Bill S-15 (Historical)

Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act

An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001

Part 1 of this enactment amends the Canada National Parks Act to create Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada.
It also amends the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to prohibit drilling for petroleum in Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada or within one nautical mile seaward of Sable Island’s low-water mark, to restrict surface access rights provided for under that Act and to provide for the issuance of licences and authorizations with respect to activities that may be carried out in Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada.
Finally, it makes consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.
Part 2 amends the Canada National Parks Act to provide that the dedication of the national parks of Canada to the people of Canada is subject to any Act of Parliament.
It also amends the description of the commercial zones for the Community of Field in Yoho National Park of Canada in Schedule 4 to that Act and of the leasehold boundary of the Marmot Basin Ski Area in Jasper National Park of Canada in Schedule 5 to that Act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I call the committee back to order, please. We're going to move to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-15.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), the consideration of the preamble and clause 1, the short title, is postponed.

(Clause 2 agreed to)

(On clause 3)

On clause 3, amendment deemed moved, is there debate?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

It's actually quite a large area in and around the island itself, which is remarkable, as this is a park—the point made by Ms. Leslie—that's in an active petroleum development field.

I just wanted to put on the record that it is quite a large area that Bill S-15 is protecting. I think it's something that is positive.

Ms. Lucas, you spoke a little bit about the development of the parks management plan. I think a lot of the potential issues that we've raised in the debate in the House and here...we've heard from witnesses that this will be an excellent opportunity to address those through the development of this plan.

Could you perhaps elaborate for the committee on some of the things that you, being one of the leading experts on Sable, would be looking to see in the development of this plan?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the protection that Bill S-15 affords to Sable Island is greater than just the island itself.

[Zoe Lucas]

In the mid-1990s, I became involved in the campaign to address the long-term problem of securing government commitment for support of the Sable Island station. This involved working with the Ecology Action Centre and Mark Butler.

To ensure environmental protection and conservation of Sable's natural values, a continuous human presence on the island is essential. There has been a government station on Sable since 1801, but for the first 150 years, the primary role of the station was to maintain aids to navigation and life-saving. The development of various technologies such as radar enabled ships to avoid the island. By the mid-1900s, the island's role as a hazard to navigation was greatly reduced.

The Meteorological Service of Canada has been collecting weather data on Sable since 1871. Increasing scientific interest in the island generated awareness of its unique natural values and concerns about conservation and protection. Requests from tourists, media groups, as well as researchers to visit Sable have steadily increased.

By the mid-1990s, it was clear that the Canada Shipping Act was no longer a good fit for management of the island. This, combined with budget cuts during program review, resulted in a decade of serious uncertainty about the future of the island.

The announcement that the Government of Canada would consider national park status for Sable Island is great news. This status offers the highest level of protection and conservation available in Canada.

Given the unique history and issues of the Sable Island situation, the very grave concerns about the island's future, and the four decades of experience with the offshore energy industry in this region, this makes for a stable solution that will work well for the island. The expertise, mandate, and resources of Parks Canada will provide a high level of long-term and continuous protection for Sable Island. Advice provided to the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board by Parks Canada will greatly increase the depth and breadth of the board's understanding of Sable's environmental and biodiversity issues.

I support passage of Bill S-15 as is. Concerns arising from the amendment allowing for limited offshore energy activities can be addressed following the establishment of the Sable Island national park reserve. These concerns will most certainly be a consideration in the development of the Parks Canada management policy, and the guidance and interpretation on low-impact industry activities on the island will certainly improve that situation.

I've skipped over some of the things I was going to say, just to keep it short, and given the poor quality of the line, I'll leave it at that. Thank you very much.

[Alison Woodley, National Conservation Director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Good evening. My name is Alison Woodley and I am the national director of the parks program for the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, or CPAWS.

As Mr. Chairman mentioned, also joining us this evening from Nova Scotia is Dr. Chris Miller, who is CPAWS' national conservation biologist. Chris has been leading our work on Sable Island.

Thank you to the members of the committee for having invited us to participate in this meeting to present our thoughts on Bill S-15.

CPAWS is Canada's voice for parks and public wilderness protection. For 50 years we've played a key role in the establishment of Canada's protected areas, including many of our national parks. We've been following the various debates on Bill S-15 quite closely in both Ottawa and in Nova Scotia.

