Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 17th, 2015

[David Lindsay]

Again, thank you very much for the question, Ms. Duncan.

I'll break my comments into two pieces actually, if I can. Forest disturbance is an interesting term. We need to be very careful as we think about the disturbance in Canada's forests. There is an organization in the United States that went on Google Maps or looked at the disturbance using satellite imaging, and they concluded that there was a lot of disturbance in Canada's forests. What they neglect to clearly articulate is that much of that is forest fires and insects.

Natural disturbance happens in the boreal forest. As a matter of fact, it's part of the eco-cycle. Caribou like to be in forests of about 60 years of age—that is the ideal—where lichens grow and they can dig them out with their hoofs and eat them in the winter in dark, deep forests. The only way you get a large expanse of 60-year-old forest is if, 62 or 63 years earlier, you had burned it. That's the natural cycle of a boreal forest.

There are natural disturbances, and then there are human disturbances. When we say there is disturbance in Canada's boreal forest, we need to be careful that we differentiate between natural disturbance and human disturbance.

Last year the Canadian Forest Service published its annual report on disturbances in the boreal forest. I don't have it in front of me, but I recommend that the committee have a look at it. Fire, insects, oil and gas, hydroelectric dams—there are lots of disturbances. Canadian forest products companies are legally required to replace the forest cover that they harvest. Any harvesting that takes place by forestry companies is replaced so that there is a net zero reduction in forest cover by the forestry companies, except for the roads to get in and out.

Again I go back to my opening comments. We're very proud of our record of managing the boreal forest and managing all our forestry practices, as we are legally required to do.

The second point I would make is that the Forest Products Association of Canada has worked closely on the Species at Risk Act—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Lindsay, you're not actually answering my question. I didn't even actually ask about the caribou, so I wonder if I could go on with my second question—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Ms. Duncan, actually you're out of time, so we'll have to do that next round or another time.

We now go to Ms. Perkins, followed by Mr. Rafferty and Mr. Trost.

Go ahead, please, Ms. Perkins, for up to five minutes.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you all for your deputations here today.

I've been very intrigued by the issues around the national building code. Mr. Lapointe has certainly outlined for us the changes that have taken place since 1941 and how buildings have gone down in height and what that might look like moving forward. I'm also hearing about the challenges that are being seen with respect to partnerships with engineers who are qualified or comfortable with working and designing with wood products.

Mr. Lapointe is certainly making it abundantly clear that it's doable. From your point of view, Mr. Lindsay, how do you see that piece progressively working into your industry? Is there something significant in this for you or for all of us?

[David Lindsay]

There is very much so. We have a number of colleagues in the forest industry family who have a particular focus on that opportunity. The Canadian Wood Council, CWC, and their Wood Works! program is something on which, I understand, they will make a presentation before this committee in the coming weeks, so I won't go into detail on what they do, but I would encourage you to talk to them about how they run education programs for architects and for the public.

I know that Pierre and the folks at FPInnovations have manuals they have prepared, so lots of good work is happening.

Both the provinces and the federal government need to continue to tell the story about the lighter carbon footprint of forest products. We need to remind municipal planning officers and people in the development industry that you can construct a wooden building quite quickly once the concrete foundation is there, and we want to work with our friends in the concrete industry. Putting a building up with wood construction is a lot quicker and reduces traffic congestion and the challenges of construction in urban settings.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

We appreciate that. Coming from a municipal sector, I know that's going to be a very big challenge for you with the building officials and engineers now.

Mr. Lapointe, you brought forward these slides for us to have a look at. Is this 13-storey in Quebec City under way?

[Pierre Lapointe]

It will be announced in the next few days.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

That's quite interesting. You also had a few others you were talking about here. One of them, of course, was the Richmond skating ring. Is that complete? That is used—

[Pierre Lapointe]

That is complete. It was used at the Vancouver Olympics, and it won a world green-building architecture prize.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

Who is spearheading this new move in this direction? If this is truly the direction you think things are going to go in, where's the push coming from, and who needs to hear about it?

[David Lindsay]

I'll start, and maybe Pierre can jump in and help a little bit.

I've met with the building and land developers and the home builders' associations of Ontario. They are actually quite supportive and quite positive on the greater use of wood construction. They helped to lobby the provincial government in Ontario to change their building code to six storeys.

They're working with the national building code here in Ottawa to make those changes because they see the economic opportunity, particularly in mid-rises. In Whitby—Oshawa, along the arterial roads in Oshawa, there is a lot of mid-rise construction there that's due to be refurbished and rejuvenated. Tearing down strip plazas and putting up four- and six-storey multi-use dwellings is more efficient for the community. It's fast construction, with minimal disruption, and it's a green and renewable resource.

I think the market pull will happen as people start to understand all the merits and values of it.

Pierre may have something to add.

[Pat Perkins, Conservative, Whitby—Oshawa, ON]

If I have time, I'll just ask one more. With respect to the comments that were made about the market in China not using wood in construction, are they more into cements and those sorts of things? Are they staying in that direction?

