Bill S-15 (Historical)

Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act

An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001

Part 1 of this enactment amends the Canada National Parks Act to create Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada.
It also amends the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to prohibit drilling for petroleum in Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada or within one nautical mile seaward of Sable Island’s low-water mark, to restrict surface access rights provided for under that Act and to provide for the issuance of licences and authorizations with respect to activities that may be carried out in Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada.
Finally, it makes consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.
Part 2 amends the Canada National Parks Act to provide that the dedication of the national parks of Canada to the people of Canada is subject to any Act of Parliament.
It also amends the description of the commercial zones for the Community of Field in Yoho National Park of Canada in Schedule 4 to that Act and of the leasehold boundary of the Marmot Basin Ski Area in Jasper National Park of Canada in Schedule 5 to that Act.

[The Speaker, Andrew Scheer]

I have the honour to inform the House that when the House did attend His Excellency the Governor General in the Senate chamber, His Excellency was pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to certain bills:

C-321, An Act to amend the Canada Post Corporation Act (library materials)—Chapter 10, 2013.

C-37, An Act to amend the Criminal Code—Chapter 11, 2013.

C-383, An Act to amend the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act and the International River Improvements Act—Chapter 12, 2013.

S-9, An Act to amend the Criminal Code—Chapter 13, 2013.

C-47, An Act to enact the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act and the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 14, 2013.

C-309, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (concealment of identity)—Chapter 15, 2013.

C-43, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act—Chapter 16, 2013.

S-213, An Act respecting a national day of remembrance to honour Canadian veterans of the Korean War—Chapter 17, 2013.

C-42, An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 18, 2013.

S-209, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (prize fights)—Chapter 19, 2013.

S-2, An Act respecting family homes situated on First Nation reserves and matrimonial interests or rights in or to structures and lands situated on those reserves—Chapter 20, 2013.

S-8, An Act respecting the safety of drinking water on First Nation lands—Chapter 21, 2013.

C-63, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the financial year ending March 31, 2014—Chapter 22, 2013.

C-64, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the financial year ending March 31, 2014—Chapter 23, 2013.

C-15, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 24, 2013.

C-62, An Act to give effect to the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts—Chapter 25, 2013.

S-14, An Act to amend the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act—Chapter 26, 2013.

S-17, An Act to implement conventions, protocols, agreements and a supplementary convention, concluded between Canada and Namibia, Serbia, Poland, Hong Kong, Luxembourg and Switzerland, for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes—Chapter 27, 2013.

S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001—Chapter 28, 2013.

It being 4:24 p.m., the House stands adjourned until Monday, September 16, 2013, at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Orders 28(2) and 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 4:24 p.m.)

The first session of the 41st Parliament was prorogued by royal proclamation on September 13, 2013.

Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing or Special Order or usual practice of the House, Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be deemed concurred in at the report stage and deemed read a third time and passed.

(Bill S-15. On the Order: Government Orders:)

June 18, 2013—Report Stage of Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001—Minister of the Environment.

Business of the House

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there has been consultation among the parties and I believe it is possible that you could find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That Bill S-15, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be taken up at the report stage later today.

Environment and Sustainable Development

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among the parties and I am hopeful that you could find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That Bill S-15, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 may be taken up at report stage later this day.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

In accordance with its order of reference of Monday, June 10, 2013, your committee has considered Bill S-15, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, and agreed on Monday, June 17, 2013 to report it without amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much.

I want again to thank Minister Kent and his officials for being with us today.

Thank you, committee, for great questioning.

At this point, we have the honour to adjourn, and then I have the honour of presenting Bill S-15 to the House in a few minutes. So we're going to adjourn at this point.

Thank you very much.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Certainly I look forward, I hope in the very near future—and thank you for your consideration of Bill S-15, as I said at the beginning—to bringing any new proposed legislation before the committee for consideration.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

Mr. Chair, the preamble to Bill S-15 is not repeated in the provincial legislation, so it would only apply to the federal act. The proposed amendment calls on the Government of Nova Scotia to, in part, not use Bill S-15 as a precedent for creating new national parks in areas of oil and gas exploration, or allowing oil and gas exploration in any new national parks. This subject matter is not germane to the province of Nova Scotia.

The preamble as currently written suggests that Parks Canada should no longer consider proposed national parks should they be located in areas of oil and gas exploration. This could constitute an enormous constraint on Parks Canada's ability to complete the national parks system.

I think this was the point that was made by Ms. Leslie in her questioning of certain witnesses. This is a park that exists within an area of hydrocarbon exploration, and we're actually getting an enormous ecological integrity gain from this legislation.

The preamble is redundant in that Bill S-15 does not amend the Canada National Parks Act to permit petroleum exploration and drilling activities in any national park or national park reserve, nor in any future national park or national park reserve.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I will give my ruling at this point.

Bill S-15 amends the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act by prohibiting drilling for petroleum, by restricting surface access rights, and by providing for the issuance of licences and authorizations with respect to activities that may be carried out in Sable Island national park reserve of Canada.

The proposed amendment aims to also review the working relationship between the Parks Canada agency and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on page 766:

An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.

In the opinion of the chair, the “working relationship between the Parks Canada agency and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board” is beyond the scope of Bill S-15 and is therefore inadmissible.

(Clause 16 agreed to)

Shall the short title carry?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

This will shock you, Mr. Chair.

We also think that a parliamentary review is good, but there is another way. The issue I have with this particular amendment is that it would have the effect of amending the section dealing specifically with the Marmot Basin ski area in Jasper National Park. But the proposed amendment, in our opinion, is redundant in that, within five years, Parks Canada must table in Parliament a management plan for Sable Island national park reserve. This will provide the opportunity for a parliamentary review of the overall management of Sable Island, including the provisions of Bill S-15, as well as the work of Parks Canada with the Offshore Petroleum Board.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

This is a review clause. It would require Parliament, most likely a committee, to study not only the operation of this act but also the working relationship between Parks Canada and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.

I want to make sure we get this right and that we don't forget about Sable Island after Bill S-15 receives royal assent. I'm proposing that we come back and take another look at it in five years. How has it fared? How is it being enforced? What is the health of the island, its ecosystem, and wildlife? Also, what is the relationship between Parks Canada and the board? Are there areas of friction or concern? How can we smooth those out?

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I think we're ready for my ruling; at least that's my impression.

Bill S-15 amends the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to restrict surface access rights provided for under that act and to provide for the issuance of licences and authorizations with respect to activities that may be carried out in Sable Island national park reserve of Canada. This amendment proposes to lay any proposed memorandum of understanding concluded between the board and Parks Canada agency under section 46 of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act before each House of Parliament.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on page 766:

An amendment to a bill that was referred to committee after second reading is out order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment attempts to introduce a new concept that is beyond the scope of Bill S-15 and is therefore inadmissible.

(Clause 8 agreed to)

(Clauses 9 to 15 inclusive agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I have a ruling on amendment MAY-4 as well.

Bill S-15 amends the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act by prohibiting any work or activity related to the drilling for petroleum. This amendment would permit the establishment of any facilities related to emergency evacuation without the board's authorization.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on page 766:

An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.

In the opinion of the chair, this amendment is contrary to the provisions of clauses 6 and 8 of Bill S-15 and is therefore inadmissible.

Amendment MAY-5 is deemed moved.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We're on amendment MAY-6.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we have amendment LIB-1.

Ms. Duncan, you have a minute to speak to your amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I do have a ruling on it, but is there debate first?

Okay. The motion has been made. However, the ruling is that Bill S-15 amends the Canada National Parks Act to ensure continuity of existing leases, easements, and licences of occupation in or on the Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada. This amendment proposes to subject the continuity to pending consultations with first nations and the general public.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on page 766:

An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.

In the opinion of the chair, this condition is contrary to the provisions of clause 3 of Bill S-15 and is therefore inadmissible.

This ruling also applies to amendment MAY-2.

(Clause 3 agreed to)

(Clauses 4 and 5 agreed to)

(On clause 6)

On clause 6, amendment MAY-3 is deemed moved. Debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I call the committee back to order, please. We're going to move to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-15.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), the consideration of the preamble and clause 1, the short title, is postponed.

(Clause 2 agreed to)

(On clause 3)

On clause 3, amendment deemed moved, is there debate?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

It's actually quite a large area in and around the island itself, which is remarkable, as this is a park—the point made by Ms. Leslie—that's in an active petroleum development field.

I just wanted to put on the record that it is quite a large area that Bill S-15 is protecting. I think it's something that is positive.

Ms. Lucas, you spoke a little bit about the development of the parks management plan. I think a lot of the potential issues that we've raised in the debate in the House and here...we've heard from witnesses that this will be an excellent opportunity to address those through the development of this plan.

Could you perhaps elaborate for the committee on some of the things that you, being one of the leading experts on Sable, would be looking to see in the development of this plan?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the protection that Bill S-15 affords to Sable Island is greater than just the island itself.

[Zoe Lucas]

In the mid-1990s, I became involved in the campaign to address the long-term problem of securing government commitment for support of the Sable Island station. This involved working with the Ecology Action Centre and Mark Butler.

To ensure environmental protection and conservation of Sable's natural values, a continuous human presence on the island is essential. There has been a government station on Sable since 1801, but for the first 150 years, the primary role of the station was to maintain aids to navigation and life-saving. The development of various technologies such as radar enabled ships to avoid the island. By the mid-1900s, the island's role as a hazard to navigation was greatly reduced.

The Meteorological Service of Canada has been collecting weather data on Sable since 1871. Increasing scientific interest in the island generated awareness of its unique natural values and concerns about conservation and protection. Requests from tourists, media groups, as well as researchers to visit Sable have steadily increased.

By the mid-1990s, it was clear that the Canada Shipping Act was no longer a good fit for management of the island. This, combined with budget cuts during program review, resulted in a decade of serious uncertainty about the future of the island.

The announcement that the Government of Canada would consider national park status for Sable Island is great news. This status offers the highest level of protection and conservation available in Canada.

Given the unique history and issues of the Sable Island situation, the very grave concerns about the island's future, and the four decades of experience with the offshore energy industry in this region, this makes for a stable solution that will work well for the island. The expertise, mandate, and resources of Parks Canada will provide a high level of long-term and continuous protection for Sable Island. Advice provided to the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board by Parks Canada will greatly increase the depth and breadth of the board's understanding of Sable's environmental and biodiversity issues.

I support passage of Bill S-15 as is. Concerns arising from the amendment allowing for limited offshore energy activities can be addressed following the establishment of the Sable Island national park reserve. These concerns will most certainly be a consideration in the development of the Parks Canada management policy, and the guidance and interpretation on low-impact industry activities on the island will certainly improve that situation.

I've skipped over some of the things I was going to say, just to keep it short, and given the poor quality of the line, I'll leave it at that. Thank you very much.

[Alison Woodley, National Conservation Director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Good evening. My name is Alison Woodley and I am the national director of the parks program for the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, or CPAWS.

As Mr. Chairman mentioned, also joining us this evening from Nova Scotia is Dr. Chris Miller, who is CPAWS' national conservation biologist. Chris has been leading our work on Sable Island.

Thank you to the members of the committee for having invited us to participate in this meeting to present our thoughts on Bill S-15.

CPAWS is Canada's voice for parks and public wilderness protection. For 50 years we've played a key role in the establishment of Canada's protected areas, including many of our national parks. We've been following the various debates on Bill S-15 quite closely in both Ottawa and in Nova Scotia.

We're pleased to hear what appears to be overwhelming support for protecting Sable Island which, as everyone knows, is a very interesting and unique piece of Canada. Like the other witnesses, rather than reiterate all the reasons why Sable Island is so special and deserves our highest level of protection, which has been discussed very well, including during our testimony at the Senate committee, we'll cut to the chase on what we feel are the key issues.

CPAWS is strongly supportive of a national park designation for Sable Island. In fact, we first proposed this as an option for protecting Sable way back in 1971, so we're very pleased that the governments of Canada and Nova Scotia are taking the steps required to make the national park a reality.

The national park designation is a big improvement over the status quo and will result in much stronger habitat protection for the flora and fauna of the island. Parks Canada has a requirement to manage national parks for ecological integrity as a first priority and must develop a management plan that addresses this. The previous management structure for Sable Island using outdated regulations in the Shipping Act is not tenable over the long term and doesn't offer the sorts of ecosystem protections that many Canadians expect of this important location.

CPAWS is very concerned about the prospect of oil and gas exploration being allowed to occur on Sable Island. The ocean all around Sable Island is available for industry and we feel that the sliver of sand that is Sable Island should be left free from any such industrial activity. Specifically on the issue of allowing low-impact oil exploration, driving thumper trucks onto the beaches at Sable, stringing lines across the island, and digging listening devices into the sand, as has been described, are not what we would consider to be low-impact activities, nor are they appropriate activities in a national park, which should be off limits to all oil and gas exploration and development activities. We also believe they run counter to what most people want for Sable Island, which is simply for it to be left alone as much as possible and to remain this wild and free place that so many Canadians cherish.

For these reasons we are requesting that the clauses of Bill S-15 that would allow for oil and gas exploration activities to occur on Sable Island be removed. In summary, CPAWS is strongly supportive of a national park for Sable Island. We want this legislation to move forward, and we are requesting amendments to strengthen protection of the island from oil and gas activities.

I would also like to share some brief comments on clause 15 of the bill, which includes the proposed change to the leasehold boundary of the Marmot Basin ski area in Jasper National Park. We do not have a specific amendment to put forward here, but I do want to highlight that in exchange for the reduction in the leasehold area of the Marmot Basin ski area, there are new development proposals being considered that could have a significant impact on wildlife in the park, including on caribou which are identified as threatened under the federal Species at Risk Act.

For new development to be considered outside the current footprint of a ski area, Parks Canada policy requires the operator to demonstrate that there will be a substantial environmental gain from the overall plan. This net gain is not achieved by the redrawing of the leasehold boundary, but rather by the overall impact of developments and activities on wildlife and ecosystems, both inside and outside the current footprint and the leasehold areas. The developments and activities determine whether there's a substantial environmental gain.

In the case of Marmot Basin, CPAWS is particularly concerned about Jasper's woodland caribou, which have dropped to critically low numbers and are at risk of disappearing entirely from the park. There is a study under way to better understand the importance of the Marmot area to caribou and other wildlife, and given the precarious state of this species, no development that could potentially result in any further risk to caribou in the park should be allowed to proceed. As final decisions are made about developments at Marmot Basin in Jasper, we will be looking to Parks Canada to uphold its responsibility to put ecological integrity first in its decision-making.

Thank you again for the opportunity to present today on behalf of CPAWS. We will be pleased to answer any questions.

[Stuart Pinks, Chief Executive Officer, Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the invitation to appear before the committee this evening. I'll try to jump through my speaking notes which I think all of you have copies of, and try to hit some of the highlights to try to meet the five-minute time commitment.

My name is Stuart Pinks. I'm the chief executive officer for the board. I'm joined by Elizabeth MacDonald, who is an adviser on environmental affairs and a conservation officer with our board. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to communicate our support for Bill S-15.

Sable Island has long been the centre of oil and gas activity in the offshore Nova Scotia area since hydrocarbon exploration began back in the 1960s. To date, all the discoveries and the production that have been made in the Nova Scotia offshore have been within 60 kilometres of Sable Island, and a significant amount of that within 12 kilometres of Sable Island. The coexistence of Sable Island with the oil and gas industry has been going on successfully for quite awhile.

When the board was first advised of the changes in the status of Sable Island in November 2011, the board approached the licence holders in the area who voluntarily agreed to amend the terms and conditions for the five significant discovery licences that encompass or are within one nautical mile of the island. These licences were issued prior to the board being formed and give the rights holders tenure.

These amendments prohibit drilling from the surface of the island or within one nautical mile seaward of the low watermark of the island. We know this prohibition has been ingrained in the proposed legislation that is now before the House.

We understand that the current debate in relation to the proposed legislation has, in part, been centred on the definition of low-impact exploration activity that may be allowed to be carried out within the national park reserve. Our commitment is that once this legislation goes into effect, the board in partnership with Parks Canada intends to develop and publish guidance and interpretation notes addressing this matter.

The development of guidance and interpretation notes is contemplated under the accord acts and they form an important part of our regulatory regime. Public consultation will be a key component of this process.

Experience has shown that when conducted using appropriate equipment, work practices, and mitigation, the type of activities contemplated on the island can be carried out with little or no lasting impact on the environment. These include things like geochemical studies and seismic-type work.

I think the committee is aware that in 1999 a four month low-impact seismic program was carried out successfully on Sable Island by what was then Mobil Oil Canada. The program and the code of practice were carefully observed by Zoe Lucas who lives on the island. Upon completion she concluded that in general the program had only limited and short-term impact on Sable Island.

Upon or prior to receiving an application by an operator to carry out any proposed exploration program for possible authorization, regardless of whether it is on the ocean or on Sable Island, the board would require an environmental assessment up front. In conducting this assessment, public comment periods are provided for. In order for the board to consider the issuance of an authorization, the environmental assessment would have to demonstrate that there would be a low likelihood of significant adverse environmental effects following the implementation of the project-specific mitigation from carrying out the proposed program.

Should work be proposed within the national park reserve, the board will solicit input and advice from Parks Canada among others. The requirement for low-impact exploration would drive consideration of, and potential implementation of, additional mitigation to further minimize or remove any potential environmental effects on all surrounding ecosystem components, including landscape, vegetation, wildlife, and marine life. Each operator would be required to develop and submit for board review and acceptance a code of practice specific to the work to be done on or around the island.

I wanted to speak very briefly to the fact that our board underwent an extensive audit by the federal Auditor General's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. They looked at some 10,000 records generated between our board and the Newfoundland board and other federal parties. The report that was published in February 2003 concluded that the board exercises due diligence when assessing and approving offshore projects and activities; the board takes adequate steps to ensure that operators comply with environmental requirements; and overall, the board manages the current environmental impacts associated with natural gas activities in the Nova Scotia offshore area in a manner consistent with the size and scale of current operations.

Having those types of comments made by the federal Auditor General after an almost two-year review of the activities that our board undertakes was, to me, a huge vote of confidence.

In closing, the board supports the amendments to the Canada National Parks Act designating Sable Island as a national park reserve and the resulting amendments to the accord acts. The amendments to the accord acts reflect board policy that has been in place for many years for exploration licences. The establishment of this reserve is an example of government, industry, and the regulator cooperating to achieve a common goal, the protection of Sable Island.

In summary, I would ask that you consider the following points as you move forward.

One, the board commits to, in partnership with Parks Canada, develop guidance and interpretation notes to give definition to the term “low-impact exploration activities”.

Two, low-impact seismic activity occurred on Sable Island in 1999 and also previously in 1996. There were no significant adverse environmental effects from this program, according to the report that was prepared by Zoe Lucas, who I think is joining us as well.

Three, under the proposed bill, Parks Canada will have to be consulted and their views considered before any low-impact activities occur on Sable Island, which is not the case now. We could authorize those activities today without having to consult with Parks Canada.

Four, an environmental assessment, including a public component, will be required before any low-impact activity can take place on Sable Island.

Five, the federal Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development recently expressed confidence in the board's execution of its environmental protection mandate.

Thank you again for the opportunity to provide the board's perspective on this matter. I look forward to some of the upcoming questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I'd like to call the meeting of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development to order. We're in meeting number 82.

Prior to introducing our witnesses, I have something I would like to read, which I understand has been worked out with all parties:That, notwithstanding the decision made by the Committee on June 13, 2013, the Committee move immediately to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, following the witness testimony on Monday, June 17, 2013.

Are all in agreement with that? I understand we're in agreement to move directly into clause-by-clause study after the witnesses are finished.

Thank you very much.

We will move now to our witnesses. We have seven witnesses tonight. Three of them are joining us by teleconference.

To save a bit of time, I'm not going to mention all of them now. I'm going to go in the order that's listed on the orders of the day. If you don't have a copy, we can get a copy to you.