We're pleased to hear what appears to be overwhelming support for protecting Sable Island which, as everyone knows, is a very interesting and unique piece of Canada. Like the other witnesses, rather than reiterate all the reasons why Sable Island is so special and deserves our highest level of protection, which has been discussed very well, including during our testimony at the Senate committee, we'll cut to the chase on what we feel are the key issues.

CPAWS is strongly supportive of a national park designation for Sable Island. In fact, we first proposed this as an option for protecting Sable way back in 1971, so we're very pleased that the governments of Canada and Nova Scotia are taking the steps required to make the national park a reality.

The national park designation is a big improvement over the status quo and will result in much stronger habitat protection for the flora and fauna of the island. Parks Canada has a requirement to manage national parks for ecological integrity as a first priority and must develop a management plan that addresses this. The previous management structure for Sable Island using outdated regulations in the Shipping Act is not tenable over the long term and doesn't offer the sorts of ecosystem protections that many Canadians expect of this important location.

CPAWS is very concerned about the prospect of oil and gas exploration being allowed to occur on Sable Island. The ocean all around Sable Island is available for industry and we feel that the sliver of sand that is Sable Island should be left free from any such industrial activity. Specifically on the issue of allowing low-impact oil exploration, driving thumper trucks onto the beaches at Sable, stringing lines across the island, and digging listening devices into the sand, as has been described, are not what we would consider to be low-impact activities, nor are they appropriate activities in a national park, which should be off limits to all oil and gas exploration and development activities. We also believe they run counter to what most people want for Sable Island, which is simply for it to be left alone as much as possible and to remain this wild and free place that so many Canadians cherish.

For these reasons we are requesting that the clauses of Bill S-15 that would allow for oil and gas exploration activities to occur on Sable Island be removed. In summary, CPAWS is strongly supportive of a national park for Sable Island. We want this legislation to move forward, and we are requesting amendments to strengthen protection of the island from oil and gas activities.

I would also like to share some brief comments on clause 15 of the bill, which includes the proposed change to the leasehold boundary of the Marmot Basin ski area in Jasper National Park. We do not have a specific amendment to put forward here, but I do want to highlight that in exchange for the reduction in the leasehold area of the Marmot Basin ski area, there are new development proposals being considered that could have a significant impact on wildlife in the park, including on caribou which are identified as threatened under the federal Species at Risk Act.

For new development to be considered outside the current footprint of a ski area, Parks Canada policy requires the operator to demonstrate that there will be a substantial environmental gain from the overall plan. This net gain is not achieved by the redrawing of the leasehold boundary, but rather by the overall impact of developments and activities on wildlife and ecosystems, both inside and outside the current footprint and the leasehold areas. The developments and activities determine whether there's a substantial environmental gain.

In the case of Marmot Basin, CPAWS is particularly concerned about Jasper's woodland caribou, which have dropped to critically low numbers and are at risk of disappearing entirely from the park. There is a study under way to better understand the importance of the Marmot area to caribou and other wildlife, and given the precarious state of this species, no development that could potentially result in any further risk to caribou in the park should be allowed to proceed. As final decisions are made about developments at Marmot Basin in Jasper, we will be looking to Parks Canada to uphold its responsibility to put ecological integrity first in its decision-making.

Thank you again for the opportunity to present today on behalf of CPAWS. We will be pleased to answer any questions.

[Stuart Pinks, Chief Executive Officer, Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the invitation to appear before the committee this evening. I'll try to jump through my speaking notes which I think all of you have copies of, and try to hit some of the highlights to try to meet the five-minute time commitment.

My name is Stuart Pinks. I'm the chief executive officer for the board. I'm joined by Elizabeth MacDonald, who is an adviser on environmental affairs and a conservation officer with our board. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to communicate our support for Bill S-15.

Sable Island has long been the centre of oil and gas activity in the offshore Nova Scotia area since hydrocarbon exploration began back in the 1960s. To date, all the discoveries and the production that have been made in the Nova Scotia offshore have been within 60 kilometres of Sable Island, and a significant amount of that within 12 kilometres of Sable Island. The coexistence of Sable Island with the oil and gas industry has been going on successfully for quite awhile.

When the board was first advised of the changes in the status of Sable Island in November 2011, the board approached the licence holders in the area who voluntarily agreed to amend the terms and conditions for the five significant discovery licences that encompass or are within one nautical mile of the island. These licences were issued prior to the board being formed and give the rights holders tenure.

