on amendments for stronger legislation before the next October 2024 Conference of the Parties. Justin Trudeau should focus on passing a strong Nature Accountability Act that respects Indigenous Rights and protects biodiversity, if he truly wants to celebrate Canada’s international leadership in Cali.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

David Geselbracht’s writing can be found in The Globe and Mail, Maisonneuve, Canada’s National Observer, Grist and CBC.ca. He is completing a Juris Doctor degree at the University of Ottawa.

Stephen Hazell is counsel at Ecovision Law, and was the former Executive Director of both Sierra Club Canada and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.

Every day Canadians rely on biodiversity: the rich variety of plants, animals and ecosystems that form the fabric of our cultures and the bedrock of our economies. The living soil that grows our vegetables, the timber that frames our homes, the fish plucked at sea — all represent a vast array of species Canadians depend on. 

But Canada’s biodiversity is being destroyed at an alarming rate. Habitat destruction, unsustainable use, pollution and climate change are leaving less for future generations. In Canada, between 1970 and 2014, mammal populations declined 43 per cent. Entire fisheries have completely or nearly collapsed: like the Atlantic cod in the east and the sockeye salmon in the west. And ancient trees, some over a thousand years old, are being decimated. This destruction of biodiversity, experts describe, is akin to “burning the library of life.” 

If Canada is to protect and restore the vanishing life in its forests, grasslands and oceans, accountability must be a first step. Here is why. 

Much like our Paris climate target, Canada also has internationally prescribed targets for biodiversity protection. Named for the host region in Japan, where in 2010 the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity established them, there are 20 Aichi targets aimed at protecting species, lands and oceans, reducing water pollution and improving forest management, among other crucial actions. To date, Canada has achieved significant success on one: protecting 10 per cent of our coastal and marine areas by 2020. This was no small feat (only 1.3 percent was protected in 2015) and Canadians should be proud. 

However, Canada is struggling to meet the other targets. A 2018 progress report from Canada’s Environment Commissioner was searing. The federal government, it found, “had no plan for achieving Canada’s biodiversity targets,” and rather than being practical, the goals were too often “aspirational.” A final report on the federal government’s progress has yet to be released; but regardless, there needs to be more built-in accountability. 

To fix this, recent federal climate legislation may provide some inspiration. 

Canada’s climate goals also struggled with accountability issues. Previous governments would set targets with no real plan to actually meet them. But last June, Parliament passed Bill C-12 (the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act), which requires the federal government to set short and long-term climate targets, submit more frequent plans to meet those targets, report on progress to Parliament and utilize an advisory body to provide expert advice. Is it perfect? No. But it provides a layer of accountability that reluctant future administrations must address by law.

Canada needs similar accountability legislation for biodiversity. 

British Columbia’s looming extinction crisis

There are hurdles, of course. Protecting biodiversity is, in some ways, more complex than reducing emissions. There are far more targets on a wider range of areas — 20 Aichi targets rather than one Paris target. There are thorny jurisdictional and planning issues with the provinces. And any legislation would act as an umbrella to already existing provincial and federal laws — like the Species at Risk Act and the Migratory Birds Convention Act. Current actions are failing though, and, again and again, accountability has been identified as a limiting factor. 

To help protect species big and small, to create migration corridors, and to pass a legacy of biological diversity on to future generations, Canada needs accountability legislation for biodiversity. It would create clearer and more consistent target setting, progress reporting and the use of the best experts in the country, and it could spur greater collaboration between federal and provincial governments and Indigenous communities. 

As you read this article, nations are currently meeting to plan the next round of international biodiversity targets, organized through the Convention on Biological Diversity. The sad irony, of course, is that none were collectively reached for the last round (the Aichi targets), which had a deadline of 2020. Canada, as the second largest country on Earth, with vast webs of biological diversity, is well placed to take a lead in domestically implementing this next round of targets. But we should learn from past efforts. We must embed accountability into the process, through thoughtful legislation like Bill C-12.

Humans have always relied on the forests, waters, soils and species the planet provides us with. Biodiversity is the foundation of our prosperity. To ensure Canada stems the current loss of biodiversity, this incredible library of life, we must act with haste but also with humility. To translate goals from rhetoric to reality, we are going to need more accountability.   

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.