We'll begin with the Government of Nova Scotia, the Honourable Leonard Preyra, Minister of Communities, Culture and Heritage.

I have asked our witnesses as much as possible to try to limit their opening statements to between five and seven minutes to give us more time for questions from members; however, I will be a little flexible there, so we'll move ahead with that understanding.

Honourable Leonard Preyra, would you begin your statement, please.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, this time last week, I said that I hoped to have a substantial list of accomplishments to report to the House. Indeed, I do.

In just the last five days, thanks to a lot of members of Parliament who have been here sitting late at night, working until past midnight, we have accomplished a lot. Bill C-60, the economic action plan 2013 act, no. 1, the important job-creating bill, which was the cornerstone of our government's spring agenda, passed at third reading. Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act, passed at third reading. Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, passed at third reading. Bill C-62, the Yale First Nation final agreement act, was reported back from committee and was passed at report stage and passed at third reading. Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act, was reported back from committee. Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act, was reported back from committee this morning with amendments from all three parties. Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act, has been passed at committee, and I understand that the House should get a report soon. Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, passed at second reading. Bill S-17, the tax conventions implementation act, 2013, passed at second reading. Bill S-10, the prohibiting cluster munitions act, passed at second reading. Bill S-6, the first nations elections act, has been debated at second reading. Bill C-61, the offshore health and safety act, has been debated at second reading. Bill S-16, the tackling contraband tobacco act, has been debated at second reading. Finally, Bill C-65, the respect for communities act, was also debated at second reading.

On the private members' business front, one bill passed at third reading and another at second reading. Of course, that reflects the unprecedented success of private members advancing their ideas and proposals through Parliament under this government, something that is a record under this Parliament. This includes 21 bills put forward by members of the Conservative caucus that have been passed by the House. Twelve of those have already received royal assent or are awaiting the next ceremony. Never before have we seen so many members of Parliament successfully advance so many causes of great importance to them. Never in Canadian history have individual MPs had so much input into changing Canada's laws through their own private members' bills in any session of Parliament as has happened under this government.

Hard-working members of Parliament are reporting the results of their spring labours in our committee rooms. Since last week, we have got substantive reports from the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, the Standing Committee on Health, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.

We are now into the home stretch of the spring sitting. Since I would like to give priority to any bills which come back from committee, I expect that the business for the coming days may need to be juggled as we endeavour to do that.

I will continue to make constructive proposals to my colleagues for the orderly management of House business. For example, last night, I was able to bring forward a reasonable proposal for today's business, a proposal that had the backing of four of the five political parties that elected MPs. Unfortunately, one party objected, despite the very generous provision made for it with respect to the number of speakers it specifically told us it wanted to have. Nonetheless, I would like to thank those who did work constructively toward it.

I would point out that the night before, I made a similar offer, again, based on our efforts to accommodate the needs of all the parties.

Today we will complete second reading of Bill S-16, the tackling contraband tobacco act. Then we will start second reading of Bill C-57, the safeguarding Canada's seas and skies act.

Tomorrow morning we will start report stage of Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act. Following question period, we will return to the second reading debate on Bill S-6, the first nations elections act.

On Monday, before question period, we will start report stage and hopefully third reading of Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act. After question period Monday, we will return to Bill C-49, followed by Bill C-65, the respect for communities act.

On Tuesday, we will also continue any unfinished business from Friday and Monday. We could also start report stage, and ideally, third reading of Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act that day.

Wednesday, after tidying up what is left over from Tuesday, we will take up any additional bills that might be reported from committee. I understand that we could get reports from the hard-working finance and environment committees on Bill S-17 and Bill S-15 respectively.

Thereafter, the House could finish the four outstanding second-reading debates on the order paper: Bill C-57; Bill C-61; Bill S-12, the incorporation by reference in regulations act; and Bill S-13, the port state measures agreement implementation act.

I am looking forward to several more productive days as we get things done for Canadians here in Ottawa.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to have that level of civility. I congratulate my friend across the way.

Before asking the usual Thursday question and before the government House leader across the way starts to talk about how he has been able to abuse Parliament over the past week, I would like to make a small observation for all those listening.

Of all the bills I am sure he is about to mention that are important, not a single bill passed through this legislative process in anything resembling a normal fashion. Bills S-8, S-15, S-17, S-2, S-6, S-10, S-16, C-56 and C-60, every single bill we have debated in the past week, operated under time allocation. I might parenthetically add that seven of them came from the Senate. It seems like a strange place for the government to get its agenda: a bunch of unelected, under-investigation senators, but so be it. It is the government's choice.

We tried to work with the government to find ways to allow the House to debate bills and to do so expediently. A good example is the Sable Island as a national park bill. For example, we offered up about five or six speakers who wanted to address the merits of the bill, which would have allowed the passage of that bill after they had spoken. The reaction from the leader from the other side was to move time allocation, which in fact ended up taking up more time in the House than the offer the NDP had made would have taken.

The Conservatives' strategy is sometimes bizarre. In fact, it is hard to figure out whether it is a strategy or not. I would like the Conservative member to enlighten me on this, even though the Conservatives' responses have no merit.

We have spent more than 14 hours debating and voting on time allocation motions in the past two weeks alone. I find it ironic that the government allots only five hours of debate to the content of the bill under time allocation, when the vast majority of our time is spent debating and voting on the time allocation motions and not on the bills. That is the Conservatives' way of doing business.

When will the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons learn that a hammer is not the only tool available for getting the work done?

Could the leader of the government tell us what his plans are for this week and the week following?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thanks, Ms. Rempel.

I just want to be clear. I understand the legislative protection. I want to be clear: we need to meet an ethical and moral obligation, and that's why I'm concerned about the precedent.

When B.C. wanted some logging in Gwaii Haanas, the NGOs and the federal government did say no.

My last question. We've talked about how under Bill S-15 the Parks Canada role seems relegated to merely consulting CNSOPB on its environmental recommendations. Can you tell me why this is so? What is preventing Parks Canada from being the last stop when it comes to the ecological health of the park? What happens in and around it?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming.

I think everyone knows that I have real concerns about precedent. I've been assured by the officials that future parks are legislatively protected from potential exploration.

Having said that, I asked the parliamentary secretary and the minister during debate on Bill S-15 that this park not be used as a precedent to allow exploration in national parks. My question was not answered.

I then went to the minister and said, “Can you get it on the record that you will not use this as a precedent?” So I'm going to ask very specifically. I would like the word—that the integrity of Canada's national parks will not be undermined, but instead protected, that creating a national park amid oil and gas exploration is not a foot in the door, an opening setting a precedent to allow development in our national parks. Today, I hear, “In my view....”

I need better. Will this be used as a precedent?

[Kevin McNamee]

Yes. Clause 8 in Bill S-15 is clear that, with respect to Sable island National Park Reserve, the surface access rights provided for under this section are limited to “the following”, and those are the four things that Mr. Latourelle addressed.

[Kevin McNamee]

We've had some discussions with the Offshore Petroleum Board about how to address this kind of issue. Under the accord act, the board has to negotiate a memorandum of understanding with any agency that has regulatory authority within the offshore. With Bill S-15, and with the establishment of the park, we would obviously be regulating a national park.

A memorandum of understanding is definitely something that we have discussed and we want to put in place. That could provide one place in which to do it, and it could be done earlier. As Mr. Latourelle indicated, that is something we've indicated we would consult on in order to get views on the issue.

There are other things under the accord act that, as a matter of practice, can be done. We have not reached any decisions with the board as to which is the best way to do it. Under the accord act, ministers can issue a directive to the board on a range of issues. The board can amend its environmental policy and practice guidelines to build that into place, which is something they place on their website.

There are these various instruments that we want to fully explore with the board to figure out how we can bring a protocol into place, so that people understand what the parameters are if and when a request is made to authorize such activity.

[Alan Latourelle]

Mr. Chair, permit me to address the amendments that Bill S-15 proposes for the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act. All petroleum-related activities of Nova Scotia's offshore, including in and around Sable Island, are administered under the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act.

As the preamble to Bill S-15 reiterates, section 4 of the accord states that the act takes precedence over all other legislation applicable to offshore areas, including Sable Island.

Thus the challenge in creating Sable Island National Park Reserve was to negotiate an agreement that would not have an adverse impact on Canada's and Nova Scotia's interests in offshore petroleum resources, while it upheld the integrity of Sable Island National Park Reserve.

Bill S-15 provides for several conservation gains with respect to Sable Island.

As you know, a number of petroleum-related activities can still be authorized on Sable Island National Park Reserve, as required, under the terms of a national park agreement.

Clause 3 confirms that the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board will continue to be the body to authorize such petroleum activities. While the board will have to consult with Parks Canada on such requests, we do not want to create within our own organization a second regulatory body.

Clause 8 amends the federal accord to restrict the number of current activities the board can authorize on Sable Island.

[Alan Latourelle]

Before responding to the committee's questions on Bill S-15, I would like to point out some of the ways in which Parks Canada is building on a tremendous legacy.

We are beginning our second century of the administration of our national network of national parks, national marine conservation areas, and national historic sites for future generations. I'm very proud of the fact that in recent years Parks Canada has received both international and national acclaim for its work in expanding our network of protected areas and offering visitors the chance to experience our natural and cultural heritage, and in working with aboriginal peoples.

Organizations ranging from the World Wildlife Fund International and the National Geographic Society to the Royal Canadian Geographical Society and Hostelling International-Canada have recognized the dedicated efforts of the Parks Canada team. But we cannot rest on our laurels, Mr. Chair. Our challenges are daunting. We are working to conclude agreements for several national parks, and as Canada becomes increasingly urban and as new Canadians make their homes here, and as younger generations come of age, our challenge moving forward is to connect Canadians to their national and historic treasures.

Allow me to now address Bill S-15. The bill has two parts. The first part deals with the establishment of Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada, and the second part amends section 4 and schedules 4 and 5 of the Canada National Parks Act.

Establishing Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada is a key action toward the Government of Canada's commitment in the 2011 Speech from the Throne to create significant new protected areas. This bill is a critical step in implementing the terms of the national parks establishment agreement, which the Minister of the Environment and the Nova Scotia Premier, Darrell Dexter, signed in October of 2011. Under that agreement, both governments agreed to take the necessary steps to bring legislative protection to this iconic island.

Mr. Chair, the natural and cultural features that define Sable Island were addressed many times during the second reading in the House of Commons, so allow me to move directly to the provisions of Bill S-15.

To enable the establishment of Sable Island National Park Reserve under the terms of the agreement negotiated with the Province of Nova Scotia, Bill S-15 amends three federal pieces of legislation: the Canada National Parks Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act, and the Canada Shipping Act. Let me first address the amendments to the Canada National Parks Act.

Clause 4 of Bill S-15 provides for the protection of Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada by amending schedule 2 of the Canada National Parks Act to add a legal description of the park reserve. Schedule 2 is the list of national park reserves, while schedule 1 lists national parks. The boundary of Sable Island National Park Reserve extends to the low-water mark and does not include the buffer zone where the ban on drilling for petroleum resources will also apply.

Bill S-15 designates Sable Island as a national park reserve for the purpose of protecting the asserted aboriginal rights and title of the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia to this area. A national park reserve designation is used where there are outstanding claims by aboriginal peoples regarding aboriginal rights and title and these claims have been accepted by Canada for negotiation, such as the case with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia.

Mr. Chair, it's important to note that a national park reserve enjoys all of the same protections that a national park does, while respecting the assertions of aboriginal or treaty rights. It is not a lesser category of a national park. Some of our most famous national parks, including Nahanni, Pacific Rim, and Gwaii Haanas are designated as being national park reserves under the Canada National Parks Act.

In November 2010, the Mi'kmaq wrote to Parks Canada confirming that they were “in agreement that Sable Island be designated as a national park by bringing it under the Canada National Parks Act and by an Act of Parliament.”

Consultations with the Mi'kmaq will continue until the final step in the establishment process, namely the designation of Sable Island as a full-fledged national park. This will not happen until the final accord has been negotiated by Canada, Nova Scotia, and the Mi'kmaq through the “Made in Nova Scotia” process. I can confirm that there is no time limit on the national park reserve designation. It will apply until we have reached an agreement with the Mi'kmaq, confirming their role with respect to a final national park.

Clause 3 of Bill S-15 provides for the administration and continuation of leases, easements, and licences of occupation in or on Sable Island National Park Reserve, since there are 46 structures located on Sable Island—buildings for accommodations; offices; storage buildings; communication towers; wind turbines; light station towers; garages; sheds; and utility buildings for power distribution, water, and sewage.

[Alan Latourelle, Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to appear before the committee to speak about Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada's national parks act.

As you mentioned, I'm Alan Latourelle, chief executive officer. As we celebrate Public Service Week, I'd like to acknowledge the exceptional contribution to Canadians of my colleague, Kevin McNamee, who has led the most significant expansion in our national parks system.

Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise in the House to speak at second reading in support of Bill S-15, which is the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act.

The main purpose of this legislation is to legally protect forever the natural and cultural values of that treasure known as Sable Island. As the title of the act suggests, through this legislation, we would be expanding the national parks system to conserve Sable Island as our nation's 43rd national park.

As anyone who has resided or visited eastern Canada knows, islands are plentiful throughout this great region. Two of our nation's 10 provinces are islands: the inspiring rock of Newfoundland and Labrador; and the red sands and green fields of Prince Edward Island. There is New Brunswick's Grand Manan Island, Cape Breton Island of Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islands of Quebec, P.E.I.'s Lennox Island and Fogo Island off Newfoundland. Each of these and other islands have contributed to shaping the distinct nature and culture of what we call Canada.

Over time, as we have settled and developed these grand islands, we have seized the opportunity to protect the nationally significant landscapes on some of these islands.

For example, Gros Morne and Terra Nova National Parks provide an opportunity for Canadians to explore and discover the east and west coast of Newfoundland. Prince Edward Island National Park is famous for its sandy beaches, red cliffs and the house that inspired the novel Anne of Green Gables and for protecting the piping plover habitat. There is the world renowned Cabot Trail that winds through Cape Breton Highlands National Park. Our government is working with the Province of Quebec to assess the potential for a marine protected area in the waters off the Magdalen Islands.

Now we are on the cusp of adding that mysterious and far offshore place known as Sable Island to our national parks system. I hope that all hon. members will join me in supporting Bill S-15.

Throughout this debate, we have heard many testimonials on the natural and cultural attributes of Sable Island that have inspired us to add it to our national parks system. We are impressed by the fact that this island of 30 square kilometres, rising out of the Atlantic Ocean almost 300 kilometres southeast of Halifax, continues to survive as a shifting sandbar on the edge of the continental shelf.

We are inspired that on this island, composed mainly of sand, with sparse vegetation, so far from shore, life abounds. There are 190 plant species, 350 bird species, including the endangered roseate tern and Ipswich sparrow, grey seals and those famous Sable Island horses.

We marvel at the attempts made throughout the 1600s and 1700s to settle the island, despite the rough seas, the storms and fogs that make Sable Island such a hazard to navigation. The more than 350 recorded shipwrecks in this area stand as a testament to the difficulty of simply accessing Sable Island, let alone trying to settle it.

We are hopeful that in taking action to protect Sable Island under the Canada National Parks Act, future generations will be proud that the House of Commons, in 2013, developed, debated and passed legislation that enabled the protection of this magnificent and mysterious island.

As I have followed this debate, it appears to me that all parties in the House support the proposal to establish Sable Island as a national park reserve. Many members spoke of the urgent need to get on with the job, as this has been so many years in the making. It is clear from public consultations undertaken by Parks Canada in 2010 that this support and sense of urgency echoes the passionate views of Canadians, especially Nova Scotians. Establishing Sable Island national park reserve of Canada is the right thing to do, and the time to do it is now.

I would also observe a high degree of support for putting in place a legislative ban on drilling, from the surface of Sable Island out to one nautical mile from the shoreline. Many who have participated in this debate have acknowledged and thanked the petroleum companies, such as ExxonMobil Canada, for amending its existing significant discovery licenses to incorporate this legislative ban on exploratory and development drilling.

However, there appears to be one key concern with Bill S-15, and that is the proposal to allow the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board to authorize low-impact seismic activity on Sable Island.

I would point out that in reality, the board currently has the authority to permit seismic activity on Sable Island. What Bill S-15 proposes is to limit that authority to low-impact seismic activity. In light of this, I would like to spend the next few minutes speaking to this concern.

As previous speakers have noted, we are establishing Sable Island national park reserve in one of North America's largest active petroleum fields. As we heard earlier, there is a federal-provincial legislative framework in place under the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act that administers all petroleum matters in the Nova Scotia offshore. Since 1988, this legislation has taken precedence over all other federal legislation in this region, including the Canada National Parks Act. As the preamble to Bill S-15 makes clear, this legislation will continue to take precedence.

In August 1986, the Government of Canada and the Province of Nova Scotia signed the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore petroleum resources accord. Under the accord, Canada and Nova Scotia agreed to develop oil and gas in the offshore in a manner that would harmonize the interests of all Canadians and those who reside in the province.

The accord called on both parties to pass mirror legislation to create a unified administrative regime for offshore petroleum resources. This goes to the heart of our deliberations. To give legal effect to the 1986 accord, both governments passed legislation in their respective legislatures, with essentially the same wording.

While the names of these bills are a mouthful, for the record, the Government of Canada passed the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act, and the Province of Nova Scotia passed the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation (Nova Scotia) Act. Members will recall that the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act takes precedence over all other acts. Thus, to put in place a legal ban against drilling on the surface of Sable Island and to limit potential seismic activity to low impact, both the federal and the provincial accord acts must be amended. This fact has profound implications for our deliberations.

On April 24 of this year, the hon. Charlie Parker, the New Democratic Minister of Energy, tabled Bill 59 in the Nova Scotia legislature to amend the provincial petroleum accord act for several purposes. First was to prohibit the carrying on of work related to drilling for petroleum, including exploratory drilling, in or within one nautical mile of Sable Island national park reserve. Second was to limit the surface access rights provided for under the accord act to, among other things, low-impact seismic activity. Third was to set out a process under which the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board must consult with, and consider the advice of, Parks Canada when considering an application to authorize petroleum-related work or activity in the national park reserve.

When the proposed provincial bill was referred to its law amendments committee, there was one witness, the Ecology Action Centre, that recommended that the bill be amended to delete the option of conducting low-impact seismic activity on Sable Island. However, the New Democratic government chose not to amend its legislation to delete the reference to low-impact seismic activity. The Nova Scotia legislature followed suit, passing Bill 59 without amendment. On May 10, 2013, the provincial bill was given royal assent.

In short, the provincial New Democratic government has passed the legislation called for under the terms of the 2011 national park establishment agreement signed by Premier Darrell Dexter and the federal Minister of the Environment and witnessed by Mr. Leonard Preyra, the provincial Minister of Communities, Culture, and Heritage, and the hon. member for Central Nova.

The provincial New Democratic government was satisfied with the arrangement and was not prepared to amend its legislation. Nova Scotia now awaits the outcome of our deliberations to designate Sable Island national park reserve under the Canada National Parks Act.

I recount this history, because given the concerns expressed about low-seismic activity, it is important to accurately outline the work that would be required in the weeks and months ahead should consideration be given to amending Bill S-15 as the only means of remedying these concerns.

Given that Canada and Nova Scotia passed mirror legislation in 1988 to implement the Canada-Nova Scotia offshore petroleum accord, and given that our Bill S-15 and the Province's Bill 59 have developed mirror legislation to amend these acts to implement the drilling ban and to limit seismic activity to low impact, and given that Nova Scotia has passed its Bill 59 without amendment, the implication for our work is clear: should we decide the amend Bill S-15, additional work would need to be undertaken.

The provincial New Democratic government would have to decide whether it is prepared to once again amend its provincial accord act, this time to delete or amend references to seismic activity.

