Environment Committee on Oct. 29th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I'd like to call our meeting to order.

This is meeting 34 of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. We are continuing today with our study of Bill C-40, an act respecting the Rouge national urban park.

We are pleased to have witnesses from the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, the Waterfront Regeneration Trust Corporation, and the York Region Federation of Agriculture.

Mr. Éric Hébert-Daly, national executive director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, will speak first for seven minutes, and then we'll follow with Pauline Browes and Kim Empringham.

With the number of witnesses we have today, we'll try to leave some time for questions and answers.

We will proceed with Mr. Hébert-Daly, for the first seven minutes.

[Éric Hébert-Daly, National Executive Director, National Office, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society]

Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to share with the committee our recommendations and thoughts on Bill C-40, an act respecting the Rouge national urban park.

My name is Éric Hébert-Daly. I'm the national executive director of CPAWS. Since our creation about 50 years ago, CPAWS has played a key role in the establishment of about two-thirds of Canada’s protected areas. We have 13 regional chapters across the country in nearly every province and territory, including the CPAWS wildlands league chapter in Toronto, as well as a national office here in Ottawa. We have over 60,000 supporters across the country, and we work collaboratively with governments, industry, first nations, and others to conserve Canada’s natural heritage.

Over the last five years we've welcomed the arrival of new federal park initiatives, including the sixfold expansion of Nahanni National Park Reserve in 2009, and the creation of Gwaii Haanas national marine conservation area in B.C., in 2010.

We're here to discuss a different kind of park, the creation of Canada’s first national urban park in the greater Toronto area. CPAWS has been quite excited about and has supported this idea from its very inception. We see it as a remarkable opportunity for us to protect a very special natural valley in Canada’s biggest urban area, and at the same time to engage and connect people with nature.

Let me also be clear that CPAWS has recognized from the very beginning that farming is and will continue to be an important aspect of this park. We believe that farming can contribute to nature conservation at the same time that nature conservation can contribute to farming. We as conservationists actually share a very common interest with farmers, that of keeping urban development and urban sprawl from these lands. We often remark that the opportunity to create this national urban park is in part due to the farmers who themselves have kept urban development at bay, and the local grassroots groups who have been championing the Rouge for decades. In fact, we make no suggested changes to the aspects of agriculture within the bill.

In recent weeks we have listened with great interest to the debates about the appropriate management framework for the Rouge: should it be ecological integrity or ecosystem health? While we think there are valid arguments being made for both, CPAWS believes there is a more fundamental issue that needs to be addressed in the legislation, which is that nature conservation be clearly identified as the overarching priority for managing the park. This gets to the very essence of what a park is. Without it, we don't really have a park; we may have something else. We may have a multi-use zone or we may have other types of reserves.

However, prioritizing nature conservation is both consistent with international standards for protected areas and with existing federal and Ontario provincial legislation for parks and protected areas. It should, and it can, be reflected in the Rouge legislation as well, yet it is absent from the current bill, which only requires that the minister take into consideration nature and wildlife in managing the park.

For several years, Parks Canada has expressed a preference for managing the Rouge national urban park under an ecosystem health framework, rather than an ecological integrity framework, to distinguish national urban parks from other national parks. In the spirit of being solutions oriented, we have developed constructive recommendations over that period of time that focus on maximizing ecosystem health.

We are recommending that the legislation be amended to clearly identify maximizing ecosystem health to the greatest degree possible, which is a very important condition as part of the the overarching management goal for the Rouge. We also recommend that a robust definition for maximizing ecosystem health be embedded in the legislation.

Our recommendations would mean that language in the bill would meet international and Canadian standards for protected areas. They would provide park managers with stronger tools to protect the park’s existing natural values and improve the health of its ecosystems as much as possible, particularly given its urban and agricultural context. It would make Parks Canada accountable for improving the health of the ecosystem over time, while not giving the impression that they must achieve an end point of full ecological integrity.

Moreover, our recommendation would provide a clear mandate and incentive for Parks Canada to work collaboratively with farmers to identify strategies that would be good for nature and for farmers in the long run.

We have also identified a few areas where the legislation needs strengthening. On the management planning side, we see requirements for setting ecological objectives and indicators, as well as provisions for ecological monitoring and reporting that are needed in clause 9.

