Environment committee  I'm going to let Darren talk about the current scientific work that we're doing in this area.

Environment committee  I suspect that the WMO standards Mr. Ferguson was referring to primarily had to do with water quantity monitoring standards that would be adhered to by the program Ms. Béchard supervises. It's important to adhere to those kinds of standards. Canada is a significant contributor to the scientific and standard development at the WMO.

Environment committee  I can provide you with a preliminary answer. If you want more detail, we'd be happy to follow up. We can give you a written submission, if you want, describing the precise parameters of the study. The brief answer is that under the chemicals management plan, Environment Canada jointly with Health Canada has initiated a scientific review to assess the effects on the environment of microbeads in consumer products.

Environment committee  Well, I'll provide a preliminary answer, and if my colleagues want to jump in or kick me, I'm sure we'll find out. Let me just step back a bit and explain that the Canada Water Act provides us with broad authority to undertake research and monitoring, either on our own or—and importantly, jointly—with the provinces, both on water quality and on water monitoring.

Environment committee  We also conduct a number of extensive water quantity monitoring activities. As shown in slides 10 and 12, we have about 2,800 sites that measure water levels and stream flow. About half of those provide data in real time. The indicator on slide 10 refers to water quantity in terms of normal, which is a reflection—and I'll let Geneviève provide more detail, if you're interested—essentially, as I understand it, of average flows between 1981 and 2010.

Environment committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning to all the committee members. We are pleased to be here. We're very happy to be here. I will take you briefly through a summary of the department's water-related activities, and then of course we'd be happy to answer questions on any of the topics.

Environment committee  I'm sorry; it was page 4. With slide 5, you'll have to excuse me. I'm trained as a lawyer, so there has to be a legal slide in every deck I present—and a complicated legal slide, of course. This is to illustrate the simple point that even within the federal government, responsibility for water management is shared widely among departments.

Foreign Affairs committee  I take it we're only talking about the proposed amendment to paragraph 7(1)(b) of the act. I think the view of the government is that this would be, if I could put it in colloquial terms, nice to have, but not necessary to have. The key scope amendments were the two to clauses 13 to 14, which would clarify that the prohibition in the IRIA would address those waters not addressed by the prohibition in the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act.

Foreign Affairs committee  The government has suggested all three so that there is a coherent set of definitional provisions that would provide clarity as to the scope of the prohibition. The third one would enhance the coherence of that suite of definitional amendments.

Foreign Affairs committee  Thanks, Mr. Chair. Just to clarify, Mr. Dechert referred to a suite of amendments, three amendments, all of which would affect the definitions and therefore the scope of the new prohibition in the International River Improvements Act. The first of this suite of three would amend clause 13 of the bill, which is a part of the bill and I think would therefore be within the scope of the committee to look at.

Foreign Affairs committee  Mr. Chair, I think it's important to emphasize that neither of these statutes is designed to provide comprehensive environmental protection associated with waters in Canada. Jurisdiction over waters in Canada is shared federally and provincially. Provincial governments have considerable jurisdiction over the management of water within their own territories.

Foreign Affairs committee  Thanks, Mr. Chair. Mr. Dechert described three amendments. I'll speak to them in a slightly different sequence, if I may. The first amendment would clarify the purpose of the new prohibition in the International River Improvements Act, precisely the same new purpose that the committee just agreed to add to the IBWTA prohibition, so it's having the same purpose: focused on environmental harm associated with the prohibitions in both acts.

Foreign Affairs committee  I believe Mr. Dechert has referred to two amendments to clause 13. The first would simply amend the definition of international river improvement and add the single word “pipeline”. The purpose of that amendment would be to clarify that a pipeline would constitute an improvement for the purpose of the International River Improvements Act.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'll start by repeating that I think the important clarification Mr. Dechert provided here is that proposed section 42 in the bill focuses only on a review of the enforcement-related provisions of the bill, proposed sections 24 to 41. This provision is a mirror of the provision that was introduced in the Environmental Enforcement Act three years ago, which required precisely the same 10-year review of the new enforcement provisions that were introduced by the Environmental Enforcement Act into nine other environmental statutes.

Foreign Affairs committee  This provision would essentially add this 10-year review requirement to the IBWTA. I think we already have this provision for the IRIA. It would add this provision and it would be triggered on the date that the section comes into force, as it says. It wouldn't be concurrent with the other 10-year reviews.