Environment Committee on Nov. 26th, 2014

[Alan Latourelle]

Mr. Chair, this is all new money, so none of that—

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Okay.

Over how many years is that going to be spent?

[Alan Latourelle]

From a Parks Canada perspective, over the next month or so, we will be able to confirm that. The Prime Minister, when he made the announcement on Monday, said that the vast majority of the federal infrastructure would be spent over a three-year period.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Do we know yet how it's going to be allocated?

[Alan Latourelle]

It's going to be allocated wisely, and it's going to be spent efficiently and with probity.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

I'm sorry—

[Alan Latourelle]

Seriously, we've done a lot of work. In 2012 we looked at our 11,000 assets and identified the condition of each and every one of them, so we know where we are with every single asset that we own. We're going to be investing the $2.8 billion. Again, it includes Parks Canada as the major component. There may be other departments, but it will cover our current backlog of deferred work. So we know where it is and then it's an issue of implementing that and developing the detailed plan. But this information came to us this week, so we will need some time to finalize the details.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Do we know yet how much is going to go to Parks Canada specifically, or how much is going to go to Heritage resources conservation? Do we know yet how much is being allocated to—?

[Alan Latourelle]

I would say that the bulk of the $2.8 billion will be coming to Parks Canada.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

To Parks Canada.

Do you know how historic sites are going to be defined? There may be national historic sites that aren't part of Parks Canada or are having a hard time being recognized. Are they going to be able to apply for funding?

[Alan Latourelle]

The funding that's before you in the supplementary estimates is, again, for highways, bridges, and dams for this year in Parks Canada. The $2.8 billion, as mentioned, mentions the historic sites also, but those are Parks Canada owned and operated.

We do have a grants and contributions program that's approximately $1 million a year to support third party owned national historic sites. Some of those national historic sites, though, for example, are owned by provincial governments.

For example, in Charlottetown the federal government has invested $10 million this year on a provincially owned—

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

What if they're owned by municipalities?

[Alan Latourelle]

They can access and make submissions to our grants and contributions program, for which we have a call for proposals every year.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Does my colleague Mr. Bevington have a...?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

You have 45 seconds.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

In that case let's just keep going. I'll forfeit my time for another round.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

Mr. Shipley, go ahead.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm a visiting body to environment, so it's interesting to be here.

I want to touch on an area that hasn't yet been touched on—genomics. I am in agriculture, in farming, but whether you're in agriculture or not, genomics is playing an incredible part, whether it's in pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, or agriculture.

These are supplementary estimates; I understand that. I think I read that about $800,000 has gone into renewal of genomics research and development initiatives. Can you talk to me a little bit about that and what it is? I don't know a lot about genomics, either, but I can tell you the significance of it as we move forward in whatever industry we're in. Genomics is going to play a significant role in terms of our economic growth and the ability to stay on the cutting edge in terms of advancement in technology.

Mr. Martin, I think you're on if you would help us a little bit with that part of it.

[Michael Martin]

Thank you for the question.

Yes, if approved, we will receive funding of $800,000 for very specific activities. As you suggested, genomics provides a new tool that is potentially extremely significant to some of the work we do.

To give you an example, we currently use genomic techniques in support of wildlife conservation, to look at how genes interact with environmental stressors or specific contaminants. In fact, I had the opportunity to visit our lab that is co-located here at Carleton University, which is doing some of this work.

It provides a tremendous new tool to look at the impact that contaminants may have, for example, on migratory birds. It's helpful in terms of strengthening our environmental monitoring. When we look at indicators within key aquatic or land-based ecosystems and species, we can look at the impact of various contaminants on aquatic species in terms of their genetic impact.

It also can enhance our tool kit in terms of compliance and enforcement, because using genomic methods we can do more efficient analysis of fauna and flora. It's a very powerful tool that we're beginning to make greater use of.

The costs associated with it are also coming down significantly, as you're seeing in other areas.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

I was going to ask you about that because the cost is.... I forget what the number I heard recently was, but it has come down something like 1,000% or some astronomical number in comparison to where it started.

With that, it's so interesting because I think it also helps to understand genome molecular activity and how it reacts to certain things. You talked about contaminants.

I wonder if you could touch on external partners. You don't do this all by yourself, so the best way to leverage anything and to be able to reach out and get the best value.... You mentioned Carleton University. I wonder if you could elaborate in terms of your external partners.

[Michael Martin]

This is, of course, part of a broader initiative. We do look to work with other university partners where they may have the capabilities. The reality is, though, that Environment Canada as an environmental science performer is certainly one of the leading institutions in the country and a significant performer globally through a variety of metrics.

To give you another example, in this specific area we would make use of other people's genomics sequencing capability to support our activity, but we often do that just on a commercial basis. For example, we can now sequence the entire genome of a migratory bird. The number I was given recently, it was only about $2,000.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

Thank you very much, Mr. Martin.

Your time is up, Mr. Shipley. Thank you.

Ms. Brown, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I too am a visiting body to this committee, so thank you for having me.

My questions are for Mr. Bloom.

I was very fortunate, when I was first elected, to be on the transport committee, in which we had the discussion, first of all, about the extension of the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act. Then two years ago at the foreign affairs committee, Mr. Bloom, you were one of our witnesses in our investigation into Canada's policy for the Arctic. We submitted that report to the House in May 2013, just at the time that Canada was taking the chair of the Arctic Council.

I refer to your remarks in committee, from a quotation that is actually in the report, which says:

[The] scale of resource development in this region is reaching unprecedented levels. World demand and commodity prices have brought global attention to the north's rich supply of minerals, metals, oil, and gas. Emerging markets around the world provide Canada with an opportunity to responsibly develop our natural resources for the benefit of all Canadians.

Then you talked later on about some 21 resource and regional infrastructure projects that were at various stages of the regulatory process in Canada's north. You talked about a further eight projects that are “set to potentially enter the environmental assessment phase in the coming 18 months”.

With the changing complexions of the north, we heard from academic institutions, the private sector, environmental interests, government actors in the north, all of the actors.

Could you give the committee an update on some of the processes that are under way? What point are these projects at? How are they changing the face of the north? Are we doing a good job?

It's a lot to answer. I'm sorry.

[Mitch Bloom]

I won't answer the good job, but I will give you an update on how things have gone since I last appeared before that committee.

Projects continue to move through the environmental assessment systems in all three territories. That has happened. Projects are going into construction and/or production.

I'll use examples from two of the territories, one being Nunavut, where the Mary River Baffinland iron ore project went into production back in September.

How is it changing the face of the north? There are 600 people on site—it's about minus 30 degrees Celsius on an average day at this time of year—and that's remarkable. The number of Inuit employed at those sites is significant. We should and could do better. This is the biggest employer in all of Nunavut, and it will affect Nunavut's GDP in its own right, probably by about 20%, just using that one example.

I go to the Northwest Territories and use the example of De Beers' Gahcho Kué diamond mine, which is now going into construction as well.

In certain commodities, one iron ore and one diamond, you can see that things remain to happen. As I said then, it's largely due to the geology and the opportunity that the north offers.

Having said that, in the oil and gas sector things have quieted down significantly. That is largely due to global forces. You have seen that the glut in oil production has meant that higher-expense districts, such as in the Northwest Territories central Mackenzie Valley or the offshore Arctic, really aren't the optimal places to go.

Having said that, the overall pace continues. Companies continue to put their projects through the environmental assessment in all three territories; funding is a bit more challenging now—that's just a global force—and things continue to happen in the north, including this construction. We're quite positive, seeing this happening.