While I cannot speak for the provincial New Democratic government, it is clear that in negotiating the national park establishment agreement and in rejecting a prior recommendation to alter the seismic activity reference, they are supportive of the current approach.

Additional consultations would also have to be undertaken with the petroleum industry to determine its views on such a change. Again, while I cannot speak for the industry, it would seem to me that since petroleum activity within the broader Sable basin will continue, industry and the offshore petroleum board would require the most accurate seismic data in order to reduce the exploration risk when drilling expensive offshore oil and gas wells.

Allow me to offer a few observations on the issue of low-impact seismic activity.

It is my understanding that the offshore petroleum board has indicated to Parks Canada that it is currently not aware of a need for additional seismic data to be collected on Sable Island. However, these needs may very well change in the future.

In addition, should a company seek an authorization to collect new data from Sable Island, the board would require justification from the company that the current seismic information is not sufficient and that information could not be gathered beyond the national parks reserve.

Failing the above, the board would also seek from the company assurances that other less intrusive techniques could not be used to augment the existing seismic information.

Finally, if after all this it had been clearly demonstrated that a seismic program that would place equipment on Sable Island was required, an environmental assessment would be conducted under the policy of the offshore petroleum board. This assessment would have to meet the Canadian Environment Assessment Act standard of determining the likelihood of an activity to cause significant adverse environmental effects.

Given the requirement of Bill S-15 that the board seek the advice of Parks Canada on such a proposed authorization, Parks Canada would clearly have an opportunity to influence the nature of any proposed seismic undertaking.

I look forward to the in-depth discussions that will ensue at committee on these and other issues related to the designation of Sable Island as a national park reserve, and I trust that clarity will be brought to the issues that have been raised in this chamber.

I would like to address one other major concern that has been expressed during this debate: the notion that Bill S-15 will undermine the integrity of our internationally renowned national parks system. The concern focuses on the suggestion that by continuing to allow the offshore petroleum board to authorize seismic activities, although Bill S-15 proposes to limit that authorization to low impact, we are somehow setting a precedent for other national parks across Canada as well as for future national parks.

I appreciate this concern. It speaks to the non-partisan support that exists in the House for the desirability of protecting our nationally significant lands and waters in protected national parks for the benefit of present and future generations. It speaks to the actions that Parliament has taken over the decades, indeed, spanning the last three centuries since 1885, when it created Banff National Park to forever set aside iconic landscapes and their resident plant and animal species.

However, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment made clear in her remarks last Thursday, we are giving effect to the drilling ban and to limiting seismic activity to low impact by amending the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Accord Implementation Act, not the Canada National Parks Act. We are not introducing any changes whatsoever to the Canada National Parks Act that could be remotely interpreted as allowing seismic activity in any other existing national park. I cannot be clearer on this point. It will not be allowed in Aulavik National Park or in Yoho National Park or in any other national park in between.

I would also like to make it clear that we are not amending the Canada National Parks Act to permit low-impact seismic activity on Sable Island: seismic activity is already allowed on Sable Island. We are amending the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to restrict any future seismic work to low impact on Sable Island. Thus, it will only be within Sable Island national park reserve that at some future date the offshore petroleum board may authorize low-impact seismic activity.

Through Bill S-15, we are enhancing the integrity of our national parks system. We are bringing the highest level of federal legislative protection to Sable Island as a national park reserve.

As the parliamentary secretary also made clear, when we negotiate for the creation of new national parks, we are often challenged to consider whether or not to allow certain activities to continue on a case-by-case basis. For the most part, we are able to achieve a new national park that respects the act and that is completely true to the best of our intentions, but sometimes that is just not possible. That simple reality is no reason to completely abandon the idea of designating an area a national park.

I would remind the House that it was only in 2009 that Parliament passed legislation authorizing the permitting of several mineral access roads through the expanded Nahanni National Park Reserve. This was no doubt a difficult decision, but one that made possible a six-fold expansion of Nahanni, producing what was referred to as the greatest conservation decision of this generation.

As we move forward with Bill S-15, I trust that we will balance our duty to maintain the integrity of our national parks system with the opportunity to finally provide Sable Island with the level of protection and conservation framework that has been called for over the past 50 years. With this approach in Bill S-15 to balance the conservation and development needs of Sable Island with the broader Nova Scotia offshore needs, with the balancing of the goals of the offshore petroleum accord act with the Canada National Parks Act, we are achieving real conservation gains for Sable Island.

Let me paraphrase the hon. Minister of the Environment in his remarks last Thursday night. Through Bill S-15, we are accomplishing the following: a new national park reserve for Sable Island, Canada's 43rd national park; the application of a comprehensive conservation framework to Sable Island for the first time in 50 years; a legislative ban that for the first time will prohibit all exploratory and development drilling for petroleum resources from the surface of Sable Island; the creation of a legislative buffer zone around Sable Island that will prohibit drilling out to one nautical mile; a prohibition on the extraction of non-petroleum resources from beneath the surface of Sable Island; a limit on the number of petroleum-related activities that can be authorized by the offshore petroleum board on Sable Island national park reserve; limiting the current ability of offshore petroleum board to authorize any seismic activity on Sable Island to low-impact activity; providing a legislative requirement for the offshore petroleum board to seek and consider advice from Parks Canada should it choose to authorize activities listed in Bill S-15; and developing a management plan within five years that will direct the necessary measures to protect Sable Island to enable visitor experiences that respect the fragility of the island and to forge partnerships with interested stakeholders.

Finally, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Minister of the Environment, the Minister of Natural Resources, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment for their dedicated leadership on collaboratively developing legislation that will enable the creation of Sable Island national park reserve as Canada's 43rd national park. It is their leadership that has brought this legislation before us today. Now it is up to this chamber to complete our business to ensure that Sable Island will be forever protected so that future generations, whether they choose to visit it or not, will know that this Parliament took action to ensure that the natural and cultural values of this place persist forever.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak on Bill S-15.

I first want to stress the fact that despite the importance of the debate and the exchanges on the subject, the Conservative government has again imposed a limit on debate. Consequently, there is once again an undemocratic short-circuiting of the customary parliamentary process.

That said, as stated, Bill S-15 amends the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and makes consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.

In more concrete terms, this initiative from the Senate would designate Sable Island as Canada’s 43rd national park. Quite obviously, we are delighted at the move to protect this unique place, which has stirred our imaginations with its beauty, its history and the ecological heritage it represents.

The bill includes a number of measures. First, drilling less than one nautical mile from the island, or on the surface of the island, would be strictly prohibited. This would make it possible to protect the visible areas from any petroleum development. Of course, this would be an important step in preserving the integrity of the area and the ecosystem that is part of it.

On the other hand, it is important to emphasize that exploration activities would be tolerated, provided they had little impact on the ecosystem of the island. Moreover, this partial prohibition would not include seismic testing, which can have an environmental impact on the area.

In that connection, we note that unfortunately, the concept of impact is not formally defined in the bill. This will be one of the factors to be explored in committee. However, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board should consult Parks Canada on the conduct of such exploration activities. This is important, because it would ensure collegial management of the space occupied by Sable Island and maximize its protection.

In the same vein, while surface drilling will be prohibited, underground drilling would be allowed. This would clearly constitute a first for a national park. Consequently, we shall have to know exactly how this significant aspect of the bill will be overseen. While the technology is not fully developed in this area, the fact remains that we will be confronting that aspect sooner or later.

Another element found in Bill S-15 is the installation of landing platforms for helicopters used to evacuate offshore workers. We applaud this inclusion, as we value the safety and security of all our people. The spirit that guides these measures takes us one step in the right direction in order to protect that jewel, Sable Island.

Let us remember that this ecosystem harbours many unusual species of flora and fauna, some of them unique to Sable Island. They include the 250 wild horses, the seals that reproduce there and the many bird colonies.

In 1977 the government had already recognized the ecological importance of Sable Island and designated it a migratory bird sanctuary. As a result, the unique ecological heritage of this area is well known and our duty as parliamentarians is to work to protect it.

Naturally, like many environmentalists, the NDP agrees with the principles expressed in Bill S-15. We are in favour of protecting Sable Island in all its facets and establishing boundaries for the human activities that take place there.

Certainly, there are several aspects of this legislation that should be studied in committee. It will be essential to consider the concepts of exploration and impact we find in the bill. What will be considered a low impact? How much petroleum exploration activity will we allow on the island? What will the relationship be between the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and Parks Canada? What will we do if a petroleum deposit is discovered beneath Sable Island?

It will also be important to consider the possibility of exploration using seismic testing. These are questions that must be asked by the parliamentarians who are members of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

In short, the work done in the committee will determine the future success and survival of this national park. Moreover, we believe that we must be in constant contact with the various stakeholders involved in the current legislative process. They include the Nova Scotia provincial government, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, the Ecology Action Centre, the Green Horse Society and the Friends of Sable Island Society.

This is a serious matter. We must ensure that all stakeholders work together with parliamentarians to complete this project and set up a national park that will meet ecological and environmental objectives.

That said, the Conservatives are trying to present Bill S-15 as environmental good news. It was true, although certain reservations have been expressed about the creation of this national park. However, that does not diminish the fact that ever since it came to power the government has done all it could to eliminate, weaken and stall environmental measures.

The fact that Canada withdrew from Kyoto clearly showed that the Conservatives had abdicated their environmental responsibilities. Then they cut back considerably on environmental assessments, which must be done for companies' projects and routine activities. This is clearly having a significant impact on various practices, and it will have serious effects on our ecosystem. What is worse, the Conservatives deny that there is a problem with the environment or that climate change exists, which seriously taints the creation of Sable Island national park.

The NDP, on the other hand, has done everything it can to promote environmental values. We remain the only credible political party the public can trust to protect ecosystems and ensure that sustainable development is at the heart of everything we do.

That will be the basis for our work on Bill S-15. We will support the bill at second reading, so that it can be sent to committee. However, we will do everything we can to limit potential and foreseeable environmental abuses. We will be listening to stakeholders and will do what we can to develop the best bill possible for the creation of Sable Island national park.

I am now prepared to take questions from my colleagues.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

What she describes is strangely reminiscent for me of the situation currently prevailing with regard to aviation. Developers can in fact set up anywhere, without having to ask permission from Transport Canada to do anything. They merely have to notify it of what they are doing. Here we have a similar scheme. I find this deplorable and rather disturbing.

I said just now that people seemed to be saying there would be no exploration or drilling on Sable Island. However, the subsoil of Sable Island is not part of the national park. It would be excluded.

I do not entirely understand the reasoning of this government, which asserts that it will not allow any exploration on Sable Island, even though the subsoil nevertheless remains accessible to some companies. Are we going to find similar measures in future laws establishing national parks? I hope not.

I hope that the necessary provisions to avoid such a situation will be included in Bill S-15.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House in support of Bill S-15, Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act, at second reading.

I should first note that I will be sharing my time with the member for Saint-Lambert.

Among other things, Bill S-15 proposes to make Sable Island, a small island 175 km off the south-east coast of Nova Scotia, Canada’s 43rd national park.

It is a very interesting bill that has support from regional and national environmental groups. It is the result of negotiations between the federal government and the provincial NDP government. Clearly, with support from the community and from government, we already have an opportunity to take the longer view, and perhaps support it.

A few months ago, on one of those rare evenings of rest I was able to get, I happened upon an article about Sable Island. I was truly fascinated by what I was able to learn, particularly about the unique ecosystem of this thin sand dune off the coast of Nova Scotia. I found the island absolutely magnificent. It is a most impressive place, with over 300 unique species of birds, insects and butterflies, and a herd of the wild horses that are the cause of its fame.

The flora of Sable Island are just as varied, and include a number of plants rarely found elsewhere on our planet. Uninhabited, except for a handful of researchers, this island continues to stir the imagination of Canadians today, and must be protected, both because of its unique and important ecosystem, and its historical value. The island is very fragile, and exposed to the winds of the Atlantic Ocean. In an intensified way, it is subject to the weather conditions of the environment in which it is located.

In designating Sable Island as a national park, this government has the responsibility of granting it the enhanced environmental protection measures that should accompany its designation as a national park.

Although Bill S-15 seems to be an initial step in the right direction, there are still a number of concerns about its wording.

First, the bill prohibits drilling within one nautical mile of the island, or on its surface, but still allows drilling underneath it. This is a first for a national park in Canada, but it is not one to be proud of. In my view, a very dangerous precedent is being created for future national parks that may be created over the years in Canada. I would not like to see similar rights granted to some companies that own drilling rights, such as ExxonMobil, which still has the right to drill close to Sable Island. I believe such an opening is very dangerous, and it should be studied in detail in committee.

The current wording of Bill S-15 also allows various types of low-impact exploration on the surface of the Island, but without a clear definition of what that expression means. I have problems with this, because it is difficult to imagine all the different kinds of exploration that might be carried out on Sable Island, which is already very fragile.

My colleague from Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine has raised some concerns about the effects of some kinds of exploration, which are considered to be low-impact but which can have very harmful effects on marine mammals in the vicinity of such tests.

For these reasons, the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development has a lot of work to do before we can fully support the bill as currently drafted. It has some fairly serious shortcomings, and we must ensure that the text that emerges from the committee's proceedings guarantees genuine protection for Sable Island's invaluable habitats and ecosystems.

Parks Canada's mandate is to protect the natural and cultural heritage of our national parks. The final text of Bill S-15 must truly reflect that mandate and implement practical measures to ensure that it is carried out.

I come from the riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, where nature is a very important part of people's everyday lives and environmental protection issues are among their greatest concerns. They regularly enjoy the outdoors, hunting and fishing, but they also want to protect our natural resources.

Last Saturday, I attended the Saint-Basile-de-Portneuf fishing festival, during which I even had a chance to go and stock the river with trout.

This is one of the many actions the municipality takes every year to ensure that fishers retain their access to the river, which is very close to the village, and are able to continue fishing without depleting all the fish stocks in the river. These efforts show how important nature is to the people of my riding.

Although there is no federal national park in my riding, there is a provincial park, the Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier. There is also the Portneuf wildlife reserve, which I highly recommend to everyone as a summer vacation destination. People will not be disappointed by it.

The Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier is less than 30 minutes north of Quebec City. The Government of Quebec created the 670-km² park in 1981 to protect a representative sample of the natural region of the Laurentian mountains. Some of you may have had the opportunity to travel across part of the park if you have ever driven from Quebec City to Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean or other neighbouring areas. That route features a very good sample of the region's natural assets. In addition to a spectacular glacier valley, the park is also crossed by a salmon river, the Rivière à saumon, and is home to rich and diversified plant and animal life.

The Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier is also home to an isolated herd of nearly 75 woodland caribou, a cervid species considered vulnerable and found in very small numbers in the province of Quebec. I saw one on one of my many trips across the Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier, between Quebec City and Jonquière, where I lived for a number of years. Protection for the caribou's environment, part of which is located in the Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier, is essential to the species' survival.

The 775-km² Portneuf wildlife reserve is located approximately 40 km north of Saint-Raymond, halfway between Quebec City and Trois-Rivières. It is another large nature preserve in my riding. Some of you may perhaps already be familiar with the region, which is well known to hunting and fishing enthusiasts who come to the service cooperative in Rivière-à-Pierre to stock up on provisions before heading off to take advantage of this wildlife reserve's magnificent hills and valleys, as well as its countless lakes and rivers.

Plans are already under way in my riding to create a protected area in the Portneuf wildlife reserve, and work to protect the ecosystems in this part of the area is ongoing. With such a wealth of natural resources in my own riding, it is difficult for me not to take an interest in other natural resources in Canada, including those of Sable Island, which is the subject of the bill before us today.

Unfortunately, I do not feel reassured when I look at the Conservatives’ track record on the environment, particularly when the bill would leave open the possibility of drilling underneath Sable Island. An environment as fragile as this already needs our protection, and preserving its ecosystem means that the number of people visiting it should be kept down. This bill, however, leaves open the possibility of drilling underneath the island. This, to me, is inconceivable, particularly given the Conservatives' track record.

In 2012 alone, the Conservatives eliminated important environmental protection measures, including 99% of federal environmental assessments and 98% of protective measures for Canada's navigable waterways. They eliminated the protection regime for most fish habitats. They also slashed $29 million from the Parks Canada budget and eliminated over 6,000 jobs, all of which clearly demonstrates that Canada's national parks are anything but a priority for this government.

The Conservatives are proposing the establishment of Canada's 43rd national park, but are not providing Parks Canada with everything it needs to fulfill its mandate to protect and preserve our natural heritage. That is what worries me.

I am therefore supporting the bill at second reading so that it can be referred to committee for the in-depth study that is necessary. I hope that what comes back to us in the House is a version that truly protects Sable Island, an outcome that is absolutely essential.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to Bill S-15. I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak in support of this bill.

Sable Island is one of Canada's great natural treasures, a windswept remote island renowned for its wild horses and its historical role as the site of the nation's first life-saving station.

It is a place of astounding beauty, with sand dunes, marram grass and freshwater ponds. Anyone fortunate enough to visit this unique environment is captivated by its diversity of plants, birds and animal life. The island is home to several endangered species.

This rare and remarkable place also has a rich cultural history. Sable Island holds a special place in the hearts and minds of Nova Scotians and Canadians. It has inspired artists and writers locally, across the country and internationally.

An island of such spectacular beauty, rare flora and fauna and cultural heritage is wholly deserving of our protection. That is why on October 17, 2011, the governments of Canada and Nova Scotia signed a memorandum of agreement to establish and manage Sable Island as a national park reserve of Canada.

Our objective is to protect Sable Island for all time for the benefit, education and enjoyment of the people of Canada. As the House is aware, the designation of Sable Island as a national park reserve of Canada takes into consideration the Mi'kmaq asserted rights and title in Nova Scotia. These are being addressed through the made-in-Nova Scotia process between the governments of Canada, Nova Scotia and the Mi'kmaq.

Moreover, the governments of Canada and Nova Scotia have agreed that Parliament will enact legislation amending the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to prohibit drilling for petroleum in Sable Island national park reserve of Canada and to limit the range of surface access rights in respect to the petroleum work or activity in the park reserve.

We have done the essential preparatory work, and I would like to highlight the many reasons why Parks Canada is uniquely situated to oversee the protection of Sable Island.

The Parks Canada network now includes 44 national parks, 167 national historic sites and 4 national marine conservation areas. Since 1911, this agency has worked hard to ensure that Canada's historic and natural heritage is protected and that Canadians and people around the world can engage in inspiring discoveries of our treasured and natural historic places.

Let me give an overview of how we have expanded Parks Canada's protected areas network in recent years. In 2006, that network was 277,400 square kilometres in size. Since then, the Government of Canada has taken actions that would protect an additional 149,639 square kilometres. This would bring Parks Canada's network to more than 427,000 square kilometres, or a 54% increase.

What these numbers demonstrate is how completely Parks Canada is committed to taking care of our natural treasures and to acting as their ever-vigilant stewards. The early visionaries of our parks system recognized that connecting with the natural world can be a deeply meaningful and moving experience, and a fundamental part of that mission was a way to foster these connections. This is a principle to which Parks Canada remains dedicated.

Allow me to give some highlights of Parks Canada's achievements over the past few years, all of which provide ample evidence of this agency's fitness for the stewardship role with regard to Sable Island. Let me start with some recent top achievements, several of them marking firsts, not just in Canada but in the world.

In 2007, the Prime Minister announced the creation of the largest freshwater marine protected area in the world, Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area. This addition to our system comprises more than 10,000 square kilometres, including the lake bed, islands and north shore lands.

In 2009, we expanded the boundary of the Nahanni National Park Reserve sixfold to over 30,000 square kilometres. There is absolutely no doubt that this landmark conservation achievement is quite significant. In fact it is the greatest accomplishment for Parks Canada in a generation. I am delighted to note that it was done in close collaboration with the Dehcho First Nations.