A state of the parks report should be required to be presented to Parliament every five years, as is the case with other national parks, so parliamentarians and the public can track how well Parks Canada is meeting its objectives over time.

Related to public infrastructure, clauses 12 and 16 need to be bolstered with stringent criteria to guide decision-making prior to the clearing of land or disposal of land in the park for infrastructure purposes. For example, we suggest that decision-makers be required to consider reasonable alternatives and to ensure that lowest cost is not the sole justification for infrastructure proposals that might harm the park.

Finally, I'd like to acknowledge parts of the bill that we support and would like to see remain in an amended bill. We support the list of prohibitions currently in the bill. We support the fixed limit of a maximum of 200 hectares that can be removed from the park for infrastructure. This is critically important to avoid the park being nibbled away at over time.

CPAWS urges committee members to work together to strengthen the bill to ensure that the Rouge national urban park effectively protects this natural treasure in the long term, while also supporting a healthy and vibrant farming community and encouraging people to connect with nature.

We've prepared several specific amendments that we will provide to all members of the committee in the upcoming days.

I thank you for the opportunity to share our recommendations. I'd be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Mr. Hébert-Daly. We thank you for staying within the time limit as well.

We'll move now to the Honourable Pauline Browes for her opening statement of seven minutes.

[Pauline Browes, Director, Waterfront Regeneration Trust Corporation]

Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be back on Parliament Hill.

I'm happy to see colleagues from the Scarborough area. It's a pleasure to be at this particular committee meeting as we discuss the Rouge national urban park.

I'd briefly like to share with you some of the background of the 30 years that I've been involved with the Rouge.

In the early 1980s action was brewing to save the Rouge Valley. The community was restless and enthused, and crowds of people jammed into the municipal council chambers wanting action and official zoning bylaws to preserve the Rouge. Much of the land was in public ownership by the province, since it had been land-banked for a green space between the proposed Pickering airport and the urban area of Toronto; however, there was a great threat of subdivisions, garbage dumps, and high-rise apartments in the Rouge.

I was the federal member of Parliament representing Scarborough Centre at the time, and representatives of the organization to save the Rouge, Glenn De Baeremaeker, Jim Robb, Ron Moeser, Cathy Gregorio, came to my constituency office to seek help on how they could save the Rouge. This is a magnificent wilderness area with breathtaking vistas of the banks of the Rouge and Little Rouge rivers, heritage and cultural areas, significant flora and fauna, and white-tailed deer running free throughout the area. It will be just a short distance from the largest urban area of Canada. Yes, indeed, it needed to be protected and preserved.

The task was to find a way. The Minister of the Environment at the time, in 1987, was the Honourable Tom McMillan, and I was his parliamentary secretary. The minister had commissioned a study concerning Parks Canada, and from that study came a recommendation stating that there may be important geographical areas in Canada that should be preserved that don't necessarily fit into the criteria of the national park designation. Yes, that was all we needed. The Rouge fit perfectly into that criteria.

There was a great need for finances to protect the Rouge. With many meetings and interventions, Minister McMillan in 1988 announced on behalf of the Mulroney government that $10 million would be provided to protect and preserve the Rouge as a park.

In 1990, as the first item of business in the House of Commons for that calendar year, I had the opportunity to present a private member's motion, seconded by my Liberal colleague Derek Lee, to have the Rouge designated as a park. The motion passed unanimously in the House of Commons. That was another step in the right direction.

At the same time, the Honourable David Crombie published in his royal commission report on the Toronto waterfront that the Rouge should be protected and established as a park. This was a major boost for the initiative. What followed is that the Province of Ontario took action and appointed an advisory group to consider this.

Later, David Crombie formulated the governance structure, which was the Rouge Park Alliance, with representatives from all the municipalities in the Rouge watershed, the Rouge Valley organization, the TRCA, the Toronto Zoo, and the federal and provincial governments. That $10 million was transferred to the royal commission, and later to the Waterfront Regeneration Trust, of which I am a member. That's where the finances have been for the park.

The interest on that federal financial contribution has been about $450,000 annually. That's been the main source of funds for the Rouge park during the Rouge Park Alliance's term. I might state that out of that $450,000, about $100,000 was given to Jim Robb of Friends of the Rouge Watershed every year.

