Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 20th, 2013

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

My second question has been answered. I was going to ask Mr. Parrish about the great benefits of his time at St. Francis Xavier, but he's answered that part already.

This is not a job interview, but when I'm interviewing people to work for me, one of the questions I often ask is: Can you give me an example during your past career of having stood up to someone in authority?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

That would be in order. It's to do with qualifications and competence.

Go ahead, gentlemen.

[Kenneth Bateman]

As you can appreciate, the board is composed of a group of individuals who are independent, who are skilled and knowledgeable in their areas. We don't always agree. We meet and we listen carefully, and we draw on the expertise that our staff provides to us, but at the end of the day, we must make decisions that we believe are correct.

In board settings I have dissented in certain circumstances and it has not always been comfortable, but I have done so because I have weighed carefully all of the facts and information before me. On some of those occasions, I have stood alone but confident that I have honoured my conscience and made a decision that I believe is correct.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I don't know who would like to go next. Go ahead, please, gentlemen, in the order you choose.

[Shane Parrish]

When you work with first nations, I think that happens pretty much every day. I can't think of a specific example at this moment. It seems as if you're always fighting for something. I hope that's adequate for your question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you.

Go ahead.

[Don Young]

Mr. Chairman, providing there's adequate time, I'll be happy to respond.

I would offer this observation as a scientist, academically and professionally. Science by its very nature requires and in fact encourages vigorous debate over often complex, controversial subjects. This has been a cornerstone of my career.

In the spirit of the way the board operates, we expect vigorous debate, but we also strive towards consensus, considering that is often the best way to get to conclusions in complex situations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you.

We have very little time, so please give us a very short answer.

[Ron Wallace]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be very brief.

Yes, I have encountered that. I could give you a list of items.

In my opening remarks I discussed my time as a regulatory enforcement officer. In the early part of my career there were many times when, in order to make a decision, I had to look objectively at the law of environmental enforcement as well as the data that we were receiving as enforcement personnel. On numerous occasions I came to a decision, even though things may have been embarrassing and difficult, that an enforcement action was necessary.

I'd like to conclude by saying that in every one of the numerous actions I took in those days, including some major prosecutions in the north that received national attention, we were successful in getting to court and in getting a conviction for the offences. It doesn't sound like it at times, but when you're a young regulatory enforcement officer working for the first time on a new career, these decisions can be life changing. I was pleased to be able to go through that tunnel and come out the other side for the betterment of all Canadians.

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you.

The time listed on the agenda for this part of the meeting is up. When we discussed this, we had talked about a little bit of flexibility. Does the committee want to go another five or ten minutes with these particular witnesses? It could be done.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay, I see agreement so let's not waste any more time.

We'll go directly to Mr. Zimmer. If we're going to go ten minutes, we'll take five each. Go ahead, please.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Again, thank you for appearing before committee today.

I don't know if you know where I'm from, but I'm from northeastern British Columbia. Gas and oil and forestry are what we do in my constituency. I'll bring the relevance to your qualifications right away.

Some of these big projects either originate in my riding or they go through my riding. On behalf of my constituents, I want to ask what gives you the qualification, and back it up with some background, possibly, to make the decision on the gravity of the importance of those particular projects to the region? I say that with the understanding that I know you're limited by qualifications. I'm just asking you, based on your qualifications, what gives you the ability to make such grave decisions that affect so many people in the riding?

Perhaps you could all answer that question, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Perhaps each of you could limit yourself to one minute. That's the way it works sometimes at committee. Go ahead, please, in the same order as the last question, if you would like to do it that way.

[Kenneth Bateman]

It's member Bateman. Thank you for that question.

In response, I have conducted National Energy Board hearings for the past six-plus years.

I have sat on the gateway hearing. In that regard, I have been required to be a thoughtful and a careful listener and to take significant amounts of evidence and information and to weigh it with my colleagues in a manner that is appropriate, that is lawful, and is reflective of the public interest. That experience cumulatively has given me the depth and the experience to identify the correct issues, to be able to gather the correct and needed information and evidence in order to go through the process of making a decision. It has required me to acquire a level of technical knowledge and expertise in the design, construction, and operation of a pipeline, to have the environmental expertise and the support, where needed, in order to make a proper analysis and ultimately, to take that information and to weigh it.