Another outstanding accomplishment in 2009 was the establishment of the Saoyú-§ehdacho National Historic Site in the Northwest Territories. This marks the first of three firsts in Canada. This national historic site was the first northern cultural landscape commemorated by the Government of Canada; the first northern national historic site co-operatively managed by Parks Canada and an aboriginal group; and also the first protected area established under the Northwest Territories protected areas strategy. This historic site comprises two peninsulas bordering the Great Bear Lake. It is an area of 5,565 square kilometres, which is approximately the size of Prince Edward Island. This site protects a cultural landscape of great importance to the Sahtu people of the Great Bear Lake. The elders' vision for the site is one of continued teaching and healing, a place that forever helps to sustain the culture and well-being of the people.

In 2010, the Government of Canada formally established the Gwaii Haanas National Marine Conservation Area Reserve and Haida Heritage Site, which some people call “the Canadian Galapagos”. This achievement was a result of historic and outstanding collaborative partnership between the Government of Canada and the Haida Nation. What is extraordinary about this unique protective measure is the combination of the existing park reserve with a new marine conservation area. In total, over 5,000 square kilometres are now protected: a spectacular wilderness that extends from alpine mountaintops to the deep sea beyond the continental shelf. The scope of this achievement is a first not only for Canada but also for North America and the world.

In 2011, Parks Canada oversaw the successful reintroduction of the plains bison and the black-footed ferret, an animal once thought to be extinct for most of the 20th century, in the Grasslands National Park. This measure was part of the $75-million investment to improve the ecological integrity of national parks and national park reserves across Canada.

It was also in 2011 that the Government of Canada announced it would create Canada's first national urban park in Toronto. The concept of a national urban park is an entirely new and unique one to Parks Canada and, indeed, to Canada. Once established, Rouge national urban park will provide an unparalleled opportunity to reach the 20% of Canadians who live within the vicinity of the park and in Canada's most culturally diverse city. Since the 2011 announcement of the Rouge national park, Parks Canada has made steady progress toward establishing this unique protected area in the heart of Canada's most populated area. The agency has worked with first nations and more than 100 communities and organizations including youth. I note that my riding in the city of Barrie is very close to this Rouge national park, and I know that across southern Ontario the commitment to it has been supported and appreciated.

I also remind members of the House about four successful multi-partnership expeditions that Parks Canada has led in Canada's Arctic, in search of the lost vessels of Sir John Franklin. This work has helped narrow our search, with the great added advantages of further asserting Canadian sovereignty and deepening our scientific knowledge in the Arctic. The work to protect our natural heritage is ceaseless, and it takes in all parts of our vast nation.

In May 2012, for example, the governments of Canada and Quebec announcement the creation of an advisory committee for the feasibility assessment of a marine protected area in Îles-de-la-Madeleine.

In August 2012, the Prime Minister announced the establishment and boundaries of Canada's 44th national park, the Nááts'ihch'oh National Park Reserve in the Northwest Territories. This new national park reserve will serve as a launching area for visitors to its northern wilderness, with its breathtaking landscapes of the upper reaches of the world-famous South Nahanni River. Together, the Nahanni and the Nááts'ihch'oh national park reserves protect habitat for mountain woodland caribou, grizzly bears, Dall sheep, mountain goats and trumpeter swans, while at the same time supporting the economic aspirations of first nations and the tourism industries of the region.

I need hardly tell members that the Parks Canada role in the protection of our diverse precious natural areas and species is one of which all Canadians can justly be proud. In its dedicated work as a steward, Parks Canada is an example to the world. In fact, its reach and influence extend globally, and it has received international recognition for its achievements.

For example, in May 2011, the World Wildlife Fund International recognized Parks Canada with its prestigious Gift to the Earth award. The award noted Parks Canada's outstanding conservation achievements, including the recent dramatic growth of Canada's system of national parks and national marine conservation areas.

In September 2012, Parks Canada led the development of the publication titled “North American Protected Areas as Natural Solutions to Climate Change”, released at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature World Conservation Congress in South Korea. This publication is a collaborative effort of the North American Intergovernmental Committee on Wilderness and Protected Area Conservation with the government representation from Canada, the United States and Mexico.

I would like to turn now to some of Parks Canada's achievements in the realm of historic and cultural commemoration. As I noted earlier, these are important aspects in the protection of Sable Island.

In fact, in 2012, Parks Canada received such a historic designation itself. That year, the Government of Canada honoured the agency as the world's first national parks service by commemorating the Creation of the Dominion Parks Branch and the birth of Parks Canada as an event of national historic significance.

Parks Canada's other commemorative highlights last year included the opening of the new visitor centre at Fort Wellington National Historic Site as part of the special War of 1812 commemoration. The Calgary Stampede, billed as the greatest outdoor show on Earth, was also recognized as an event of national historic significance as was the Grey Cup.

In August last year, our environment minister designated Canada's heritage lighthouses under the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act, which included the St. Paul Island Southwest Lighthouse in Dingwall, Nova Scotia and McNab Point and the Saugeen River Front and Rear Range lights in Southampton, Ontario.

On the 100th anniversary of the sinking of RMS Titanic, the government honoured the historic efforts of Canadians in the recovery of victims of the disaster.

Earlier, I mentioned Parks Canada's involvement in searching for the ships of the Franklin expedition. In July 2010, the agency embarked upon its 10 day archeological survey of Aulavik National Park to locate HMS Investigator wreck and document and map the land sites associated with Captain Robert McClure's expedition to find the Northwest Passage. This initiative produced a number of findings, including the shipwreck of HMS Investigator, three gravesites and new information on the equipment and provision cache site.

I said that Parks Canada's commitment to protecting our natural and cultural heritage is unceasing. So, too, are the agency's efforts to help connect Canadians with nature.

The early visionaries of our parks system recognized that when people connected with the natural world they could have an experience that was deeply meaningful and moving. A fundamental part of Parks Canada's mission is therefore to foster these connections.

Today, that mission is more urgent than ever before. As many members of the House know, North Americans are becoming more and more disconnected with nature. Tackling the disconnection and fostering Canadians' close relation with the natural world is therefore a task for Parks Canada, and it takes it very seriously.

It is typical of the agency's dedication to this vision that it used its own anniversary to further this crucial work. In its anniversary year of 2011, Parks Canada introduced a series of ongoing programs to reach Canadians and youth in particular.

Among these were the innovative and highly popular learn to camp initiative, overnight camping events aimed at introducing city dwellers, many of them young families or recent immigrants, to camping and other fun outdoor activities.

Through its my parks pass program, the agency provided every grade 8 student across the country with passes to enter all of Parks Canada's sites free of charge for 12 months.

Parks Canada also introduced a promotion called “Canada's coolest school trip” in which a grade 8 class could win a school trip to visit a national park or historic site.

Using multimedia, the agency's national parks project brought together 52 of Canada's best musicians and filmmakers to create music and film inspired by Canada's most breathtaking national parks. These films are available online. The soundtrack album is in stores and on iTunes and a documentary TV series is running on Discovery World.

Also on television, Parks Canada premiered Operation Unplugged, a reality show in which eight urban young people traded their techno-dependent lifestyles for a summer unplugged in the national parks.

In all these ways, Parks Canada's centennial celebrations help the agency meet its target for public engagement so Canadians' awareness of Parks Canada and support for its work are growing across the country. Parks Canada reports the visitation to national parks is now slowly increasing, helping to reverse a downward trend seen over many years.

In my overview, I have touched on many areas of Parks Canada's achievements, all of which demonstrate the agency's long history, experience and passion for protecting our natural and cultural heritage. I noted its international recognition and that it was the first national parks agency in the world. I am fully confident that this superbly well-qualified federal agency will make an ideal steward for the wondrous beauty and unique character of Sable Island. I am therefore urging all members in the House to support the bill, which would make this exquisite island one of the jewels in our national parks system with Parks Canada as its able steward.

The House resumed from June 6 consideration of the motion that Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Parks Canada

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Sable Island. Last night, Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada's national parks act, finally went through second reading in the House to allow the bill to proceed to committee.

Sable Island is a unique spot off the east coast of Atlantic Canada, 300 kilometres off the shore of Nova Scotia, 42 kilometres long and about 1.5 kilometres wide at its widest point. Most people know Sable Island for the Sable Island horses and as the graveyard of the Atlantic. It is an absolutely unique spot off the coast of Nova Scotia. It should become Canada's 43rd national park.

I urge the committee to pass the bill as quickly as possible and to send it back to the House for third reading. We can pass this legislation before the House rises for the summer. I urge all members of the House to work in a co-operative manner to do exactly that.

Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we always want a balance. We want Canadians to experience our wonderful heritage. However, we also have to protect the environment.

In terms of protecting, we were to have 10% protected. In terms of marine protected areas, we have 1%. I would like to stress that Australia has 33%.

I would like to raise something that has not been raised tonight regarding the Mi'kmaq. Gerard Julian the co-chair and chief of a first nation group. He said that his people were not consulted on the legislation, as required by the Constitution, and were concerned that the government would fail to adequately study the historic Mi'kmaq presence on the island. He said that Parks Canada should fund the Mi'kmaq to do this archeological work, which previously was impossible because of visitation restrictions.

He told a Senate committee studying Bill S-15:

Our nation's desire and perspective is grounded in concepts that have been passed down from generation to generation, concepts of respect, integrity and environmental safeguards.

He questioned:

How can any government department make decisions on the lands and waters of our traditional territories without including the Mi'kmaq in these conversations?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to speak to Bill S-15, which would amend the Canada National Parks Act to create the Sable Island national park reserve of Canada, the conclusion of 50 years of work to protect Sable Island's distinctive nature.

The BBC describes Sable Island as being:

...for the Canadians what the Galapagos are for the people of Ecuador, or Easter Island for Chileans. It is important scientifically and historically, but more than this it is important culturally, as part of their identity...

Sable Island is world-renowned both for its biodiversity and its shipwrecks. It is home to tremendous biodiversity, including 375 wild horses, 350 species of birds, 190 plant species and the largest colony of grey seals in the world.

Since 1583, there have been more than 350 recorded shipwrecks on or near the island, earning it the title "Graveyard of the Atlantic".

Let me briefly describe the history of the creation of Sable Island national park reserve.

Given the exceptional ecosystems found on the island, the federal and Nova Scotia governments concluded in 2004:

...that it would be in the public interest to use a federal protected area designation to achieve conservation objectives for Sable Island.

Eventually the consultations recommended that Sable Island be designated a national park, and on October 17, 2011, the Governments of Canada and Nova Scotia signed a memorandum of understanding to establish a national park on Sable Island.

The island would be designated as a national park reserve in recognition of the fact that it is subject to the claim of the Mi'kmaq. The Mi'kmaq and the Governments of Canada and Nova Scotia are currently negotiating this claim. The designation as a national park reserve allows the governments to continue these land claim negotiations.

Conserving Sable Island poses a challenge owing to the wealth of resources in and around the island and the legislative framework under which the reserve was developed, which was that there can be no adverse impacts on petroleum activities.

Parks Canada has explained to me that this is the first time a reserve has ever been created in an area of oil and gas activities. Over the last 50 years, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board has made 23 significant discovery declarations in offshore Nova Scotia.

Bill S-15 would put into law an existing prohibition against drilling on Sable Island. Importantly, five oil companies that have been granted exploration licenses for on-island drilling have voluntarily agreed to relinquish these rights.

The Liberal Party strongly supports the establishment of Sable Island national park reserve. However, we would like this legislation to proceed to committee for a thorough review to ensure that this national treasure is properly protected. We want to ensure that rigorous environmental protections and safeguards are maintained for this national park reserve, for all our national parks and for future parks. As well, we must ensure that any concerns by the Mi'kmaq with regard to the legislation have the opportunity to be addressed.

One concern is with regard to the extent and oversight of natural resource development that Bill S-15 would authorize. These include petroleum exploration activities, which might include seismic, geological or geophysical programs on Sable Island. Additionally, what other activities might fall under the term “low impact” petroleum exploration? What does the government define as “low impact”?

At a departmental briefing, officials explained to me that "There are no exact details, no discussion of when low impact becomes high impact". In fact, when I asked about the availability of studies looking at possible impacts, I was told Parks Canada had only one.

Moreover, the official repeatedly used the words “as presented to us” to describe the evidence they did have, which is evidence from only industry. The lack of definition requires further clarification.

Parks Canada explained that if it was developing a marine protected area the department might have taken a different approach. Should a reserve have less protection? This is an issue that should be examined at committee. Low-impact activities must be defined for parliamentarians when this is reviewed at committee.

The Liberal Party is in favour of responsible and sustainable resource development. However, we believe that development projects must adhere to the most stringent environmental assessments. We must ensure that Sable Island is environmentally protected and that the ecosystems are not detrimentally affected. We understand the economic value that developing the oil and gas resources in and around Sable Island would provide Nova Scotia and that it is legislatively protected. However, Sable Island is a particularly sensitive ecosystem.

We would like a review of Clause 3 and an exception to the application of the Canada National Parks Act with regard to existing leases, easements and licences of occupation and work on Sable Island.

Regarding clause 7, what would be the new mechanism for coordination and co-operation between Parks Canada and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board? This is key, as in the amendments to the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act it states, “before deciding whether to issue the authorization, the Board shall consider any advice”. In other words, the offshore board is not bound by the recommendations of Parks Canada. Who is looking after the interests of the environment and Sable Island if the offshore board is not bound by the decision? I understand from Parks Canada that the MOU defining the rules of this relationship would be put in place after the park is established. The act contains changes to land borders in Jasper National Park. Would the exchange of land between Parks Canada and the operators of Marmot Basin have a detrimental impact on the species in the area?

Regarding clause 15, with respect to Jasper National Park, with the exchange of land and the new development, are there any areas of concern with regard to the environment and species at risk in this new area that would be developed?

Last week I had a conference call with the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, which focuses on protecting many important areas of Canada's wilderness. The call was to find out whether it was indeed comfortable with the fast-tracking of this bill and the fact that even if the bill went to committee, amendments may not be accepted. I was informed that it wants Sable Island protected and that this bill is an important first step.

I ask that the government not use this bill as a precedent to allow exploration in other national parks. I am assured by officials that future parks are legislatively protected from this. Having said that, I have asked the parliamentary secretary and the minister and have still not been given that assurance on the record tonight. I would like the government's word that the integrity of Canada's national parks would not be undermined but instead protected, and that creating a national park among oil and gas exploration is not a foot in the door, an opening or setting a precedent to allow development in our treasured national parks.

I look forward to these issues being addressed at committee.

In closing, I would like to say that the government says it is a conservation government, but its actions paint a different picture.

Both with proposed national parks and protected areas such as the Rouge, as well as Sable Island, there are concerns regarding ecological integrity of the parks that cannot be overlooked, yet government members continually brush aside.

Moreover, I am concerned about the government's environmental track record that we have seen play out again and again over the past year, whether it be through Bill C-38 that gutted environmental legislation, that repealed the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, that repealed the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act, or Bill C-45 that dramatically reduced environmental protection of our waterways.

These are not the actions of a conservationist government. These are not the actions of a government that seeks to protect our national habitat.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, most of Bill S-15 that concerns me relates to Sable Island.

I look at what is being proposed for Marmot Basin and recognize that a tremendous amount of work has been done. When it was first being proposed, there was a real paucity of scientific data and a real lack of understanding of what needed to be done to protect the caribou. These management plans have come a long way. They will take careful monitoring, because, as the hon. member knows, there is always a tension in our national parks system between the overriding goal, which is to maintain the ecological integrity of these parks, and the flip side of human enjoyment, which includes things such as ski hills and tourism.

Would my hon. friend agree with me that we must ensure that our national parks system is not eroded by allowing industrial activity to encroach on national parks? They have always maintained the highest level of protection, the gold standard, the highest International Union for Conservation of Nature, IUCN, qualifications, which really mandate that ecological integrity is job one. Would the hon. member agree?

[James Rajotte, Conservative, Edmonton—Leduc, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it has been a fascinating debate here tonight, and I want to thank all the members who have taken part during speeches and questions and comments. I have to preface my remarks by saying that the previous speaker was riveting, as I think the member for Halifax and the Parliamentary Secretary said. I will be more focused on the details and the technical substance of the bill, plus I have never been accused of being riveting.

I am very pleased today to speak to the second part of Bill S-15 dealing with the establishment of Sable Island national park. It deals with three distinct matters: the amendment of section 4 of the Canada National Parks Act and amendments to sections 4 and 5 of that act. I will deal with each of these amendments in turn, found in clauses 13, 14 and 15 of the bill.

First, clause 13 of the bill proposes amendments to address concerns of the Standing Joint Committee of the Scrutiny of Regulations regarding section 4 of the Canada National Parks Act. Section 4 is one of the cornerstones of the act. It dedicates national parks to the people of Canada for their benefit, education and enjoyment, subject to the act and the regulations, and provides that the parks are to be maintained and made use of so as to leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.

This wording has remained virtually unchanged for over eight decades and has served to guide the Parks Canada agency and its predecessor institutions in the establishment and operation of a system of national parks that is truly the pride of Canadians and the envy of the world. The amendments proposed in the bill do not change this intent. In fact, they leave this wording untouched.

The bill makes two amendments to section 4. It fixes the discrepancy between the English and the French versions, a change that does not alter the meaning of this clause.

The bill also adds a new subsection 4.(1.1) to clarify the authority of the minister of the environment to use sections 23 or 24 of the Parks Canada Agency Act to set fees in national parks. The wording of this clause in the bill was improved through an amendment made by the Senate. The current wording effectively avoids any misinterpretation of the intent of the proposed changes.

Clauses 14 and 15 of the bill deal with matters affecting particular national parks in western Canada. We have heard a very interesting debate from people, especially from Nova Scotia, debating Sable Island and the establishment of that national park. I would like to now describe how they address specifically the needs of two of Canada's oldest national parks in western Canada, Yoho National Park of Canada and Jasper National Park of Canada.

Clause 14 of the bill amends the descriptions of the commercial zones for the community of Field, British Columbia, located within Yoho National Park of Canada. I remind the House that the Canada National Parks Act requires all communities within a national park to have a community plan that sets out a vision, management principles and design parameters. The community plans also identify the zoning regime, including commercial zones and associated growth limits.

Since 2004, development in the communities must be consistent with the commercial zones as well as with the maximum commercial floor area as set out under schedule 4 of the Canada National Parks Act. A legislative amendment is required to make any changes in these provisions.

The first community plan for Field was prepared by Parks Canada in 1999 and led to the description of commercial zones and the commercial floor area growth limit, which are currently found in schedule 4 of the Canada National Parks Act.

In 2006, Parks Canada assessed the ecological, social and economic health of Field and released its findings in a state of the community report. The report noted that zoning was restricting the range of services visitors had come to expect in a national park, the community's economic viability and affordability for community residents. Many of the report's recommendations have been implemented, but those associated with changing commercial zones require an amendment to schedule 4 of the CNPA.

Bill S-15 proposes three minor zoning changes to schedule 4 for certain properties in Field.

When commercial zones in national park communities were introduced into the Canada National Parks Act, the bunkhouse property owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway had been developed as a restaurant, and a description of the property was included in schedule 4. It was also expected that CPR's former railway station would be redeveloped as a commercial land use, and it too was included in schedule 4. Since then, the restaurant has ceased operations, and no commercial developments for the railway station have been proposed. CPR requires both properties for its operations and has requested a zoning change from commercial to railway and utilities.

Another site on the outskirts of Field, including property occupied by a gas station, had been zoned as institutional in anticipation of a museum that has never been built. The zoning would be changed to commercial to accommodate the gas station that currently exists on the site and serves the needs of both the community and its visitors.

The site of the former Royal Canadian Mounted Police office and barracks was originally zoned residential, with a notation in the original plan that it would be changed at a later date to commercial zoning to accommodate a bed and breakfast and a gift shop. As these developments have occurred, the change to commercial would reflect the current reality.