These amendments prohibit drilling from the surface of the island or within one nautical mile seaward of the low watermark of the island. We know this prohibition has been ingrained in the proposed legislation that is now before the House.

We understand that the current debate in relation to the proposed legislation has, in part, been centred on the definition of low-impact exploration activity that may be allowed to be carried out within the national park reserve. Our commitment is that once this legislation goes into effect, the board in partnership with Parks Canada intends to develop and publish guidance and interpretation notes addressing this matter.

The development of guidance and interpretation notes is contemplated under the accord acts and they form an important part of our regulatory regime. Public consultation will be a key component of this process.

Experience has shown that when conducted using appropriate equipment, work practices, and mitigation, the type of activities contemplated on the island can be carried out with little or no lasting impact on the environment. These include things like geochemical studies and seismic-type work.

I think the committee is aware that in 1999 a four month low-impact seismic program was carried out successfully on Sable Island by what was then Mobil Oil Canada. The program and the code of practice were carefully observed by Zoe Lucas who lives on the island. Upon completion she concluded that in general the program had only limited and short-term impact on Sable Island.

Upon or prior to receiving an application by an operator to carry out any proposed exploration program for possible authorization, regardless of whether it is on the ocean or on Sable Island, the board would require an environmental assessment up front. In conducting this assessment, public comment periods are provided for. In order for the board to consider the issuance of an authorization, the environmental assessment would have to demonstrate that there would be a low likelihood of significant adverse environmental effects following the implementation of the project-specific mitigation from carrying out the proposed program.

Should work be proposed within the national park reserve, the board will solicit input and advice from Parks Canada among others. The requirement for low-impact exploration would drive consideration of, and potential implementation of, additional mitigation to further minimize or remove any potential environmental effects on all surrounding ecosystem components, including landscape, vegetation, wildlife, and marine life. Each operator would be required to develop and submit for board review and acceptance a code of practice specific to the work to be done on or around the island.

I wanted to speak very briefly to the fact that our board underwent an extensive audit by the federal Auditor General's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. They looked at some 10,000 records generated between our board and the Newfoundland board and other federal parties. The report that was published in February 2003 concluded that the board exercises due diligence when assessing and approving offshore projects and activities; the board takes adequate steps to ensure that operators comply with environmental requirements; and overall, the board manages the current environmental impacts associated with natural gas activities in the Nova Scotia offshore area in a manner consistent with the size and scale of current operations.

Having those types of comments made by the federal Auditor General after an almost two-year review of the activities that our board undertakes was, to me, a huge vote of confidence.

In closing, the board supports the amendments to the Canada National Parks Act designating Sable Island as a national park reserve and the resulting amendments to the accord acts. The amendments to the accord acts reflect board policy that has been in place for many years for exploration licences. The establishment of this reserve is an example of government, industry, and the regulator cooperating to achieve a common goal, the protection of Sable Island.

In summary, I would ask that you consider the following points as you move forward.

One, the board commits to, in partnership with Parks Canada, develop guidance and interpretation notes to give definition to the term “low-impact exploration activities”.

Two, low-impact seismic activity occurred on Sable Island in 1999 and also previously in 1996. There were no significant adverse environmental effects from this program, according to the report that was prepared by Zoe Lucas, who I think is joining us as well.

Three, under the proposed bill, Parks Canada will have to be consulted and their views considered before any low-impact activities occur on Sable Island, which is not the case now. We could authorize those activities today without having to consult with Parks Canada.

Four, an environmental assessment, including a public component, will be required before any low-impact activity can take place on Sable Island.

Five, the federal Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development recently expressed confidence in the board's execution of its environmental protection mandate.

Thank you again for the opportunity to provide the board's perspective on this matter. I look forward to some of the upcoming questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I'd like to call the meeting of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development to order. We're in meeting number 82.

Prior to introducing our witnesses, I have something I would like to read, which I understand has been worked out with all parties:That, notwithstanding the decision made by the Committee on June 13, 2013, the Committee move immediately to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, following the witness testimony on Monday, June 17, 2013.

Are all in agreement with that? I understand we're in agreement to move directly into clause-by-clause study after the witnesses are finished.

Thank you very much.

We will move now to our witnesses. We have seven witnesses tonight. Three of them are joining us by teleconference.