I believe my prior experience and my training as a lawyer allows me to objectively and neutrally weigh all of those factors, balance them in a way that will come to a conclusion, simply stated, to then ask the question: would Canada and Canadians be better off with this particular project or without it?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Yes, go ahead, please, sir.

[Shane Parrish]

Thank you for the question, honourable member.

I lived for seven years in Fort Liard, which is just down the road from Fort Nelson, although it is in the Northwest Territories. I spent a lot of time in Fort Nelson. I spent a lot of time in Fort St. John. Some of my clients included Treaty 8 Tribal Association, Fort Nelson First Nation, Fort Liard first nation. I've gone all over the Horn River Basin. I've gone all over the Liard Basin. I have your dirt under my nails. How is that? I'm pretty familiar with your area, your region, and I always will be.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay, go ahead.

[Don Young]

This is Mr. Young responding to the question. Thank you, honourable member.

I would say simply that I understand the geography, the people, and the environment based upon a variety of work experiences over the years. They include two not necessarily competing, but different, perspectives. One is that of understanding the implications of energy development in northern British Columbia, and evaluating that from an environmental and social impact assessment perspective with industry, particularly related to pipelines. Two, in my environmental non-government organization leadership capacity, a significant part of our work during my tenure with Ducks Unlimited was focused on understanding the importance of that environment, the people who depend upon it, and how to effect long-term protection of those important landscapes for Canadians. I think it's a companion set of perspectives that provide the kind of balance that is required for forming reasoned decisions to benefit Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you.

Doctor.

[Ron Wallace]

Mr. Chairman, and honourable member, thank you for the opportunity to respond.

I think it's important for us to acknowledge that we, as board members of the National Energy Board, are looking at case-specific information that is brought to us on project-specific materials put before us. In that kind of setting, while testimony and evidence brought forward to the board may be passionate, is it well-based, is it science-based, and does it persuade?

What I would like to say is by example, since I don't have direct experience in your specific region, honourable member.

In my opening statement I talked about my recent work with the Inuvialuit settlement region of the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway. I had a significant role in assisting board members in setting out the approvals and requirements for that licensing process. This project was announced by the Prime Minister this summer. There is tremendous support for this in the Inuvialuit settlement region. Nonetheless, the board was required to set out terms and conditions of the licence for the construction and operation of that highway that met much broader concerns of all Canadians that they be informed and that this project be built, managed, constructed, and operated in a way that would be to the long-term benefit of not only the immediate people in the region, but all Canadians.

I'm very pleased to say that if that experience I've had this year is reflected in the work I'll do with the National Energy Board, I'm very confident I'll be able to deliver on the promise that has been made to you.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you very much.

Finally, Ms. Duncan, for about six minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank all four gentlemen for appearing, I wish you could have been here in person. Some of you may recall being at energy hearings with me during my 10 years as an environmental lawyer in Alberta.

I have to say right off the bat that I'm very impressed with the increasing appointments of people with scientific background. Kudos go to the government for appointing people with these credentials.

The questions I'll put to you deal with the potential for conflict and bias because of your credentials, and I'll try to make them specific to make it easier for you to answer.

A specific question would be for Mr. Parrish. I'm delighted to see all of your northern and aboriginal experience. It looks like most of it is with first nation corporations, as opposed to communities. I'm wondering if you anticipate any potential bias or conflict during hearings that might involve the same first nations or Inuit corporations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Go ahead, please, sir.

[Shane Parrish]

Thank you, honourable member, for the question.

Yes, I have worked a lot with first nations, mostly, as I say, in northeast B.C., NWT, and Inuit and eastern Arctic. I also have an education. I went to the Coady International Institute at St. Francis Xavier. I also have a B.A. in economics from the University of Calgary. I have worked extensively with first nations. I've also worked with industry and I've worked with government. I think that's it, industry and government. I was manager of business development for Canadian Petroleum Engineering.

We all bring to the table different areas of expertise. We rely on each other to a certain extent when we're appointed to a panel or a board, and we draw from each other's expertise. We also—what's the word I'm looking for here? Success is based on being able to see different perspectives and it has to be beneficial to everyone, not only to one party.

That's what I have to say. I base my success on my previous work environment.

I hope that answers your question.