These zoning modifications are not controversial. They are supported by the community and they are well within the commercial growth limit already established in schedule 4. They would help support services required by park visitors and the town's businesses and residents. They are important to the economic viability of the community of Field and meet the intent of the community plan objectives. They would have no impact on the ecological integrity of Yoho National Park of Canada.

I would now like to turn to the amendments in clause 15 of the bill that would affect Jasper National Park of Canada. They involve the ski resort at Marmot Basin, which is located just 20 minutes from the town of Jasper within the boundaries of the park itself.

The ski hill has been in operation since 1961, and since then has provided exceptional skiing experiences to hundreds of thousands of visitors, including you, I believe, Mr. Speaker.

Before getting into the details of the amendments proposed by clause 15, which would bring positive benefits to both Jasper National Park and the ski hill operator, I wish to first describe the legislative and policy controls that Parks Canada has put in place with respect to ski hill development and the management of national parks in general. This will allow me to squarely address concerns raised previously in this House regarding the nature of the analysis brought to bear on the proposals relating to Marmot Basin ski area and on the opportunities for public input into these proposals.

The 1998 provisions were introduced in the Canada National Parks Act requiring that the boundary and size of each ski area be set out in schedule 5 of the act. Any change to those boundaries requires a legislative amendment. The bill is the vehicle for an amendment to the Marmot Basin ski area boundaries, as currently set out in schedule 5 of the act.

In addition to the legislative controls set out under the Canada National Parks Act, Parks Canada has, since 2000, established a series of policies that guide the management of ski areas in national parks. The Parks Canada ski area management guidelines outline a broad management approach for ski areas.

Parks Canada consulted with ski areas, communities, non-governmental organizations and tourism industry representatives in 2006 to get their feedback about potential refinements to the ski area management guidelines. Adjustments were made to the guidelines based on the feedback they received. These guidelines are supplemented by site-specific guidelines for each ski area to establish permanent growth limits and set out site-specific direction for development and use.

The final element of control is a requirement for ski areas to develop long-range plans and to carry out detailed impact analysis for project proposals that the ski area wishes to advance in a 5- to 15-year time frame.

These policies provide a comprehensive and tightly controlled framework for the management of ski hill operations in national parks that provides long-term land use certainty for the ski hill area operators, for the Canadian public and for Parks Canada.

This framework respects the Parks Canada mandate of maintaining or restoring ecological integrity while fostering a connection to place through the memorable visitor experiences and educational opportunities. It also provides ski area operators with clear parameters for business planning in support of viable financial operations.

In the case of Marmot Basin ski area, its site guidelines for development and use were approved by Parks Canada in 2008. They outline what development and use may be considered in the future, and establish growth limits, ecological management parameters and approaches to ski area operation.

The site guidelines were prepared in collaboration with Marmot Basin, and included a comprehensive public participation program and completion of a strategic environmental assessment.

A long-range plan and its associated environmental assessment for the Marmot Basin ski area in Jasper National Park are under development currently. In fact, Marmot Basin has recently posted on its website notice of its intention to have public consultations on its long-range plans, starting this fall.

The process put in place by Parks Canada clearly requires that there be a thorough environmental analysis and that the public be engaged. In fact, the public has been consulted every step of the way, from the development of the agency ski area of management guidelines, with its input leading to modification of these guidelines in 2006, to the 2008 Marmot Basin site specific guidelines for development and use and, finally, now at the stage of the development of the ski area's long-range plan. There are plans for engaging the public this fall. This answers the concerns raised regarding proper analysis and the participation of Canadians who are concerned in the project review process.

One example of the detailed analysis is the collaboration between Parks Canada and Marmot Basin on two wildlife studies that will shed new light on habitat features and local movements by mountain goats and caribou. These studies will be used in the long-range planning process under the Marmot Basin site guidelines.

Information on the research findings will be publicly available and this information will contribute to future decision making by Parks Canada about the ski area and managing the adjacent wilderness in the area being considered for the amendments to schedule 5 of the Canada National Parks Act. No decisions will be made until these studies are completed.

The House heard concerns raised about the caribou found in Jasper National Park. In fact, one of the studies, referred to above, is a caribou risk assessment led by Dr. Fiona Schmiegelow at the University of Alberta. Parks Canada has also developed its own conservation strategy for southern mountain caribou in Canada's national parks.

Turning now to the situation which gave rise to the proposed amendments, the operator of the Marmot Basin ski area wishes to improve the ski experience in Marmot Basin to remain competitive with other new and expanded ski operations in the region and stay financially viable.

The growth limits and the site guidelines for the Marmot Basin ski area are based on a design capacity of 6,500 skiers per day. Currently, the ski hill frequentation averages a little over 4,000 skiers per day. The existing commercial space can serve less than 3,300 skiers. There is a need for additional facilities and services and room for them to be developed in a manner to achieve an exceptional skiing experience, while respecting conservation imperatives.

The ski area management guidelines will only allow ski areas to add new ski terrain through an exchange that results in a substantial environmental gain to the ecological integrity of the park, which brings us to the bill before us.

The operator for the Marmot Basin ski area has proposed a solution through a reduction of its leasehold boundary that will result in a substantial environmental gain, the ecological integrity of Jasper National Park. The Marmot Basin ski area has offered to remove from its lease and return to the park 118 hectares of ecologically-sensitive land in the Whistlers Creek valley. This is undeveloped terrain that is important habitat for many wildlife species, including woodland caribou, a threatened species under the Species At Risk Act, as well as for grizzly bears and mountain goats. In exchange, 60 hectares of land in a less ecologically-sensitive area will be made available to the ski area operator to develop beginner ski terrain and cross-country ski trails.

The land to be exchanged was carefully selected to avoid caribou habitat and other important wildlife habitats, including potential grizzly bear denning sites, none of which have been identified in the area. Before any development would be authorized, further environmental evaluation of the area would be conducted in the context of the long-range planning process the Marmot Basin has announced recently and to which I referred just a few minutes ago.

The proposed removal of the 188 hectares from the ski area leasehold is considered a substantial environmental gain for several reasons.

First, the reconfiguration of the lease represents an 18% reduction in the leasehold, which is a major reduction in size.

Second, the lease reduction establishes long-term certainty in approved protection for sensitive and important mountain caribou and goat habitat, including caribou food sources and a goat mineral lick.

Third, the area would be added to an existing declared wilderness area that would have a greater degree of protection than is currently the case. Uses would be carefully managed to protect the wilderness character of the area.

Next, the lease reduction is a positive contribution of Parks Canada's participation in current and future broad-scale ecosystem management initiatives to better protect caribou habitat. The lease reduction protects broad ecological values for multiple species associated with the Whistlers Creek valley, including habitat security for other valley and sensitive species, such as grizzly bear, wolverine and lynx.

This proposal fits squarely within the parameters of the Parks Canada policy regime for ski area management. The 2006 ski area management guidelines, Parks Canada's overarching policy document for ski area management, specifically allow for the potential to make modifications proposed where there is a substantial environmental gain. This applies in situations where there is a leasehold reduction or a reconfiguration that results in better protection of sensitive areas in exchange for development of less sensitive areas.

The bill would improve the protection of sensitive ecosystems in Jasper National Park while creating greater certainty in land use. It would maintain Park Canada's authority to carry out its mandate while giving the ski area operator the possibility to make business decisions with certainty and confidence.

As I have pointed out, the proposed changes to the Marmot Basin ski area leasehold set out in schedule 5 of the Canada National Parks Act give us a win-win situation. It would be a win for the ski hill operator who could take steps to enhance its competitive position by following the strict rules set out in the Parks Canada legislation and policy. Most of all, it would be a win for Jasper National Park of Canada, which would benefit from a reduction in the ski area leasehold boundary and be able to provide enhanced protection to habitat for a variety of wildlife, including the threatened caribou.

In closing, I would like to reiterate that part 2 of Bill S-15 would bring very positive benefits for Parks Canada and all Canadians. It would effect minor amendments to section 4 of the Canada National Parks Act that maintain the strength and purpose of the dedication clause while clarifying the administrative ability of the minister to set fees in national parks under related legislation. It would make minor but important amendments that would benefit the community of Field, a town site in Yoho National Park of Canada. It would provide for a substantial environmental gain for wildlife habitat in Jasper National Park of Canada.

Above all, this bill is evidence of this government's commitment to ensuring that Canada's national parks offer visitors inspiring experiences and meaningful opportunities to connect to these places while ensuring their protection for future generations. I urge all members on both sides of the House to support this bill going to committee and moving this initiative forward.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed my privilege today to rise in this House for the purpose of expressing my support for Bill S-15 and, in particular, for taking the action necessary to protect Sable Island as a national park reserve under the Canada National Parks Act.

Throughout this debate and subsequent examination of Bill S-15 by a committee of the House, we are being asked to preside over an historic event: the creation of a new national park.

This is a unique opportunity for all the members of this House. In effect, we are being asked to make a clear and conscious decision to protect Sable Island for all time. We are being handed the opportunity to pass on to future generations this iconic island with its famed wild horses and important wildlife habitat. We are providing to our children a legacy of a natural area and all its inherent stories for them to enjoy and to pass on to the next generation.

It might seem at first glance that this is a rather short and inconspicuous piece of legislation, but in reality this is the key to ensuring that Sable Island will, as the dedication clause in the Canada National Parks Act states, be dedicated to the people of Canada for their benefit, education and enjoyment and be maintained and made use of so as to leave it unimpaired for the enjoyment of many future generations.

I stand in this House in support of making that decision by speaking in favour of Bill S-15.

I can only imagine standing on the beaches of Sable Island, wondering how this island came to be. I can imagine asking how it is that in the midst of the Atlantic Ocean, perched on a lonely outcrop of the continental shelf, this sandbar survives all the ocean can pound it with.

How is it that so many ships came to their last port of call on Sable Island as one of hundreds of shipwrecks? How is it that horses and endangered birds survive on this desolate outpost of dunes and sparse vegetation? What sheer idealism moves some of the current residents to spend months out here, guarding this island on behalf of all Canadians?

I look forward to the initiatives that Parks Canada is going to undertake to share the rich story of Sable Island and to answer these and other questions.

Perhaps a more direct question to consider this evening as we debate the proposal to protect Sable Island under the Canada National Parks Act is how we got to the point of designating Sable Island as a national park forever.

Early conservation efforts regarding Sable Island were merely targeted and reactive. As we have heard, the government passed regulations as long ago as 1961 to protect the horses of Sable Island from being removed from the island. These were called the Sable Island Regulations, and they specifically protected the island through restrictions aimed at controlling access and controlling certain types of activities.

In the late 1960s, the Department of Transport put an end to plans to remove mineral-rich sands from the surface of this island, even after the entire island had already been staked.

The story goes on. A more forward-looking conservation approach to Sable Island was first adopted in 1977, when Sable Island was designated as a migratory bird sanctuary under the Migratory Bird Convention Act. The purpose of this designation was to protect migratory birds, including their nests and eggs, a very important thing to do.

However, a migratory bird sanctuary in itself does not protect the other wildlife species or their habitat on Sable Island. In addition, the regulations only apply when migratory birds are actually nesting, so they are not an effective conservation tool for the rest of the year.

Things continued to develop and, more recently, specific areas of the island have also been designated as “critical habitat” for the endangered roseate tern under the Species at Risk Act.

Then, in 1998, working with the Province of Nova Scotia and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Environment Canada's Canadian Wildlife Service prepared a key document entitled “Conservation Strategy for Sable Island”. The overall goal was to set a framework for the preservation of the physical integrity and biological diversity of Sable Island. I note that it was initiated under a former government.

It was observed that the island had been used by humans for over 400 years and that this use had in fact changed the island, permanently altering its pre-contact ecosystem, yet it was time to develop a conservation strategy to define the environmental limits within which future activities should proceed.

In brief, the essence of the strategy was to protect the existing terrain from human-induced destabilization and to conserve the island's flora and fauna. That was 1998.

Of particular interest to our debate tonight is the part of the strategy dealing with the legal designation of Sable Island. The authors of the document observed that while the application of the Sable Island Regulations and the Migratory Birds Convention Act,

...have been relatively effective in protecting Sable Island, there are many parts of the island's natural environment which, at present, do not receive adequate protection under the law.

As a result, the strategy wisely recommended that enhanced legal protection should be sought that provides more comprehensive protection to the island's natural value. That is what we have been moving toward all of these years.

Finally, in June 2008, under the present government, work to designate Sable Island as a federal protected area was first announced by the hon. member for Ottawa West—Nepean. At that time, he announced funding under the health of the oceans initiative to maintain a year-round weather station on Sable Island.

I believe it is worth recounting the words of the hon. member from that day. This is what he said:

We believe that it is in the best interest of Canadians to ensure that Sable Island is preserved for generations to come.... Today's announcement is further proof of our Government's commitment to protecting and preserving our environment in Atlantic Canada.

These were prescient words, because with that announcement the journey to this very evening and to Bill S-15 was under way.

It was in 2009, as the Government of Canada and the Province of Nova Scotia were discussing progress on the protection of Sable Island, that the idea of protecting the island as a national park was first introduced.

In January 2010, the two governments signed a memorandum of understanding, an MOU, respecting the establishment of a federal protected area on Sable Island in the province of Nova Scotia. Finally, after all those years, a government was willing to move.

Recognizing that Sable Island possesses national significance, the two governments agreed to work together to determine if Sable Island should be protected as a national wildlife area under the Canada Wildlife Act or as a national park under the Canada National Parks Act.

By the terms of the agreement, the governments appointed a task force for the purpose of recommending which type of federally protected area should be embraced. This was going to be a well-thought-out process.

It is important to note that from day one of the process, the MOU between the two governments was clear that:

...no recommendation regarding the potential designation or creation of a federal protected area for Sable Island will have an adverse impact on Canada's or Nova Scotia's interest in offshore petroleum resources including those in the Sable Island area....

It was clear from the start that, no matter what type of protected area was recommended, it had to take into account the existence of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resource Accord Implementation Act, a mouthful, but really something that took precedence over all other federal legislation in this region, previously negotiated with the province, and of course it had to also take into account the role of the offshore petroleum board itself.

What came next in this rather fascinating history of development? It was on Earth Day, April 22, 2010, that the Canada-Nova Scotia Sable Island Task Force recommended to the Government of Canada and the province of Nova Scotia that Sable Island should be designated as a national park under the Canada National Parks Act. In comparing the two types of federal protected areas, the task force concluded that the national park designation would convey a number of additional public benefits.

First, as a national park, Sable Island would be protected and presented within a national network of national parks and would be recognized as one of Canada's premier natural and cultural icons.

Second, while petroleum resources would remain available to industry offshore, a national park places a stronger emphasis on the protection from exploitation and development of non-petroleum resources found in the subsurface of Sable Island.

Next, as a national park, the designation brings a stronger emphasis to the conservation and preservation of archeological and cultural resources, also an important factor.

Finally, the diversity of program objectives required in a national park, which include protection, visitor experience and engagement with stakeholders, would better serve to maintain a year-round human presence on the island.

In its conclusion, the task force noted something that many associated with Sable Island have come to learn, and that is the strong appreciation and passion and depth of interest that citizens share for the future of Sable Island. It was also clear through the work of the task force that all the sectors were committed to achieve a renewed future for Sable Island.

Perhaps that speaks to what we are trying to accomplish with Bill S-15, and that is a renewed future for Sable Island.

In May 2010, the two governments announced their decision to undertake consultations and to negotiate an agreement for the designation and protection of Sable Island under the Canada National Parks Act.

We might ask what the public thought of this idea, turning Sable Island into a national park. This is quite an important consideration as we consider the merits of Bill S-15. During the summer of 2010, Parks Canada held three open houses in Halifax, where more than 200 people attended. Many took the time to have in-depth discussions with Parks Canada staff and to submit written submissions, online submissions, emails, letters and telephone messages in response to Parks Canada's web page, newsletter and advertisements.

Members will be astounded to learn that Parks Canada received more than 2,800 responses, including 235 detailed submissions. As Parks Canada observed in its report on these consultations, the volume and quality of responses Parks Canada received are testament to the strong link that many Nova Scotians and Canadians across this country feel for this very special place. Furthermore, the agency noted, “Sable Island and its isolated sand dunes hold a special place in the hearts and minds of Canadians”.

Nova Scotians, among whom I have my roots, feel a particular tie to Sable, as it figures prominently in their history and looms large in their imagination.

The passion and great interest Canadians have in Sable Island was evident in the submissions Parks Canada received from across Canada and even from abroad expressing support and highlighting ideas, concerns and vision for the future of Sable Island as a national park.

What were the views of Canadians on the idea of designating Sable Island a national park? What did they have to say?

Well, in general, Parks Canada reported that Canadians support the proposed national park designation. They feel it is important to maintain the ecological integrity and protect the cultural resources of Sable. They are interested in visitor experience opportunities on the island that, however, are limited in scope and scale and well managed. They want off-island experiences and educational opportunities. Canadians are also seeking careful management of natural resources, including petroleum. Last but certainly not least, they are concerned about wildlife management.

Buoyed by the strong support that the consultations revealed for protecting Sable Island as a national park, officials moved to complete the negotiation of a memorandum of agreement for a national park at Sable Island. The next step in this great story is that on October 17, 2011, our Minister of the Environment and the minister responsible for Parks Canada joined with the hon. Darrell Dexter, Premier of Nova Scotia, in signing the national park establishment agreement.

Bill S-15 seeks to put into legislation many of the elements of that 2011 national park establishment agreement, including some very important things, which I will mention.

First of all, there would be a ban on drilling from the surface of Sable Island out to one nautical mile. Second, there would be a restriction of surface access rights for petroleum-related activities to only four very limited and very specific activities. Finally, there would be a requirement for the offshore petroleum board to consult Parks Canada should it consider authorizing even any of those four very limited activities.

In recognition of the Province of Nova Scotia's ongoing interest in the future of Sable Island, the establishment agreement also provides for a Canada-Nova Scotia committee to enable the province to provide input and advice respecting the operation of the national park reserve. In addition, subject to reasonable conditions, Parks Canada would permit Nova Scotia to continue to carry out environmental, climate change, weather and air monitoring programs on Sable Island as well as scientific research.

As we bring to a close this first part of the journey to renew the future of Sable Island, it is important not to forget those whose personal and professional dedication to this island has left us with this marvellous opportunity.

I am thinking of those officials at the Canadian Coast Guard, the Meteorological Service of Canada and the Canadian Wildlife Service, who for decades watched over Sable Island for the rest of us.

I am also thinking of those individuals and organizations, such as long-time resident and volunteer guardian, Zoe Lucas, as well as the Green Horse Society and the Sable Island Preservation Trust.

I am thinking of the Province of Nova Scotia and companies like Exxon Mobil, which have acted in the public good by always keeping conservation of Sable Island in the forefront of their actions in this region.

I call on this chamber to thank the Province of Nova Scotia, which on May 10 of this year gave royal assent to its bill amending the legislation to put into place the legislated ban against drilling. It now rests with this chamber to complete our work so that both governments would be able to give effect to their respective acts, thereby finally protecting Sable Island in law under the National Parks Act.

I also want to mention that Parks Canada will continue its work with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia.

In conclusion, I am very proud to have had the opportunity to speak in favour of Bill S-15 and to put on record my support for renewing the future of Sable Island as a national park reserve under the Canada National Parks Act.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. My question is about Bill S-15. I am very worried about the fact that the bill, which would create a new national park on Nova Scotia's Sable Island, is a real threat.

The more I think about it, I think the perfect analogy is that this is a Trojan Horse. It is as though we are getting a new gift, a new national park, and we should all be very happy to see it. While I am happy to see a large wooden horse coming into the courtyard, I suspect that the regulatory authorities that will remain with the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board will amount to a surging army that undoes the protection of other national parks across Canada.

I would like my hon. colleague's comments.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to say that I will be sharing my time with my very esteemed colleague, the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan.

