Evidence of meeting #13 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was navigation.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
John Maloney Liberal Welland, ON
That would be good.
Have any concerns about downloading responsibilities been expressed by the provinces, the municipalities, or the conservation authorities through the provinces?
12:50 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
We have to enter into discussions with them to determine that. But of this there is no doubt: out of all of the agencies and interested parties you've just named, there is nobody, virtually in the last five years that I've been leading this program, no agency, no government body, no municipality that hasn't come to me and said, “Change that bloody act”. How they want to partner with us, and their willingness to do it, has not yet been explored. It should be.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
In your previous testimony you noted as an example a forestry project that required 3,000 temporary bridges. Later on you mentioned you're working to self-regulate with the forestry sector already. What oversight would there be about those, and could you maybe be specific about which one it is? How would you determine they were correct on those 3,000 bridges?
12:50 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
Quite often, these areas they go into.... I'll just use the forestry industry to set an example, because I think it points to our other problem, the other problem being that our current legislation requires that every work--work being every one of those bridges--requires a dedicated approval document.
Suppose MacMillan Bloedel wants to go into a piece of New Brunswick. They're going to cut here this year, and it's away out in the boonies someplace. It's three hours from anybody. In the past they used to come in and say they were going to clear-cut up here, and were there any navigational concerns? They'd show us their boundaries. We'd take a quick look at it and we'd say no--just go. They'd go in and they'd do their thing with their temporary bridges. They'd pull whatever they had out and they'd move on for the next year. That's one company.
Then came the introduction of ISO standards. ISO certifications require all these companies, in order to maintain their certification, to prove they've got all their required approvals, permits, and certifications in place and to produce them. All of a sudden we start having these guys show up with 3,000 applications in hand, saying now they need us to produce 3,000 pieces of paper for them on waterways that for the most part would be covered under these minor waterways that nobody's ever going to put a canoe or a kayak on.
In one case we went with the Forest Products Association of Canada by helicopter two hours north of Prince Albert and landed on the bridge. I looked under the bridge and I said, “The water's absolutely navigable, but other than your lumber trucks, who's up here?” There is nobody around for 300 to 400 miles.
12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
So the ISO certifications were pushing that, and that's why we have to try to find a method whereby we can deal with that requirement. In a changed act, one way would be that if you had 3,000 bridges that really mattered, all on a similar type of waterway on a given project, you could come to us and maybe we'd review it and issue you one document for the 3,000 bridges--maybe. We'd have to look at it.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Chair, I just want to get a brief clarification.
There was an exchange between you and Mr. Masse in which Mr. Masse talked about the number of employees you have working under this particular program. I believe you referred to a couple of thousand.
Then there was a question regarding the number of people who actually have the ability to give approvals. I believe you said the number was 40 across Canada. Is that correct?
12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
Yes. Actually, I think currently there are about 67 people involved in the program directly, including management staff and clerical staff. Of the 67, approximately 40 are officers able to make decisions and to issue approval documents.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
You said the number had increased by about five over the last four years or so. Is that right?
12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
That's correct.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
But that increase of five isn't the total number of staff that's been increased for the department or for the navigable waterways program. Is that correct?
February 12th, 2008 / 12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
That's the total number of staff that have been increased in the navigable waterways.... We haven't brought on new clerical staff or managers simply because we really need to put our limited resources on officers.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
So your total contingent is about 67 and it's been increased by about five--is that correct?
12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
Correct.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Don Bell Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Yes.
You mentioned partnerships with other organizations. You were talking there about municipalities, but does this include private businesses, private enterprises? You mentioned persons or organizations, including municipalities.
12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
The organizations I was thinking of were the recreational boaters group, for example, if we're going to regulate private moorings. They're out on the water; they can help in that regard.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Don Bell Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Okay.
The other one was aquaculture. If DFO covers the fishy aspect of it--the pollution and the sea lice and all that--what do you cover? Is it whether it'll interfere with navigable waters?
12:55 p.m.
Manager, Navigable Waters Protection Program, Department of Transport
All of these works are placed in navigable waters, by their very nature, and we cover all of the markings for the private buoys around them to show that they're here and that there's a navigational channel to get through them. In the case of the larger ones in Prince Edward Island, they cover full bays, for example. We cover all the markings around them.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you.
I would suspect that we will ask you back, probably more than once, to continue this discussion and dialogue. I appreciate your time. We'll talk to you soon on navigable waters.
Just for the advice of the committee, the subcommittee is meeting on Thursday. I would ask, if you can get your heads around this a little bit, for a list of witnesses that you'd perhaps like to see, and perhaps areas that we would like to visit specifically, if we decide to go on the road—and where we might be able to plan. We have to help our clerks here to make some calls and to start making a budget if that's the case.
Mr. Maloney.