Significant work has been accomplished. Thousands of trees and wildflowers have been planted, wetlands created, marshes and endangered species protected, and farmland, the trail system, just to name a few things. Meanwhile the province under every political party in a non-partisan way designated more and more land to enlarge the park. David Peterson, Bob Rae, Mike Harris, Dalton McGuinty: they all helped to create what we have as the park.

Over the years the Rouge Park Alliance has discussed how to get different governance and more money, finances, to protect this park. We reviewed all the options. Should it be a provincial park? Should it be a municipal park? Should it be a conservation park? Should it be a national park?

All the criteria...after all the deliberations, looking at all the policies, it was stated that the Rouge should be a national park, which would provide the largest, greatest, and highest protection for the park to stretch from Lake Ontario to the Oak Ridges Moraine.

Every municipality in the Rouge watershed passed a motion endorsing the proposal, as well as the TRCA, to urge the federal government to establish a national park. The Government of Ontario publicly and enthusiastically supported that recommendation. The community supported the recommendation. The information was forwarded to the federal government, and with the assistance of the Honourable Michael Chong, who was a representative of the Rouge Park Alliance, and under the watch of the Honourable Peter Kent and the late Honourable Jim Flaherty, the Rouge national urban park was included in the Speech from the Throne and subsequently allocated the extensive financial resources and the budget, which was absolutely thrilling. The agreement has been signed with the provincial government to transfer those publicly owned lands to Parks Canada.

This legislation is before you. Parks Canada, a heralded organization of experience and very competent individuals, has been assigned the responsibility of the permanent protection and preservation of the natural, cultural, and agricultural aspects of the Rouge national urban park. In particular I would like you to look at clauses 4 and 6. I have read the debates that each of you have made in the House of Commons and I am impressed by what you have been saying, but the language of these two clauses is clear and self-explanatory. These clauses will allow the minister to make the decisions based on the identified purposes for which the park is being created and the factors which must be taken into consideration. Pitting the elements against each other by putting one as a priority, as my friend has mentioned, would really create conflict. I would ask you to consider the natural, cultural, and agricultural aspects, and I mean the cultural aspects with the aboriginal issues and the archaeological issues. When I was a member we did some archaeological digs in the park and we found a 17th century French coin. There's a lot of cultural heritage within this park.

I appreciate being here. You are participating in some historical work in the creation of Canada's first national urban park. I invite you to visit the national park and I urge you to proceed with the passage of this legislation.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Ms. Browes, thank you very much.

We're going to move now to Kim Empringham, York Region Federation of Agriculture. My apologies Ms. Empringham, for the misspelling of your name. It should have a g, but we know who you are and we welcome you to our committee today. We'll then follow up with some questions later.

[Kim Empringham, York Region Federation of Agriculture]

Thank you.

I'd like to thank you on behalf of the York Region Federation of Agriculture for giving me the opportunity to speak to you on behalf of its 700 farmer members in the region, including those farming in the proposed Rouge national urban park. We represent the farmers in the region on issues affecting their farms, as well as decisions that will affect them in the future.

The York Region Federation of Agriculture supports Parks Canada's consultation process that engaged over 150 stakeholder groups and thousands of individuals to create the Rouge national urban park. We support the integrated approach balancing natural heritage, sustainable farming, cultural heritage, and visitor experience found in both Bill C-40 and the draft management plan. We have confidence that Parks Canada will improve the ecological health of the park while maintaining the farmland in production.

Two of the guiding principles for the Rouge national urban park are to maintain and improve ecological health and scientific integrity, and to respect and support sustainable agriculture and other compatible land uses.

The draft management plan states:

The protection, conservation, and restoration of the park's natural, cultural and agricultural resources are integral to all decision-making related to park management.

The farmland in the Rouge national urban park, approximately 7,500 acres, is class 1 agricultural land, meaning it's the best land for agricultural production. Less than 1% of Canada's farmland is class 1. The farmers in the park have already given up 1,000 acres of productive farmland in the park to reforestation projects, completed by the previous Rouge Park.

With the world population expected to increase from seven billion to nine billion by 2050, there will continue to be a growing need to protect farmland resources and support production to meet local and global food needs.

Farmland should be protected for its highest and best use: for agriculture and food production. Any tree planting and habitat restoration should be encouraged in areas where farming is not feasible, such as slopes, riparian areas, wet areas, etc., or hedgerows between the fields. Farmers support the protection of natural areas, but it is important that natural heritage restoration doesn't unnecessarily encroach on productive farmlands.