How could I not begin by speaking out against the 42nd time allocation motion imposed by the Conservative government? It is truly shameful because we agree with the overall intention of this bill.

I will focus mainly on the case of Sable Island and on giving it national park status. That is basically a very good idea, but since the devil is in the details, with all due respect to our Conservative colleagues, we would like to work with them as equals to examine these details and find common ground.

Unfortunately, our time will be limited, which is truly a shame. Clearly, we will not use our parliamentary privilege to talk our colleagues' ears off. All we are asking is that the Conservatives listen to our legitimate concerns, our proposals and any other reasonable issue that deserves to be debated in the House. Unfortunately, we will have to make do with what we have.

The Conservatives have a majority in the House. Good for them. Although they may abuse their power, we will continue to work and, more importantly, we will get behind a bill that has a number of positive aspects.

As a proud Canadian who was born in Quebec and still lives there today, I will talk about Sable Island, which is a rather mythical place in the minds of all Canadians. Who has not heard of Sable Island, this thin and fragile strip of sand off the coast of Nova Scotia? The island is home to many animals, including the mythical herd of wild horses. It is an idyllic place. It is also a national treasure whose reputation extends far beyond our borders.

I repeat: it is a wonderful idea to make Sable Island a national park and to provide it with the protection that comes with that status.

However, the hon. member for Halifax, a strong advocate for this issue, has pointed out a serious problem. Unfortunately, major environmental protections at the federal level have been weakened and even gutted, which is a great cause for concern and which undermines national park status.

I will not talk about that because it has been debated. I am certain that some of my colleagues will want to expand on that.

I will talk instead about the national park status. With that status, Sable Island will become the responsibility of Parks Canada, which will supervise and operate it. I will also talk about the lack of funding. No matter the value that we place on this bill, the lack of funding ultimately makes it a hollow bill, unless we at least restore some means to ensure that the island is protected and studied in order to acquire the knowledge we need about this magnificent natural place.

To illustrate this point, I will talk about my riding, Beauport—Limoilou. It is home to an important element of our history that is the responsibility of Parks Canada. I am referring to Cartier-Brébeuf Park, which history and archeology have identified as the first spot where Jacques Cartier wintered back in the 16th century.

Cartier-Brébeuf Park, which is now located in downtown Quebec City, on the shore of the St. Charles River, is a place that I remember well. When I was in high school, I went there on a school trip. I also visited it with my son after settling in Limoilou. In the winter, I think we enjoyed drinking a cedar bark brew. I do not remember it well because it was about 20 years ago. My son was a young boy at the time. It was an aboriginal recipe that helped Jacques Cartier and his crew survive the terrible Canadian winters and the ravages of scurvy, among other things.

It is very important that we preserve such an asset because it is a source of pride, not to mention knowledge. When we know where we come from, we have a greater understanding of ourselves and we have certain basic tools to guide us. The historical perspective is key. It is very easy to lose track of the past, of artifacts and material aspects of our history, which are fragile and few. These objects are part of our heritage.

This year, there will be no more interpretive guides at Cartier-Brébeuf park. Everything will be done with interpretive signs or audio-guides. People will go around with their earphones. It is an appealing method, from a technical standpoint. It is a very interesting innovation, but ultimately, nothing can replace a human being or the interaction that can mean so much to both the visitors and the interpretive guides. I can say that based on my experience at a heritage site in Lotbinière.

Nothing can replace that interaction between the visitors and the interpretive guides, who can offer so much more to the visitors. They can answer questions, or if they are asked a question that they cannot answer, they can expand their knowledge and come back with even more information to share with visitors. It is really dismaying to see this place—one of the spots where the French presence was first felt in Canada—being abandoned like this.

At the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, I have often asked what the point is of passing a bill if we do not have the means to put it into effect and ensure that it will be fairly and thoroughly implemented.

It is true that Bill S-15 could be very promising. However, biodiversity in Canada is on the decline, particularly marine biodiversity, and in the case of Sable Island specifically, if we do not have the means to fulfill this bill's ambitions, it will all be for naught. It will be a disgrace for us because we are passing this legacy on to future generations, and it is a rich, fragile legacy.

I also wanted to talk about the drop in visitors to our national parks. I used to be the proud critic for small business and tourism, a position that is now held by my nearby colleague. We have both noticed a dramatic drop in the number of foreign tourists. We can draw the same conclusion, be it regarding Parks Canada or foreign tourists: unfortunately, we are not doing what it takes to spark people's interest, draw them in, welcome them and help them enjoy a one-of-a-kind experience.

At the same time, we agree with the purpose of Bill S-15 and we agree to support it at second reading, but will the means follow? Can the government reassure us that they will? I have serious doubts.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for coming and speaking tonight. One of our concerns is regarding the extent and oversight of natural resource development that Bill S-15 would authorize. These include petroleum exploration activities, which might include seismic, geologic or geophysical programs on Sable Island.

I am wondering if the minister could describe what is meant by seismic. People are concerned that only one study has been done to explore the impacts of seismic testing. Could he describe what seismic impacts are possible on the ocean and wildlife?

Second, I am going to ask very directly that this park created among oil and gas exploration will not be used as a foot in the door, an opening or a setting of precedent to allow development in our treasured national parks. Minister, do I have your word?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak in support of Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada's national parks act.

This bill would bring legal protection to Nova Scotia's Sable Island as Canada's 43rd national park. It is a key action toward the Government of Canada's commitment in its 2011 Speech from the Throne to create significant new protected areas. The passing of this bill would mark the end of the steps to which the Government of Canada agreed, with the Province of Nova Scotia, to designate Sable Island as a national park reserve, and the start of a new iconic national park reserve for all Canadians.

In fact, in October 2011, the hon. member for Central Nova and I were honoured to join with the Premier of Nova Scotia, Darrell Dexter, in Halifax to sign the memorandum of agreement for a national park at Sable Island. I know that each of us shared, that day, a strong sense that not only were we concluding almost 50 years of work to conserve Sable Island, but that we were taking the necessary action to protect this iconic landscape for the benefit of future generations. The dream of protecting Sable Island is a long-standing one that we hope to realize very shortly with the passage of Bill S-15.

As the hon. member for South Shore—St. Margaret's noted earlier in this debate, it was the call of schoolchildren from across Canada to stop the proposed removal of the famous Sable Island horses that resulted in the first federal conservation action in 1961, and, as the Sable Island region became the focus for petroleum development in the late 1960s and early 1970s, organizations stepped forward to draw national attention to the future of the island. During this time, the level of development and human use of the island declined, allowing nature to once again reassert itself.

As someone who has had the honour and the distinct pleasure of visiting Sable Island, I can attest to this House what a special place we are bringing under the protection of our world-class national parks system. In size, Sable Island is tiny in comparison to the 30,000 square kilometres now protected in Nahanni National Park Reserve in the Northwest Territories, thanks to the actions of Parliament in 2009 when it significantly expanded Nahanni. However, from my first-hand experience, I can tell members that it is no less important. Nature indeed has reasserted itself, reclaiming Sable Island as a sanctuary for life on the edge.

As we fly into Sable Island, we cannot help but be impressed by the fact that this isolated sandbar island, located, as my colleagues have said, just under 300 kilometres from Halifax, has survived. It is amazing that it has survived, let alone sustained life. The island is a remarkable formation, not only for its geography as the only remaining exposed portion of the outer continental shelf in the northwest Atlantic, but for its wildlife. Some 190 plant species live there, including 20 that have restricted distribution elsewhere. It is a sanctuary for some 350 species of migratory birds, including the roseate tern that is listed as endangered under the Species at Risk Act. In fact, Sable Island is the breeding ground for virtually the entire world population of the Ipswich sparrow.

Perhaps most famously, Sable Island is home to a band of feral horses. The numbers vary, from year to year and from decade to decade, from 300 to 500 animals. It is one of the few bands in the world that remains entirely unmanaged. These horses were introduced, it is believed, in the 1730s, and were declared protected by the Diefenbaker government in 1961. As a Canadian, as a member of this House and as a visitor to Sable Island, I am proud to stand in this chamber to help conclude the work started back in 1961. What a legacy for this Parliament to leave to future generations.

And, what a legacy passed on from previous generations. As we have heard, Sable Island has a very long human history, some of it tragic. About 350 shipwrecks are recorded there, earning the island the title often referred to of “graveyard of the Atlantic”.

Life-saving stations were established there over 200 years ago and in subsequent years lighthouses and shelters for shipwrecked sailors were built, much attributed to the resourcefulness and determination of Canadians. Thanks to the professional expertise of Parks Canada, we will continue to tell these stories and will continue to share them with Canadians and people around the world.

The bill before us amends schedule 2 of the Canada National Parks Act to add the legal boundary description of Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada. Using the national park reserve designation respects the ongoing discussions that the federal government is having with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia under the Made-in-Nova Scotia Process. The Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia support the national park reserve designation for Sable Island. The Government of Canada is committed to negotiating an agreement with the Mi'kmaq once the Made-in-Nova Scotia Process is completed in order to transition Sable Island to final full national park status.

Until that agreement is finalized, Sable Island would remain a national park reserve. I wish to stress that a national park reserve enjoys all the same protections that a national park does while respecting assertions of aboriginal or treaty rights. It is not a lesser category of national park. Some of our iconic parks, such as the Nahanni, in the Northwest Territories, and Gwaii Haanas and Pacific Rim on the west coast, are also still national park reserves. Nor is this time limited. We will not effect the transition to a full-fledged national park until we have concluded our work with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia.

As we heard, Sable Island is located in one of the largest offshore hydrocarbon basins in North America. I know that during this debate I heard again this evening concern expressed about the future of Sable Island and the petroleum activities that may be permitted within this region. However, at the end of the day, given that Sable Island National Park Reserve is being created in a region that is the subject of active petroleum exploration and development, I believe that our government and the Government of Nova Scotia have negotiated an approach to Sable Island that balances conservation and development in creating Canada's 43rd national park.

Members should consider what we would be accomplishing with this bill as it pertains to Sable Island. We would be creating a new and exciting park reserve on Sable Island that would conserve one of the largest dune systems in eastern Canada, habitat for endangered species and of course for the wild horses of Sable.

We would be protecting the asserted aboriginal rights and title of the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia while launching a new collaboration between Parks Canada and the Mi'kmaq. For the first time we would be putting in place a legislative ban on exploratory and extractive drilling for petroleum resources from the surface of Sable Island. We would be creating a legislated buffer zone around the national park reserve that prohibits drilling from the park boundary, which would be considered the shoreline at low tide, out one nautical mile.

We would be legally limiting the number of current petroleum-related activities that can be undertaken from Sable Island while directing those activities, if authorized, have low impact. I would be glad to speak to that in questions after these remarks. We would be putting in place a legislative requirement for the Offshore Petroleum Board to consult Parks Canada before consideration of any permits for this low-impact activity on Sable Island.

Finally, we would be providing opportunities for Canadians to experience and learn about Sable Island, whether by visiting the island itself or learning through various media.

At this time, I would like to echo the remarks of previous speakers in thanking the holders of petroleum discovery licences on or near Sable Island who voluntarily agreed to amendments that now fully and in perpetuity prevent them from drilling on the island and within the buffer zone of one nautical mile.

I too want to express my sincere appreciation to the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for their work in helping to create a national park reserve on Sable Island.

I want to again express my sincere appreciation to the Province of Nova Scotia for working with us from day one to realize this new national park reserve.

I would like to assure this House that for Parks Canada, Bill S-15 would be but a first step as it takes on administration of the island and begins to deepen the connection Canadians make with this remote place in the northwest Atlantic Ocean.

In the coming years, the agency would work with partners and shareholders to protect this land of wild horses and windswept dunes, of shipwrecks and sea birds. The wild character of this island would continue to be a defining feature for those who make the once-in-a-lifetime journey there.

I have heard questions of mild concern to this effect, but Parks Canada would carefully facilitate experience opportunities while protecting the special place in perpetuity for the benefit of present and future generations.

At the same time that Parks Canada maintained Sable Island's ecological integrity, it would consult with the public and it would work with partners and stakeholders to prepare a management plan to guide all aspects of the future management of this wonderful national park reserve.

Now I wish to briefly describe the other proposed amendments to the Canada National Parks Act made in the second part of the bill.

First, with regard to the other proposed amendments in the second part of this bill, the bill before us would address issues raised by the standing joint committee for the scrutiny of regulations, in particular to correct the discrepancies between the English and the French versions of subsection 4(1). These changes are minor in nature. They would not alter the meaning of the clause.

The bill would also add a new subsection 4(1.1), which clarifies the authority of the Minister of the Environment to use section 23 or section 24 of the Parks Canada Agency Act to set fees in national parks.

In fact, an amendment to this bill in the Senate brought greater clarity to these changes. The bill would make changes affecting two national parks in western Canada. It would make minor changes to commercial zoning in the community of Field, British Columbia, in Yoho National Park, to reflect the current reality in Field while at the same time respecting the commercial limits established for that community and the community plan.

Finally, the last set of amendments is that Bill S-15 would change the leasehold boundaries of the Marmot Basin ski area that is within Jasper National Park of Canada by removing an area that is an important wildlife habitat for woodland caribou, for mountain goat, for grizzly bear and for wolverine in exchange for a smaller area of less ecologically sensitive land. This would result in a significant gain for the ecological integrity of Jasper National Park.

The Government of Canada is proud to table this bill to formally establish a Sable Island national park reserve of Canada, and to give this national treasure the highest level of environmental protection in the country. Sable Island would join with other places that have become Canada's premier natural and cultural icons in a national parks system that covers more than 326,000 square kilometres, an area that is 4 times the size of Lake Superior and that celebrates the infinite beauty and the variety of our land.

Bill S-15 marks the third time our government has brought before Parliament a legislative proposal to increase the size of Canada's internationally acclaimed network of national parks and national marine conservation areas.

In fact, in May 2011, Parks Canada was awarded the prestigious Gift to the Earth award by World Wildlife Fund, its highest accolade to applaud conservation work of outstanding merit. In recognizing a conservation action as a gift to the earth, WWF highlights both environmental leadership and inspiring conservation achievement, which contribute to the protection of our shared living world.

The Gift to the Earth award recognizes Parks Canada's conservation leadership and its globally outstanding track record in creating new protected areas and in embracing precedent-setting aboriginal participation in the establishment and the management of our protected areas.

I would like to briefly speak to some of these new protected areas, which would soon see Sable Island among them.

In 2009, Parliament unanimously passed legislation resulting in a sixfold expansion of Nahanni National Park Reserve, bringing the park to 30,000 square kilometres in size.

It was remarked in the House that this was the conservation achievement of a generation, one that was accomplished with the close collaboration of the Dehcho First Nations. Designated one of the planet's first world heritage sites, this expanded park now protects in perpetuity significant habitat for grizzly bear, caribou and Dall sheep, as well as the famed South Nahanni River.

A year later, after a parliamentary review, the Gwaii Haanas National Marine Conservation Area Reserve and Haida Heritage Site became the first marine protected area to be scheduled under the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act. In a global first, this new marine protected area, along with the existing Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve and Haida Heritage Site, protects a contiguous area that extends from alpine mountaintops right down to the bottom of the ocean floor—a rich temperate rainforest and its adjoining marine ecosystem now protected for the benefit of future generations. All of this was accomplished as we worked hand in hand with the people of the Haida Nation.

It is important to note that our government has not only worked to protect large or remote natural areas such as Nahanni, Gwaii Haanas and Sable Island, but we are also working to protect endangered habitat and species and to conserve some of the last large remaining natural areas in more developed settings.

In 2011, the government announced the purchase of the historic Dixon family ranch lands of the Frenchman River Valley, in southwest Saskatchewan, in order to protect it for future generations as part of Grasslands National Park of Canada.

This land acquisition of approximately 111 square kilometres within the west block of Grasslands National Park's existing boundary is significant for its spectacular scenery and its native grasslands, which includes critical habitat for species at risk.

Allow me to quote the hon. member for Edmonton—Spruce Grove, when she observed:

This vast, windswept prairie was home to millions of free-roaming bison prior to European settlement. With the re-introduction of bison—an icon of the prairie—the park will restore grazing to this mixed-grass prairie ecosystem, enhance the long-term integrity of the park and once again give Canadians the opportunity to view these symbols of the prairie after over a century's absence in this area.

It is these kinds of actions that speak to the power of our national parks. Not only do they protect the natural areas that have been handed down from generations before us, but they also provide us with the opportunity to restore what might have been lost.

Again to Grasslands National Park, in 2009, Parks Canada reintroduced the black-footed ferret, a species that had disappeared from this region more than 70 years ago.

Finally, I am particularly proud of our government's initiative to bring the message of protected areas and conservation to the Rouge Valley of Toronto.

In the 2011 Speech from the Throne, our government announced that it would work to create a national urban park, the first national urban park in Canada, in the Rouge Valley. This is an important initiative that would help increase the profile and public investment in urban conservation. I am also proud of the fact that our government will invest over $143 million, over 10 years, for park development and interim operations, with an annual budget of $7.6 million to continue operations.

The overall size of a Sable Island national park reserve and Rouge Urban National Park are not as large as our great northern and Rocky Mountain national parks, but they are no less important. They complement the mandate of large protected areas by focusing on some of our most endangered ecosystems, and they provide yet another opportunity to inspire people to take action to conserve their local natural areas.

Passage of Bill S-15 would ensure that the natural and cultural features of a Sable Island national park reserve of Canada would be protected forever, for the enjoyment, the appreciation and the benefit of current and future generations of Canadians.

I hope that hon. members across both sides of this House will join me in supporting Bill S-15.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the hon. Chief Government Whip for his support. It is such a pleasure to be here tonight.

I was actually quite impressed with some of the testimony that came out the last time we were speaking to this bill, on Friday. I have geared my speech to address some of the issues that came up. I looked a bit through the Senate committee testimony that came up as well as some of our technical briefing documents, and I hope to address some of my colleagues' concerns that were raised on Friday.

The critical points that were raised on Friday related to some of the issues around seismic activities on the island as well as aboriginal consultations and inclusion within the bill. Questions were raised around Parks Canada consulting the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia. I can assure this House that we are taking important measures with respect to the Mi'kmaq, that we have consulted and will continue to consult them and that Parks Canada is continuing to work with them.

In designating Sable Island as a national park reserve, the Government of Canada would be protecting the asserted aboriginal rights entitled to this area. A national park reserve designation, which is clearly defined under the Canada National Parks Act, is used where there are outstanding claims by aboriginal peoples regarding aboriginal rights and titles and these claims have been accepted by Canada for negotiation.

In her remarks, the member for Edmonton—Strathcona expressed her concern that, while the preamble refers to the Mi'kmaq's asserted rights and title, the bill itself does not. I just want to assure the House that this is standard when it comes to designating national park reserves under the Canada National Parks Act, in that specific reference is not made to the aboriginal people claiming rights and title to a specific national park reserve. Rather, it is the designation as a reserve that protects their asserted rights. When it comes to concerns over the integrity of the national parks system, the Canada National Parks Act is also clear that a national park reserve is protected just as much as a national park, all the while respecting the assertions of aboriginal or treaty rights. It is not a lesser category of national park. Parks such as Nahanni in the north, Mingan Archipelago in Quebec and the Gulf Islands in British Columbia are all currently designated as national park reserves while we work with the aboriginal people who use these areas to finalize an agreement through which they would co-operatively manage these areas in collaboration with Parks Canada.

To be clear, we will not move to designate Sable Island as a national park of Canada until we have concluded our consultations and negotiations with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia.

In fact, to illustrate this point, when our government first took office in 2006, Labrador's Torngat Mountains was then designated as a national park reserve. That year, the hon. member for Edmonton—Spruce Grove signed a park impacts and benefit statement with the president of Makivik Corporation representing the Nunavik Inuit of northern Quebec who had a claim to the area in Labrador covered by the park reserve. Only with the signing of that agreement did the government move to formally transition the reserve to what is now the Torngat Mountains National Park of Canada.