To save a bit of time, I'm not going to mention all of them now. I'm going to go in the order that's listed on the orders of the day. If you don't have a copy, we can get a copy to you.

We'll begin with the Government of Nova Scotia, the Honourable Leonard Preyra, Minister of Communities, Culture and Heritage.

I have asked our witnesses as much as possible to try to limit their opening statements to between five and seven minutes to give us more time for questions from members; however, I will be a little flexible there, so we'll move ahead with that understanding.

Honourable Leonard Preyra, would you begin your statement, please.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, this time last week, I said that I hoped to have a substantial list of accomplishments to report to the House. Indeed, I do.

In just the last five days, thanks to a lot of members of Parliament who have been here sitting late at night, working until past midnight, we have accomplished a lot. Bill C-60, the economic action plan 2013 act, no. 1, the important job-creating bill, which was the cornerstone of our government's spring agenda, passed at third reading. Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act, passed at third reading. Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, passed at third reading. Bill C-62, the Yale First Nation final agreement act, was reported back from committee and was passed at report stage and passed at third reading. Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act, was reported back from committee. Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act, was reported back from committee this morning with amendments from all three parties. Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act, has been passed at committee, and I understand that the House should get a report soon. Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, passed at second reading. Bill S-17, the tax conventions implementation act, 2013, passed at second reading. Bill S-10, the prohibiting cluster munitions act, passed at second reading. Bill S-6, the first nations elections act, has been debated at second reading. Bill C-61, the offshore health and safety act, has been debated at second reading. Bill S-16, the tackling contraband tobacco act, has been debated at second reading. Finally, Bill C-65, the respect for communities act, was also debated at second reading.

On the private members' business front, one bill passed at third reading and another at second reading. Of course, that reflects the unprecedented success of private members advancing their ideas and proposals through Parliament under this government, something that is a record under this Parliament. This includes 21 bills put forward by members of the Conservative caucus that have been passed by the House. Twelve of those have already received royal assent or are awaiting the next ceremony. Never before have we seen so many members of Parliament successfully advance so many causes of great importance to them. Never in Canadian history have individual MPs had so much input into changing Canada's laws through their own private members' bills in any session of Parliament as has happened under this government.

Hard-working members of Parliament are reporting the results of their spring labours in our committee rooms. Since last week, we have got substantive reports from the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, the Standing Committee on Health, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.

We are now into the home stretch of the spring sitting. Since I would like to give priority to any bills which come back from committee, I expect that the business for the coming days may need to be juggled as we endeavour to do that.

I will continue to make constructive proposals to my colleagues for the orderly management of House business. For example, last night, I was able to bring forward a reasonable proposal for today's business, a proposal that had the backing of four of the five political parties that elected MPs. Unfortunately, one party objected, despite the very generous provision made for it with respect to the number of speakers it specifically told us it wanted to have. Nonetheless, I would like to thank those who did work constructively toward it.

I would point out that the night before, I made a similar offer, again, based on our efforts to accommodate the needs of all the parties.

Today we will complete second reading of Bill S-16, the tackling contraband tobacco act. Then we will start second reading of Bill C-57, the safeguarding Canada's seas and skies act.

Tomorrow morning we will start report stage of Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act. Following question period, we will return to the second reading debate on Bill S-6, the first nations elections act.

On Monday, before question period, we will start report stage and hopefully third reading of Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act. After question period Monday, we will return to Bill C-49, followed by Bill C-65, the respect for communities act.

On Tuesday, we will also continue any unfinished business from Friday and Monday. We could also start report stage, and ideally, third reading of Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act that day.

Wednesday, after tidying up what is left over from Tuesday, we will take up any additional bills that might be reported from committee. I understand that we could get reports from the hard-working finance and environment committees on Bill S-17 and Bill S-15 respectively.

Thereafter, the House could finish the four outstanding second-reading debates on the order paper: Bill C-57; Bill C-61; Bill S-12, the incorporation by reference in regulations act; and Bill S-13, the port state measures agreement implementation act.

I am looking forward to several more productive days as we get things done for Canadians here in Ottawa.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to have that level of civility. I congratulate my friend across the way.

Before asking the usual Thursday question and before the government House leader across the way starts to talk about how he has been able to abuse Parliament over the past week, I would like to make a small observation for all those listening.