The farmers in the park use environmental farm plans incorporating best-management practices as part of their ongoing stewardship of the farmland they have been taking care of for generations.

Farmland produces food production, carbon sequestration, climate regulation, improved air quality, wildlife habitat, hydrological functions, groundwater recharge, and buffering protection to natural heritage features.

Whether we are talking about the 51,000 farms across the province of Ontario, the 800 farms in York region, or the 40 farmers in the Rouge national urban park, we're talking about farm families, not industrial corporations. Some 98% of the farms in Canada are family owned and operated. They're handed down from generation to generation, but we must remember, these farm families are agricultural businesses.

The agrifood sector is the second biggest economic driver in the province. We have an important job to do, feeding our neighbours, whether they are in Markham or Toronto, across the province, or around the world. Our business is agriculture, but our heart lies with our family and our land.

For the farms to be environmentally and economically sustainable in the park, it will be important to ensure that farmers will not have unnecessary regulations or restrictions placed on them. They cannot be put at a competitive disadvantage compared with other farms across the province.

The farming community in the Rouge national urban park are the same farm families who have been caring for the land and growing food for the people of Ontario for the past 200 years.

The future of the farms in the park has been in limbo since the farms were expropriated in the 1970s. The farmers who decided to stay on their family farms after they were expropriated had to farm with one-year leases and no certainty in their future or the ability to make capital improvements on farms which they could be evicted from at any time.

Farmers in the park are not getting rich on the backs of Ontarians. They are paying $20 to $30 more an acre to lease farmland compared to farmers outside of the park on private land.

The infrastructure on the farms in the park has had no substantial improvement made to it over the past 40 years because of the one-year leases and uncertain future. The long-term leases outlined in the draft management plan will allow farmers to invest in their farms for the future in the park.

Farmers in the Rouge national urban park produce 46 different crops. Some of these crops are sold fresh to the consumer while others require some sort of processing before being consumed.

There have been some who question the value of growing corn on public lands, believing that it is not local food and that there's lots of corn being grown across the province. Of the 280 million bushels of corn produced in Ontario this year, 190 million bushels go to human and animal feed, and 135 million bushels go to ethanol production to fulfill the government requirement to substitute 10% ethanol into gasoline. There will be a 62% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions on a per-litre basis when ethanol is used in gasoline instead of the equivalent petroleum products, but we don't produce enough corn to fulfill our needs. We have to import corn in 2014 and 2015 to supply this important environmental initiative.

I would like to reiterate that the farmland in the park needs to be preserved so that future generations of farmers can produce food, fibre, and fuel for their surrounding neighbours.

I would like to thank you again for the opportunity to speak to you today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Ms. Empringham.

We'll move now to the opening round of questions with Mr. Woodworth, please.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

My thanks to the witnesses for their attendance here today.

I have a number of questions that I wish to ask that have some legal input. I'd like to inquire if I'm right.

Mr. Hébert-Daly and Ms. Woodley, neither of you is a lawyer. Am I right about that? I am correct, okay.

I have the impression that you may not be familiar with the memorandum of agreement made on January 26, 2013, between Canada and the Province of Ontario. Am I right that you are not familiar with this?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

We're familiar with it.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Have you read it?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

We have read it, yes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Have you specifically read the provisions that require the Government of Canada to respect certain policies of the Government of Ontario?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

Yes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

So you are familiar with that.

I have what I'm told is a press release titled “CPAWS and other major environmental groups applaud Ontario's position on Rouge Park lands”. Are you familiar with that?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

Yes, we are.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Did you approve it when it went out?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

Yes, we did.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Specifically, I'm looking at the last sentence in the second paragraph, which says that “the legislation...does not honour a January 2013 Memorandum of Agreement...requiring written park policies that 'meet or exceed provincial policies'.”

Did you approve that statement?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

Yes, that's right.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

What did you mean by provincial policies in that statement?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

The Rouge Park management plan specifically states that the natural features and the ecosystem will be preserved in perpetuity. The—

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Could I stop you for a moment?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

Yes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

We do have limited time, and I don't really need to know what the Rouge Park management plan says, but I want to know.... I assume that you're saying that there is a policy in the Rouge Park management plan that you feel the legislation does not honour. Is that correct?

[Éric Hébert-Daly]

Yes. The greenbelt plan that references the management plan, in fact—yes, it does