With respect to consultations, in May 2010, Parks Canada, as required under the consultation protocol established under the made-in-Nova Scotia process, wrote to the Assembly of Nova Scotia Chiefs, the Nova Scotia Office of Aboriginal Affairs and the Native Council of Nova Scotia requesting consultation on plans to designate Sable Island as a national park.

In November 2010, the Mi'kmaq people wrote to Parks Canada confirming that they were in agreement that Sable Island be designated as a national park by bringing it under the Canada National Parks Act by an act of Parliament. They also stated that they looked forward to working together with Parks Canada in the development of a management plan for Sable Island and other opportunities for the Mi'kmaq to be meaningfully and actively engaged in the vision and management direction for Sable Island as a national park.

Consultation with the Mi'kmaq during the designation process would continue until the final step in the establishment process, namely designation of Sable Island as a national park. Once a final accord had been negotiated by Canada, Nova Scotia and the Mi'kmaq through the made-in-Nova Scotia process, Parks Canada would undertake the necessary steps as defined under the final accord to transition Sable Island from a national park reserve to a national park.

Parks Canada enjoys a productive relationship with the Mi'kmaq. Parks Canada and the Mi'kmaq are close to concluding a contribution agreement, the purpose of which is to enable the Mi'kmaq to conduct research and consult with member communities to develop a thorough understanding of the cultural and historical connection of the Mi'kmaq people to Sable Island.

The results of this project would inform the future governance and advisory approach for a Sable Island national park reserve and would build practical working relationships with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia. This work would provide an important foundation for the participation of the Mi'kmaq in the planning and management of the national park reserve.

As we have heard, Sable Island is located in one of the largest offshore hydrocarbon basins in North America. I know that during the debate last Friday, concern was expressed about the future of Sable Island and the petroleum activities that may be permitted within this region. I believe that the Government of Canada and Nova Scotia have negotiated an approach to Sable Island that balances conservation and the fact that this is a large hydrocarbon development basin.

All petroleum-related activities in Nova Scotia's offshore, including on and around Sable Island, are administered under the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act. As the preamble to this bill makes clear, section 4 of the accord act states that the act takes precedent over all legislation that applies to the offshore area, including Sable Island.

Therefore, it is into this legislative framework, put in place by previous parliaments, that we must fit this new national park reserve. To that end, through Bill S-15, we would amend the accord act to, for the first time, legally prohibit drilling from the surface of Sable Island. This is a point that should not be lost on this House because this would be of huge benefit to protecting this very unique piece of ecosystem and land that is so dear to all Canadians for the future. It is one of the core purposes of putting this bill forward to begin with. We would also put in place a buffer zone from the low-water boundary of the national park reserve out to one nautical mile where the drilling ban would also apply.

Many of my colleagues here have raised concern about the definition of “low-impact petroleum-related activities”. I think this is a fair discussion to have, because we want to make sure we get this right. Therefore, I will give a bit of background on my understanding of what this means, based on Senate committee testimony as well as discussions that the Nova Scotia government had, I believe, in the development of its bill related to this issue, because I think this should be considered, should this bill be supported by my colleagues and brought to committee stage.

Bill S-15 lists several low-impact petroleum-related activities that might be permitted on the island, including seismic. While some equate the word seismic with blasting and explosion, this is not the case in this situation. Low-impact seismic, as described by Mr. Stuart Pinks, chief executive officer of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board, before the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources, stated:

It is...emitting a sound source that, if it was done on the island, would travel down through the sand...through the rock formations, and some of the sound or energy waves are actually reflected back up. There are listening devices that will pick that up.

This activity was conducted on the island once before in the last several decades. In 1991, Mobil Oil Canada conducted seismic work on and around Sable Island. The company agreed to follow a strict code of practice that was developed in collaboration with Ms. Zoe Lucas, a long-time resident expert on Sable Island, and with the Green Horse Society, which is the leading environmental non-governmental organization for Sable Island.

In following this code of practice, industry made significant changes to its program design and implementation, including delaying the start of the program to avoid the peak periods for nesting birds, pupping harbour seals and foaling horses and changing the layout of seismic lines to avoid biologically rich areas.

Under the 1999 program, Mobil Oil Canada used two vibro-seismic vehicles on the island as sound sources on the north and south sides of the western third of Sable Island. They were restricted to the unvegetated outer beach areas. These were the sound sources. Sixty-two receiver lines were laid across the island for the purpose of receiving the sounds. In placing these receiver lines, no vehicle traffic was permitted on any vegetated terrain and all traffic on vegetation was on foot and restricted to the receiver lines. All the gear used during the program, including cables, geophones, batteries and so forth were carried into and out of the vegetated areas by personnel travelling only on foot.

Ms. Lucas concluded in a 2000 report that, “In general during the 1999 seismic program on Sable Island there was a very high compliance with the Code of Practice”. She also observed that “the [seismic] program had limited and short-term impact on Sable Island”. Furthermore, she concluded that compliance with the code of practice by the survey company “indicated that any group operating on the island could be expected to comply with similar guidelines”.

I would also point out that under the terms of the 2011 National Parks establishment agreement that was signed that year, Canada and Nova Scotia agreed that low impact exploratory work could continue to be authorized. When asked about the possibility of amending Bill S-15 to prohibit such activities by the Senate committee examining the bill, Mr. Leonard Preyra, minister of communities, culture and heritage with the Government of Nova Scotia, confirmed that having the potential to permit such activities, “is an important building block for the agreement itself. In a way, it's a deal breaker”.

During our debate in second reading, concern was expressed that Bill S-15 could set a precedent for other national parks with respect to continuing petroleum-related activity. This is clearly not the case with Bill S-15, as it does not amend the Canada National Parks Act to permit low impact petroleum activities in existing or future national parks. Rather we are amending the Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to restrict the board's current powers to authorize seismic activities on Sable Island to low impact activities.

For that reason, I would suggest that our government is not compromising the integrity of Canada's national park system, as has been suggested on several occasions by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

In creating new national parks, governments are often challenged to make tough decisions when it comes to allowing certain activities, be it mining roads in Nahanni, traditional land use activities, including hunting in Wapusk, or access to timber resources for local use in Gros Morne. In each case, we balance the need to maintain the integrity of the national park system, while trying to seize the opportunity to enhance the conservation of some of our special places, such as Sable Island.

The fact is that we have succeeded in negotiating a stronger conservation regime for Sable Island than currently exists and that is the goal here. It is to protect this area, it is to bring a greater degree of conservation and it is to understand that this indeed is one of the most special places we have in the country and we should be protecting it. That is the intent of the bill, full stop.

I would argue that our government is strengthening the integrity of our national park system and is working to significantly expand our national marine conservation area. It is because of this pragmatic approach in dealing with the various challenges inherent in creating new national parks that we are making tremendous progress.

For example, in 2006, our government established the 5,565 square kilometre Saoyú-?ehdacho National Historic Site in partnership with the Déline Land Corporation and the Déline Renewable Resources Council. This is the first northern cultural landscape commemorated by the Government of Canada, the first northern national historic site co-operatively managed by Parks Canada and an aboriginal group and the first protected area established under the Northwest Territories protected areas strategy.

In 2007, the Prime Minister joined with the Government of Ontario in announcing the creation of Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area. At more than 10,000 square kilometres, including the lake bed, islands and north shore lands, this is the largest freshwatrer marine protected area in the world.

In 2009, the House passed legislation resulting in the dramatic sixfold expansion of Nahanni National Park Reserve. For their efforts in achieving this decades-old dream, the minister of the environment, the Grand Chief of the Dehcho First Nation and the president of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society were awarded the prestigious Gold Medal by the Royal Canadian Geographical Society.

Last August, the Prime Minister joined with the leaders of the Sahtu Dene and Metis to announce the creation of Nááts'ihch'oh National Park Reserve of Canada for the purpose of protecting the headwaters of the South Nahanni River. This conservation action will bring to a conclusion the work of so many to protect the Greater Nahanni Ecosystem.

In the 2011 Speech from the Throne, our government pledged to the people of Canada to create significant new protected areas. For example, Parks Canada is working to conclude negotiations to create a new national park on Bathurst Island in Nunavut and a new national park reserve in the Mealy Mountains of Labrador. Each of these new parks will bring ecological, social and economic benefits to aboriginal people and northern communities. Each new park will also shed light on a new and fascinating destination for visitors, providing an opportunity to diversify the local economy and to open the door to new and fascinating stories about these places.

We will continue our work to conclude the consultations and feasibility assessments for proposed national marine conservation areas in the ecologically rich waters of the southern Strait of Georgia in British Columbia and Lancaster Sound in Nunavut, and for a new national park reserve in the Thaidene Nene area of the east arm of Great Slave Lake. In each case we are working closely with the provincial and territorial governments as well as aboriginal peoples.

I want to assure the House that while our government continues to work to protect national parks and marine conservation areas, we are also working to promote urban conservation. We also want to bring the inspirational messages of such faraway places as Sable Island to urban populations because we want people in urban communities to be inspired to take action to protect their natural areas.

As we move to bring Sable Island under the Canada National Parks Act, our government stands to make a special contribution to urban conservation in Canada in establishing the country's first urban national park in Rouge Valley in the greater Toronto area. Rouge national urban park will be a unique concept that would include the conservation of natural and cultural assets, sustainable agriculture, opportunities for learning and a wide range of recreational activities.

Canada's national parks already make an important contribution to urban conservation, through the provision of clean air and water and the economic benefits in natural areas. For example, the protective watershed of Banff National Park supplies life-giving drinking water, provides recreational opportunities and supports farmers and industries well beyond its boundaries.

Parks Canada's places also provide sustainable ecosystems that are home to our migratory areas for many species, such as warblers and monarch butterflies in Point Pelee National Park. These species are in turn a key link in the ecological chain of urban areas.

While the provision of clean air and water and the ecological benefits of natural areas are an incredible contribution, in fact, they only make up a fraction of what Parks Canada provides to Canadians in urban conservation.

Arguably, Park Canada's largest role in this matter is to provide the opportunities of experiencing nature first-hand, an increased public awareness of sustainable development and natural heritage and an inspiring sense of pride in taking conservation action. This is a cornerstone of what it means to be Canadian.

There is a large body of research that demonstrates that exposure to natural environments helps people cope with stress, illness and injury and improved concentration and productivity.

As I wrap up, I encourage my colleagues opposite to support the bill. I am very encouraged by the high level of productive dialogue that we have had. I am very much looking forward to having a good discussion at committee on the bill, to review each of the concerns my colleagues have brought forward. I have tried to provide some clarity on those tonight. The minister will be speaking later as well.

I certainly hope this is an example of where we can work together within this place, do a wonderful thing for conservation in Canada and also protect one of the most sacred and ecologically-sensitive areas in our country, not just for now but for generations to come.

I am so proud of what the Nova Scotia government has done in this matter. I am so proud of what industry has done. Together, in the House, we can take the final step and make the Sable Island national park reserve happen.

The House resumed from May 31 consideration of the motion that Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I do want to start by reviewing what our House has accomplished over the preceding five days since I last answered the Thursday question.

Bill C-51, the safer witnesses act, was passed at third reading. Bill C-52, the fair rail freight service act, was passed at third reading. Bill C-63 and Bill C-64, the appropriations laws, passed at all stages last night as part of the last supply day of the spring cycle.

Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, has been debated some more at third reading. Bill C-60, the economic action plan 2013 act, no. 1, was passed at report stage. Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act, was passed at report stage, was debated at third reading, and debate will continue.

Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act, was passed at second reading. Bill C-56, combating counterfeit products act, was debated at second reading. Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, was debated at second reading. Bill S-17, the tax conventions implementation act, 2013, was debated at second reading.

On Bill C-62, the Yale First Nation final agreement act, we adopted a ways and means motion, introduced the bill, passed it at second reading and it has since passed at committee. I anticipate we will be getting a report from the committee shortly.

Bill S-16, the tackling contraband tobacco act, was given first reading yesterday after arriving from the Senate. Bill C-65, the respect for communities act, was introduced this morning.

Substantive reports from four standing committees were adopted by the House.

On the private members' business front, the House witnessed three bills getting third reading, one being passed at report stage, two being reported back from committee and one was just passed at second reading and sent to a committee.

Last night was the replenishment of private members' business, with 15 hon. members bringing forward their ideas, which I am sure we will vigorously debate.

The House will continue to deliver results for Canadians over the next week. Today, we will finish the third reading debate on Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act. Then we will turn our collective attention to Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, at second reading, followed by Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, at third reading.

Tomorrow we will have the third reading debate on Bill C-60, the economic action plan 2013 act, no. 1. The final vote on this very important job creation and economic growth bill will be on Monday after question period.

Before we rise for the weekend, we hope to start second reading debate on Bill C-61, the offshore health and safety act.

On Monday, we will complete the debates on Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, and Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act.

Today and next week, I would like to see us tackle the bills left on the order paper, with priority going to any bills coming back from committee.

As for the sequencing of the debates, I am certainly open to hearing the constructive proposals of my opposition counterparts on passing Bill S-6, the First Nations Elections Act, at second reading; Bill S-10, the Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, at second reading; Bill S-12, the Incorporation by Reference in Regulations Act, at second reading; Bill S-13, the Port State Measures Agreement Implementation Act, at second reading; Bill S-16, at second reading; Bill S-17, at second reading; Bill C-57, the Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act, at second reading; Bill C-61, at second reading; and Bill C-65, at second reading.

Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward to having another list of accomplishments to share with you, and all honourable members, this time next Thursday.

Suffice it to say, we are being productive, hard-working and orderly in delivering on the commitments we have made to Canadians.

There having been discussions among the parties that it will receive unanimous consent, I would like to propose a motion. I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of this House, the member for Peace River be now permitted to table the Report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development in relation to Bill C-62, An Act to give effect to the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

Bill S-15—Time Allocation

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this government embraces the concept of parliamentary debate. Unfortunately, the agreement that existed among parties seems to have fallen apart, and the time has come to vote.

I would remind my hon. colleagues that the passage of this legislation to protect Canada's 43rd national park reserve involves and requires mirrored legislation in the House and in the Nova Scotia legislature. Mirrored legislation was introduced there on April 24. It achieved second reading on April 25 and third reading on May 6. It received royal assent on May 10.

There has been full debate in the Senate. We had an agreement for debate in the House, which, for opposition reasons, has fallen apart. We are prepared today to take questions about the material content of Bill S-15 and to proceed to the time allocation vote.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is yet another sad day. This is not about Bill S-15. This is about a Conservative majority government under the Prime Minister and his attitude and his lack of respect for due parliamentary process.

The Prime Minister, more than any other in the history of Canada, has demonstrated borderline contempt in not allowing members the opportunity to address important issues. Canadians have a right to know that parliamentarians have been afforded the opportunity to speak and the opportunity to see a bill go through a natural process. The Conservative government has incorporated in its standard process as a majority government something that is totally abhorrent and disrespectful toward democracy.

My question is not to the minister. My question is to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons or to the Prime Minister. Why has the government decided to take such strong action with time allocation, unprecedented in the history of our country, to deny members the opportunity to debate?

If there were an ounce of good-faith negotiation, that is what should be taking place. We should have negotiation through House leaders so that there is a proper procedure to pass legislation through the House of Commons. Why is the government not doing what it should be doing in terms of preserving democracy inside the House of Commons?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration of the second reading stage of the Bill; and

That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Bill S-15—Notice of Time Allocation Motion

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the House that agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to second reading stage of Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.

Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3) I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage of the said bill.

Expansion and Conservation of Canada's National Parks Act

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill S-15, which would amend the Canada National Parks Act to create the Sable Island national park reserve of Canada, the culmination of years of work by the Governments of Canada and Nova Scotia and by various stakeholders to protect Sable Island's unique nature and ecosystem. At present, Sable Island, an ecological gem, is afforded little protection and does not have protected status.

Sable Island lies approximately 290 kilometres southeast of Nova Scotia. It is a long, crescent-shaped island in the North Atlantic. While its topography is characterized by sand dunes and grasses, it is home to a significant biodiversity, including 375 wild horses, 350 species of birds, 190 plant species and the largest colony of grey seals in the world.

Sable Island is world-renowned not only for its biodiversity but for its shipwrecks. Since 1583, there have been more than 350 recorded shipwrecks on or near the island, earning it the title of “Graveyard of the Atlantic”.

Given the unique ecosystem found on the island, in 2004 the federal and Nova Scotia governments concluded that it would be in the public interest to use a federally protected area designation to achieve conservation objectives for Sable Island.

In 2010, a memorandum of understanding, or MOU, was signed to establish a federally protected area on Sable Island. Following the MOU, public consultations were held with members of the public and with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia to consider whether to establish a national wildlife area under the Canada Wildlife Act or a national park under the Canada National Parks Act.

In the end, the consultations recommended that Sable Island be designated a national park, and on October 17, 2011, the Governments of Canada and Nova Scotia signed an MOU to establish a national park on Sable Island.

The island will be designated as a national park reserve in recognition of the fact that the island is subject to a claim of the Mi'kmaq. The Mi'kmaq and the Governments of Nova Scotia and Canada are currently negotiating this claim. The designation as a national park reserve allows the governments to continue these land claim negotiations.

Conserving Sable Island poses a challenge because of the wealth of resources in and around the island. Sable Island has been at the centre of oil and gas activities for the last 50 years. Offshore hydrocarbon exploration began in the 1960s. To date, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board has made 23 significant discovery declarations in offshore Nova Scotia, eight of which have been declared commercial discoveries. From the commercial discoveries, 53 billion cubic metres of natural gas has been produced from Sable Island offshore energy fields.

Bill S-15 would put into law an existing prohibition against drilling on Sable Island. Importantly, five oil companies that have been granted exploration licences for on-island drilling have voluntarily agreed to relinquish these rights.

Let me say clearly that the Liberal Party is strongly in favour of the establishment of Sable Island national park reserve. Sable Island must be protected. In fact, the bill coming out of the Senate had the support of Liberal Party senators.

However, the Liberal Party has concerns with the legislation that we feel are important and should be addressed at the committee stage. The Liberal Party would like to ensure that rigorous environmental protections and safeguards are maintained for this national park reserve. As well, we must ensure that any concerns by the Mi'kmaq with regard to the legislation have the opportunity to be addressed.

Liberals also have several concerns regarding the extent and oversight of natural resource development that Bill S-15 authorizes, specifically as it permits horizontal drilling underneath the island as well as low-impact exploration activities on the island. We would like to know what the government defines as “low impact” and what the effect would be on species at risk.

The Liberal Party is in favour of responsible and sustainable resource development. However, we believe that development projects like these must adhere to the most stringent environmental assessments. We must ensure that Sable Island is environmentally protected and that development does not detrimentally affect the ecosystem.

We understand the economic value that developing the oil and gas resources in and surrounding Sable Island would provide Nova Scotia. However, Sable Island is a particularly sensitive ecosystem and is, as I have mentioned, home to a wealth of biodiversity as well as many species at risk, and it is important to find the right balance.

Other concerns include the following. The bill contains changes to the dedication clause, as well as changes to land borders in Jasper National Park, while the exchange of land between Parks Canada and the operators of Marmot Basin would have a detrimental impact on species in the area.

Another concern regards clause 3, an exception to the application of the Canada National Parks Act with regard to existing leases, easements and licence of occupation and work on Sable Island. Why the allowance of renewal of licences? How many leases and licences are currently in place that affect Sable Island? We have also asked for that list from the minister's office and hope it will be provided at committee stage. We would also like to know how clause 6 corresponds with clause 3 with regard to the extension of leases on Sable Island.

In clause 7, what would be the new mechanism for coordination and co-operation between Parks Canada and the offshore petroleum board?

In the amendments to the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act, it states,

“Before deciding whether to issue the authorization, the Board shall consider any advice...”.