[David Lindsay]

We've actually had some good successes. The traditional hutong and the traditional home and building construction in China have tended to be in cement and concrete. However, with B.C.'s FII, the British Columbia forest innovation institute, and the federal government working with our embassy and our trade offices, we've literally opened schools and trained architects in China in how to use more wood construction in institutional establishments, multi-dwelling homes, and schools, encouraging them to use more wood construction in the roofing in the concrete buildings. We're growing that market through education and through penetration of the people who make those decisions on the ground. It has to happen on the ground.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Ms. Perkins.

We go now to Mr. Rafferty, and if there is time left, Ms. Duncan, followed by Mr. Trost and Ms. Crockatt. There are probably a couple of spots left. We'll probably have time for another question or two after that.

Go ahead, please, Mr. Rafferty.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Just for everyone here on the committee, I always enjoy Mr. Leef's partisan comments, as I know he does mine.

Just as a point of clarification before I ask my question, in terms of the opposition parties being part of this whole process and problem, as he was perhaps implying, actually 17,400 jobs have been lost since this majority government took power, between 2011 and 2013. That's just a clarification.

I'm not going to talk about that anymore, because I have a very important—

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

I'll get a rebuttal later.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I'm going to have to give up my time to him now.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I have a very important question for all three groups, perhaps. I think we've had a small discussion about this at one point, Mr. Lindsay.

I was wondering...the companies and what you deal with. This may not be directly related to the issue I'm going to ask a question about, but have you had any opportunities to bring some things to the table with the provinces in terms of land tenure? It is my impression, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, that one of the problems with moving the forest industry forward is how provinces and territories—I'm not sure about the territories but certainly the provinces—have issues with land tenure and are continuing to try to sort it out. I know they are in Ontario, and I assume right across Canada.

Is there a way to work with provinces to ensure that the land tenure issues can be sorted out so that the forest industry can move forward at a quicker pace?

Mr. Lindsay might want to start.

[David Lindsay]

Mr. Rafferty and I have some history. I was the deputy minister in Ontario when they started the tenure reform process.

I think there is a willingness and an understanding that making fibre available for new and innovative uses has to be part of our conversation. However, it is the classic Canadian challenge that the tenure system is the responsibility of the provinces and they need to make their decisions on what's in the best interests of the people on the landscape, the people who are creating the jobs, and the communities that they want to serve.

I know Quebec has moved forward with some tenure reform there. It's challenging but they're making progress. Ontario has done a number of things with individual forest FMAs, forest management agreements, and forest management plans, to pursue tenure reform. It is happening in different parts of the country at different paces and to different degrees. More community involvement and more involvement of first nations is always a subtext when you look at tenure reform. It's not a simple plug-and-play, take out an old system and put in a new system. Companies make decisions based on 20-year investments and to suddenly change a system after they've made a 20-year investment would not be good business and it wouldn't be good public policy either. I think we need to evolve our system but respect that business decisions rely on certainty and stability.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. O'Carroll, would you have any comments on that?

[Aran O'Carroll]

Tenure reform is a long-standing and a challenging issue in Canada.

One of the clear things that the CBFA and the collaborations that are going on bring to this question is the idea of an open, transparent discussion of how we're managing the forests and engaging the communities, the first nations, and environmental groups, etc., in the discussion about how management takes place on those tenures. It's something that the CBFA is fully engaged in. That vision of collaboration is one that, while not directly affecting tenure, is certainly changing the paradigm of how those landscapes are managed.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Martel or Mr. Lapointe, would you like to make a comment on that?

[Pierre Lapointe]

Yes.

We have a program with a few provinces and some of the industry looking at what we call “intelligent inventory”. One of the issues that the industry and the provincial governments have is the imprecision of inventory, and as a result, how much it is worth or how much less it is worth. We have put together a project using drone technology to come up with a much more precise inventory and get provinces and industry to agree to a real value of the wood that they can extract. This is quite new. It was done in New Brunswick, Ontario, and Quebec.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Rafferty.

We go now to Mr. Trost, followed by Ms. Crockatt, and Ms. Duncan.

Go ahead please, Mr. Trost.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In my final question Mr. Lindsay had responded about some of our advantages. Specifically he had noted Canadian technology, environmental standards, and the productivity of our workforce. That leads me to where I'm going with my next questions.

I'll start first with the gentlemen who are joining us at a distance. Technology is one of our advantages. I know it's been touched on in some of the other answers and some of the questions here.

How specifically are we staying ahead of other countries in technology? We had some references to places we are ahead of and not, Austria, etc. How do we stay ahead where we are ahead and how do we continue to put the accelerator on? Other countries are not going to be standing still. Other countries are not going to sit around and say, you know, Canada has the Chinese market. They're going to see Canada develop the Chinese market and say, let's go in there and steal it from them. Through technology, how can we keep our advantage both for export markets and for domestic markets? It's not just specific technologies but what are the big themes you're urging to help us keep a lead in that field?