Of all the bills I am sure he is about to mention that are important, not a single bill passed through this legislative process in anything resembling a normal fashion. Bills S-8, S-15, S-17, S-2, S-6, S-10, S-16, C-56 and C-60, every single bill we have debated in the past week, operated under time allocation. I might parenthetically add that seven of them came from the Senate. It seems like a strange place for the government to get its agenda: a bunch of unelected, under-investigation senators, but so be it. It is the government's choice.

We tried to work with the government to find ways to allow the House to debate bills and to do so expediently. A good example is the Sable Island as a national park bill. For example, we offered up about five or six speakers who wanted to address the merits of the bill, which would have allowed the passage of that bill after they had spoken. The reaction from the leader from the other side was to move time allocation, which in fact ended up taking up more time in the House than the offer the NDP had made would have taken.

The Conservatives' strategy is sometimes bizarre. In fact, it is hard to figure out whether it is a strategy or not. I would like the Conservative member to enlighten me on this, even though the Conservatives' responses have no merit.

We have spent more than 14 hours debating and voting on time allocation motions in the past two weeks alone. I find it ironic that the government allots only five hours of debate to the content of the bill under time allocation, when the vast majority of our time is spent debating and voting on the time allocation motions and not on the bills. That is the Conservatives' way of doing business.

When will the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons learn that a hammer is not the only tool available for getting the work done?

Could the leader of the government tell us what his plans are for this week and the week following?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thanks, Ms. Rempel.

I just want to be clear. I understand the legislative protection. I want to be clear: we need to meet an ethical and moral obligation, and that's why I'm concerned about the precedent.

When B.C. wanted some logging in Gwaii Haanas, the NGOs and the federal government did say no.

My last question. We've talked about how under Bill S-15 the Parks Canada role seems relegated to merely consulting CNSOPB on its environmental recommendations. Can you tell me why this is so? What is preventing Parks Canada from being the last stop when it comes to the ecological health of the park? What happens in and around it?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming.

I think everyone knows that I have real concerns about precedent. I've been assured by the officials that future parks are legislatively protected from potential exploration.

Having said that, I asked the parliamentary secretary and the minister during debate on Bill S-15 that this park not be used as a precedent to allow exploration in national parks. My question was not answered.

I then went to the minister and said, “Can you get it on the record that you will not use this as a precedent?” So I'm going to ask very specifically. I would like the word—that the integrity of Canada's national parks will not be undermined, but instead protected, that creating a national park amid oil and gas exploration is not a foot in the door, an opening setting a precedent to allow development in our national parks. Today, I hear, “In my view....”

I need better. Will this be used as a precedent?

[Kevin McNamee]

Yes. Clause 8 in Bill S-15 is clear that, with respect to Sable island National Park Reserve, the surface access rights provided for under this section are limited to “the following”, and those are the four things that Mr. Latourelle addressed.

[Kevin McNamee]

We've had some discussions with the Offshore Petroleum Board about how to address this kind of issue. Under the accord act, the board has to negotiate a memorandum of understanding with any agency that has regulatory authority within the offshore. With Bill S-15, and with the establishment of the park, we would obviously be regulating a national park.

A memorandum of understanding is definitely something that we have discussed and we want to put in place. That could provide one place in which to do it, and it could be done earlier. As Mr. Latourelle indicated, that is something we've indicated we would consult on in order to get views on the issue.

There are other things under the accord act that, as a matter of practice, can be done. We have not reached any decisions with the board as to which is the best way to do it. Under the accord act, ministers can issue a directive to the board on a range of issues. The board can amend its environmental policy and practice guidelines to build that into place, which is something they place on their website.

There are these various instruments that we want to fully explore with the board to figure out how we can bring a protocol into place, so that people understand what the parameters are if and when a request is made to authorize such activity.

[Alan Latourelle]

Mr. Chair, permit me to address the amendments that Bill S-15 proposes for the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act. All petroleum-related activities of Nova Scotia's offshore, including in and around Sable Island, are administered under the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act.

As the preamble to Bill S-15 reiterates, section 4 of the accord states that the act takes precedence over all other legislation applicable to offshore areas, including Sable Island.

Thus the challenge in creating Sable Island National Park Reserve was to negotiate an agreement that would not have an adverse impact on Canada's and Nova Scotia's interests in offshore petroleum resources, while it upheld the integrity of Sable Island National Park Reserve.

Bill S-15 provides for several conservation gains with respect to Sable Island.

As you know, a number of petroleum-related activities can still be authorized on Sable Island National Park Reserve, as required, under the terms of a national park agreement.

Clause 3 confirms that the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board will continue to be the body to authorize such petroleum activities. While the board will have to consult with Parks Canada on such requests, we do not want to create within our own organization a second regulatory body.

Clause 8 amends the federal accord to restrict the number of current activities the board can authorize on Sable Island.

[Alan Latourelle]

Before responding to the committee's questions on Bill S-15, I would like to point out some of the ways in which Parks Canada is building on a tremendous legacy.

We are beginning our second century of the administration of our national network of national parks, national marine conservation areas, and national historic sites for future generations. I'm very proud of the fact that in recent years Parks Canada has received both international and national acclaim for its work in expanding our network of protected areas and offering visitors the chance to experience our natural and cultural heritage, and in working with aboriginal peoples.

Organizations ranging from the World Wildlife Fund International and the National Geographic Society to the Royal Canadian Geographical Society and Hostelling International-Canada have recognized the dedicated efforts of the Parks Canada team. But we cannot rest on our laurels, Mr. Chair. Our challenges are daunting. We are working to conclude agreements for several national parks, and as Canada becomes increasingly urban and as new Canadians make their homes here, and as younger generations come of age, our challenge moving forward is to connect Canadians to their national and historic treasures.

Allow me to now address Bill S-15. The bill has two parts. The first part deals with the establishment of Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada, and the second part amends section 4 and schedules 4 and 5 of the Canada National Parks Act.

Establishing Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada is a key action toward the Government of Canada's commitment in the 2011 Speech from the Throne to create significant new protected areas. This bill is a critical step in implementing the terms of the national parks establishment agreement, which the Minister of the Environment and the Nova Scotia Premier, Darrell Dexter, signed in October of 2011. Under that agreement, both governments agreed to take the necessary steps to bring legislative protection to this iconic island.

Mr. Chair, the natural and cultural features that define Sable Island were addressed many times during the second reading in the House of Commons, so allow me to move directly to the provisions of Bill S-15.

To enable the establishment of Sable Island National Park Reserve under the terms of the agreement negotiated with the Province of Nova Scotia, Bill S-15 amends three federal pieces of legislation: the Canada National Parks Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act, and the Canada Shipping Act. Let me first address the amendments to the Canada National Parks Act.

Clause 4 of Bill S-15 provides for the protection of Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada by amending schedule 2 of the Canada National Parks Act to add a legal description of the park reserve. Schedule 2 is the list of national park reserves, while schedule 1 lists national parks. The boundary of Sable Island National Park Reserve extends to the low-water mark and does not include the buffer zone where the ban on drilling for petroleum resources will also apply.

Bill S-15 designates Sable Island as a national park reserve for the purpose of protecting the asserted aboriginal rights and title of the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia to this area. A national park reserve designation is used where there are outstanding claims by aboriginal peoples regarding aboriginal rights and title and these claims have been accepted by Canada for negotiation, such as the case with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia.

Mr. Chair, it's important to note that a national park reserve enjoys all of the same protections that a national park does, while respecting the assertions of aboriginal or treaty rights. It is not a lesser category of a national park. Some of our most famous national parks, including Nahanni, Pacific Rim, and Gwaii Haanas are designated as being national park reserves under the Canada National Parks Act.

In November 2010, the Mi'kmaq wrote to Parks Canada confirming that they were “in agreement that Sable Island be designated as a national park by bringing it under the Canada National Parks Act and by an Act of Parliament.”

Consultations with the Mi'kmaq will continue until the final step in the establishment process, namely the designation of Sable Island as a full-fledged national park. This will not happen until the final accord has been negotiated by Canada, Nova Scotia, and the Mi'kmaq through the “Made in Nova Scotia” process. I can confirm that there is no time limit on the national park reserve designation. It will apply until we have reached an agreement with the Mi'kmaq, confirming their role with respect to a final national park.

Clause 3 of Bill S-15 provides for the administration and continuation of leases, easements, and licences of occupation in or on Sable Island National Park Reserve, since there are 46 structures located on Sable Island—buildings for accommodations; offices; storage buildings; communication towers; wind turbines; light station towers; garages; sheds; and utility buildings for power distribution, water, and sewage.