Is the offshore board not bound to the recommendation of Parks Canada? We would like to know who is looking after the interests of the environment and Sable Island if the offshore board is not bound by the decision.

Regarding clause 8, is the Conservative government not concerned with petroleum exploration activities, which might include systemic geological or geophysical programs on Sable Island?

What other activities might fall under the definition of “low-impact petroleum exploration”? What work has been undertaken to study the impacts of any programs?

Clause 14 amends the designation from utility zone to commercial zone in Yoho National Park of Canada. What changes come with the change of designation?

On clause 15, with regard to Jasper National Park, with the exchange of land and the new development, are there any areas of concern with regard to the environment and species at risk in this new area that will be developed?

The Liberal Party supports the creation of Sable Island National Park Reserve and would not block or even slow down its creation as it represents years of work by the government and stakeholders.

In fact, our environmental critic, the member for Etobicoke North, had a conference call with the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, which focuses on protecting many important areas of Canada's wilderness, to confirm what aspects it was comfortable with in the bill. Even if the bill went to committee, amendments would likely not be accepted. Based on the history of the government, would society be comfortable with the bill?

I believe the government does want Sable Island protected and Bill S-15 is an important first step.

In closing, I ask that the government not use the bill as a precedent to allow exploration in other national parks. As well, I hope it will allow a number of witnesses to appear before the Standing Committee on the Environment so that concerns can be appropriately addressed and, if necessary, the bill amended so that this special national park reserve can be established.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.

These targets are essential for several reasons. Canada has become an international laughingstock because the government refuses to meet its targets under international agreements such as the Kyoto protocol. In addition, the Minister of the Environment withdrew Canada from the protocol in 2011, without consulting Canadians or even the other countries.

The international community was not even aware that Canada was pulling out until the very last minute. The government refuses to take positive action on the environment and is waiting for a Senate bill to do so—because we know that Bill S-15 originated in the Senate. I urge the Conservatives to listen to Canadian scientists and environmentalists.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member who spoke before me, the member for Edmonton—Strathcona. She gave a wonderful overview of Bill S-15. I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to this Senate bill.

We know that in 2011 the federal government and the provincial NDP government negotiated an agreement to make Sable Island a national park. Bill S-15 was drafted as a result of that agreement.

Basically, Bill S-15 proposes that Sable Island become a national park reserve. It should be noted that unlike a national park, which does not allow for aboriginal land claims within the park area, a national park reserve designation allows the government to continue land claim negotiations.

That detail is very important here because the Mi'kmaq people of Nova Scotia are currently asserting ancestral rights to the island.

We must acknowledge the presence of first nations on the territory now known as Canada. As my colleague for Edmonton—Strathcona mentioned, we need to ensure that there are proper consultations with first nations.

I hope that the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development will invite first nations to appear before the committee so they can share their views. We know that the bill's preamble is not binding. We must ensure that this bill reflects the rights of first nations when it is implemented.

All the members of the House have said that Sable Island is a place Canadians should be proud of. Canadians all across the country know of this long, narrow, crescent-shaped island in the north Atlantic, southeast of Nova Scotia, because of the wild horses that inhabit the island.

Over 190 plant species have been identified on Sable Island, and it is home to the world's largest grey seal colony in the world as well as 350 species of birds. That is why it is so important that we protect this Canadian ecological gem.

By the way, I would like to thank everyone who works at the Centre d'interprétation de la nature de Boisbriand, in my riding of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles. This interpretive nature centre is a natural, wooded conservation area that covers approximately 42,500 m² and borders the Mille-Îles river. Thanks to their efforts, our children and our children's children will be able to enjoy our flora and fauna as past generations were able to do.

I would like to commend them for their hard work in the area of conservation, since that is what we are talking about this afternoon. These people are making sure that future generations will be able to enjoy our natural resources. In my opinion, we need to consider the issue of intergenerational equality.

It is also important to mention that this Conservative government is leaving an ecological debt for future generations. We know that the federal government sabotaged parks by making cuts to national parks last year. For example, the government made $29 million in cuts to the parks' budget last year, and over 600 biologist and park interpreter jobs were lost.

These people will no longer be available in our national parks to share their ecological and scientific knowledge with Canadians across the country. We know that, in some cases, park interpreters are being replaced with interpretive signs.

We also know that the Prime Minister's Conservatives committed to meeting the conservation targets set out in the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. However, they are not doing so.

Unfortunately, Canada is protecting only 10% of its land area and 1% of its waters. The Conservatives do not have a very good track record in this regard. I think that future generations will inherit this debt from this backward-thinking Conservative government.

What is more, the Conservative government has eliminated major environmental protection measures in Canada. Take for example the elimination of 98% of federal environmental assessments, the elimination of 98% of the measures to protect Canada's navigable waters and the elimination of measures to protect most fish habitats.

I was very sad to learn that the environment museum located in the Montreal Biosphere would open its doors for the last time this summer. In July 2012, the Conservative government made significant cuts to the Biosphere. Now, most of the staff is being cut.

We recently learned that Environment Canada has unilaterally decided to review the mandate of the environment museum, which will not survive if it no longer has any staff. The people who are being targeted are museum professionals, educators, guides, designers and technicians.

If the Conservative government really cared about sharing scientific and technical knowledge with the public, it would not have made these drastic cuts to our parks and museums, which are our country's true treasures.

That being said, I support the bill at second reading because it seeks to protect the history and beauty of Sept-Îles. I applaud the work done by the environmental groups who have joined forces to protect Sept-Îles.

As I said, I will be supporting this bill at second reading. However, I must say that the wording of this bill does raise some concerns. As my colleagues have already mentioned, the bill prohibits drilling within one nautical mile of the island, as well as drilling on the island's surface. However, in exceptional circumstances, exploration activities will be allowed on the island, which is a first in any national park. These exploration activities will be limited to those with a low impact on the environment. However, the bill fails to clearly define those exploration activities. I believe that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment needs to have a closer look at this issue in order to clearly define the term “low impact” and clearly define the exploration activities that will be allowed under this provision.

As it stands, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board will have to consult with Parks Canada before issuing licences for petroleum-related activities. The board would have the discretionary power to include in the terms and conditions any mitigation or remedial measures that the company must take.

I hope the Standing Committee on Environment will invite many experts in order to properly examine the bill. Having been a member of the Standing Committee on Environment, I have witnessed first-hand this government's unbalanced approach to conservation. The government muzzles Canadian scientists and refuses to listen to experts or scientists who work on conservation.

Throughout this parliamentary session, Conservative members who sit on the various committees have refused to adopt the amendments proposed by opposition members, even though those amendments were based on testimony from experts and reliable information gathered in committee. The goal of such amendments is always to improve bills and make them better, including through public consultation. For once I hope the government members will accept the amendments proposed in committee by opposition members, who work very hard on the committee.

I now look forward to questions from my hon. colleagues.

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to express my support for Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada's national parks act.

In 2011, the Government of Canada made a commitment in its Speech from the Throne to create significant new protected areas. The bill before us would deliver on that commitment by amending the Canada National Parks Act to protect Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada as Canada's 43rd national park.

This initiative has garnered a high level of support in Nova Scotia, including among the Mi'kmaq. In fact, we are establishing Sable Island as a national park reserve out of respect for the ongoing negotiations under the Made-in-Nova-Scotia Process. A national park reserve enjoys the same protections that a national park does while respecting assertions of first nations rights.

For many Nova Scotians, Sable Island is a mystical but real far-off place. A unique sandbar island, it is 42 kilometres long and 1.3 kilometres across at its widest point. It is home to some 190 plant species, including 20 that have restricted distribution elsewhere. It is perhaps best known for its herd of over 500 wild horses, one of the few herds in the world that remains entirely unmanaged. It was the future of those very horses that sparked the first efforts to conserve Sable Island that today culminates in this legislation.

In reaction to plans in 1960 to remove the wild horses from Sable Island, schoolchildren from across Canada raised petitions, and petitioned the House of Commons. Canada came to the defence of those schoolchildren and the horses on Sable Island. In 1961, the government of the day, the government of the Right Hon. John Diefenbaker, passed regulations protecting the horses and protecting the seeds for the long-term protection of this unique and fabled landscape.

Now, 50 years later, this chamber can help complete the work started by hundreds of schoolchildren decades ago by passing legislation to permanently protect Sable Island as part of Canada's world-class national parks system.

There have been 350 shipwrecks recorded on Sable Island and in the vicinity of Sable Island, earning it the title of the graveyard of the Atlantic. In the past, life-saving stations, lighthouses and shelters for shipwrecked sailors were established, and today the island is used for scientific research and monitoring activities such as weather forecasting and wildlife research.

I stand proudly to debate Bill S-15 today because I am probably one of the few parliamentarians in this chamber who has ever had the pleasure of setting foot on Sable Island. I have been to Sable Island probably 25 or 30 times when I worked in the offshore. We used to fly to the rig in a fixed-wing airplane that took the mail to Sable Island, land on the beach, get transferred over to the helipad and then transfer to the rig from there. I can speak with some authority to the uniqueness of Sable Island, of the shipwrecks that are on it, of the horses that are there. Those horses are very much believed to be descendants of the original horses that were taken during the expulsion of the Acadians.

During the expulsion of the Acadians in 1755, horses and cattle and pigs were gathered up and put on Sable Island. The pigs quickly destroyed the trees that were still on the island at that time and they were later butchered and taken off. The cattle were used to provision the fishing fleet and the British navy and the horses themselves. It is believed that it is the descendants of those horses that are the Sable Island horses of today. I often hear people talking about Sable Island ponies, but I can tell members from experience, that there are no Sable Island ponies. These are horses in their own right, probably the true and earliest Canadian horse.

Sable Island has long inspired those touched by the island's history and beauty. George Patterson penned the first formal history of the island in 1894. Nova Scotia author Thomas Haliburton inspired by the loss of the brigFrancis in 1798 wrote “The Sable Island Ghost” in 1802. His fictional account of a ghostly woman raised support for the construction of a rescue site on the island. Among the first photographic expeditions to Sable Island was Alexander Graham Bell, who was part of an 1898 National Geographic visit. The late, great Stompin' Tom Connors recorded his song Sable Island in 1970.

Sable Island is located in one of the largest offshore hydrocarbon basins in North America. The governments of Canada and Nova Scotia have agreed to prohibit drilling and to limit other petroleum-related activities on the island out to one nautical mile from the island. Industry will still be able to access Sable Island to monitor several abandoned wellheads from the 1970s and to undertake non-intrusive exploration work if authorized by the Offshore Petroleum Board in consultation, of course, with Parks Canada.

As a former worker in the offshore petroleum industry, I am pleased to confirm that in case of emergency, workers will be able to seek shelter and safe harbour on Sable Island should they be taken off platforms due to emergency conditions. Parts of the bill would amend the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to this effect.

If members will bear with me, I will speak a bit more personally on that subject. Having worked in the offshore industry for over eight years, six and a half of them as a driller, I went through many rig abandonments. A rig had to be abandoned on a day in the early 1980s. Most of the personnel were sent to Sable Island. There were 12 of us who were deemed as necessary personnel and had to stay on board.

The lads who were sent to Sable Island had quite a time. They came back with stories of some of the existing houses still on the island half full of shifting sands. There were a lot of great stories and pictures. Of course, they spent about a day and a half altogether on the island. In those days, there were several people in the weather station and it was just before Christmas. Along with our personnel were the personnel from a Yugoslavian freighter that was in danger of taking the legs out from the rig. All of those sailors, thanks to the search and rescue team from Greenwood, Nova Scotia, and Charlottetown, were rescued and harboured safely on the island.

Although this is a national park, it is extremely important that in cases of emergency, the facilities on Sable Island are able to harbour individuals, whether they are on an offshore platform or fishing boats that are medevaced, or whatever the reason. We can do that in the parameters of the national parks system. There is already a helipad there. It does not have to be added. There are already some personnel on Sable Island. This could be a win-win situation, where industry and Parks Canada can work together for the benefit of all.

Holders of exploration licences that include parts of Sable Island have contributed to the historic consensus to protect this remarkable island by amending their licences to prevent drilling on the island and within the buffer zone of one nautical mile. I am sure that hon. members will join me in thanking ExxonMobil Canada Properties and other licence holders for their commitment to helping protect this remarkable island as a national park reserve.

Among the steps to create a national park reserve on Sable Island, administration of the island will be formally transferred from the Canadian Coast Guard to Parks Canada. With the collaboration of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, this bill would also amend the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, to remove reference to Sable Island. The Sable Island regulations would be revoked, and instead the island would be subject to the regulatory regime under the Canada National Parks Act.

At this time, I would like to thank and congratulate the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for their work in helping create a national park reserve on Sable Island. The Government of Canada is proud to table this bill to give Sable Island the highest level of environmental protection in the country for the enjoyment, appreciation and benefit of current and future generations of Canadians.

Turning now to other aspects of Bill S-15, including important matters related to two of Canada's oldest national parks, Yoho National Park and Jasper National Park, I will briefly describe the other proposed amendments to the Canada National Parks Act made in the second part of the bill.

The bill before us would modify the French version of subsection 4(1) of the Canada National Parks Act to align the French version with the English version. It would also add a new subclause, subclause 4(1.1), that states for greater certainty that nothing in section 4 limits the ability of the minister responsible for the Parks Canada Agency to charge fees in national parks under either sections 23 or 24 of the Parks Canada Agency Act. These changes address concerns raised by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations.

The provisions affecting Yoho National Park make minor changes to the description of the commercial zones for the community of Field, British Columbia, located within Yoho National Park of Canada. These zoning modifications are well within the legislative commercial growth limit for Field, they reflect public consultations carried out and they respond to concerns for business operations and residents of the community. They are important to the economic viability of the community of Field, British Columbia.

The proposed amendments that would affect Jasper National Park relate to the ski area at Marmot Basin within the boundaries of the park. The operator wishes to improve the ski experience in order to remain competitive with other new and expanded ski operations in the region and to stay financially viable. The operator has presented Parks Canada with an opportunity to achieve a significant environmental gain in the process.

Development of ski areas within a national park is strictly controlled by legislation, by ski area guidelines, by site-specific guidelines and by leases and licences of occupation. Changes to the size and configuration of the ski area boundaries require an amendment to the Canada National Parks Act. The growth limits in the site guidelines for the Marmot Basin ski area are based on a design capacity of 6,500 skiers per day, but the existing commercial space can serve less than 3,000 skiers. There is a need for additional facilities and services, and they must be developed in a strategic manner to achieve a better ski experience and respect conservation imperatives. The ski area management guidelines would allow ski areas to add new ski terrain only through an exchange that results in substantial environmental gain to the ecological integrity of the national park.

This is what is proposed in the bill before us. Marmot Basin ski area would remove from its lease 118 hectares of ecologically sensitive land in the Whistlers Creek valley. The area is an important habitat for woodland caribou, which is listed under the Species at Risk Act, as well as habitat for sensitive species such as the grizzly bear, wolverine and lynx. In exchange, the ski area would receive 60 hectares of comparatively less environmentally sensitive habitat for the new ski trails and the beginner runs. This is a win-win situation for the ski hill and for Jasper National Park, resulting in a net increase of 56 hectares of wilderness area to the park and the protection of future development of 118 hectares of prime woodland and caribou habitat.

The creation of Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada, which is near and dear to my heart, would build on the Government of Canada's impressive achievements in protecting our natural and cultural history.

In conclusion, I hope hon. members will join with me in supporting this bill. This work started more than 50 years ago. By protecting Sable Island today as a national park reserve under the Canada National Parks Act, we can expect an important addition; even though it is an island and obviously Tertiary, the water surrounding Sable Island National Park in the nautical mile buffer zone is a very important addition.

For those members who have never had an opportunity to visit Sable Island, I urge them to do so. It is absolutely a unique place on the east coast of Canada, and the island continues to shift. It is continually in movement. We flew out and landed on Sable Island on one of the trips to the oil rig, and there was a vessel approximately 130 to 140 feet long, a steel ship, sitting upright on the bar of Sable Island. This was a vessel that had been wrecked on Sable Island back in the 1950s. I cannot say if there was any loss of life, but the vessel is still out there today. Over the period of the fall and before Christmas, that vessel, of which the spar probably would have been 60 feet off of the sands of Sable Island, was again totally covered in sand and one would not know if one had not seen it oneself that the vessel had been totally out of the sand and open on the island.

That is the type of terrain there. It is an amazing addition to the Canada National Parks Act and I urge all hon. members to support this legislation. This is a great piece of legislation.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved that Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, now that we have been sitting for a week under our Conservative government's plans for a harder-working, productive and orderly House of Commons, I would remind all hon. members of what we have been able to achieve since just Victoria Day.

Bill C-48, the technical tax amendments act, 2012, was passed at report stage and third reading. Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act, was passed at second reading. Bill C-51, the safer witnesses act, was passed at report stage and we started third reading debate, which we will finish tonight. Bill C-52, the fair rail freight service act was passed at report stage and, just moments ago, at third reading. Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act, was passed at second reading. Bill C-60, the economic action plan 2013 act, No. 1, was reported back from committee yesterday.

Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, was passed at report stage and we started third reading debate. Bill S-6, the first nations elections act, was debated at second reading. Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act, which was reported back to the House this morning by the hard-working and fast running member for Peace River, has completed committee. Bill S-10, the prohibiting cluster munitions act, was debated at second reading. Bill S-12, the incorporation by reference in regulations act, was debated at second reading. Bill S-13, the port state measures agreement implementation act, was debated at second reading. Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act, was debated at second reading.

We will build on this record of accomplishment over the coming week.

This afternoon, as I mentioned, we will finish the second reading debate on Bill C-51. After that, we will start the second reading debate on Bill C-56, Combating Counterfeit Products Act.

Tomorrow morning, we will start report stage on Bill C-60, now that the hard-working Standing Committee on Finance has brought the bill back to us. After I conclude this statement, Mr. Speaker, I will have additional submissions for your consideration on yesterday's point of order.

After question period tomorrow, we will get a start on the second reading debate on Bill S-15, Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act. I am optimistic that we would not need much more time, at a future sitting, to finish that debate.

On Monday, before question period, we will debate Bill S-17, Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 2013, at second reading. In the afternoon, we will hopefully finish report stage consideration of Bill C-60, followed by Bill S-2 at third reading.

On Tuesday, we will return to Bill S-2 if necessary. After that, I hope we could use the time to pass a few of the other bills that I mentioned earlier, as well as the forthcoming bill on the Yale First Nation Final Agreement.

Wednesday, June 5 shall be the eighth allotted day of the supply cycle. That means we will discuss an NDP motion up until about 6:30 p.m. This will be followed by a debate on the main estimates. Then we will pass to two appropriations acts.

Next Thursday, I would like to return back to Bill C-60, our budget implementation legislation, so we can quickly pass that important bill for the Canadian economy.

The Environment

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, I think at this particular time of night, my colleague would be interested to know that she supports a leader who, during his time as environment minister, actually decreased his department's budget substantively. One of the first things that he did as environment minister was brag. He went out and said, "Take my ministry, for example. When I arrived, I immediately cut my own budget by 8%". It was actually in the Chomedey News, Laval, on May 5, 2005. This is the NDP's track record on the environment. It is one that my colleague opposite supports.

Here is the other thing that she does not understand. She does not understand the basic principle that we can ensure environmental protection in the country with economic growth. Time after time, I have heard her colleagues talk about how we need to shut down wholesale sectors of our economy in order to ensure environmental protection. I fundamentally believe that this presumption is false.

Specifically with regard to our government's track record on parks, it is one that I am so very proud to stand in the House of Commons and support. In fact, it has been under our government's tenure that we have seen nearly 150,000 square kilometres added to the protection of our national parks sector. This is an incredible amount of protected space that it has been our government's privilege to take leadership on and protect.

One of the accomplishments that our government has seen with regard to its protection of national parks is the World Wildlife Federation's international award, its Gift to the Earth award. It is one of the highest accolades that it can award, which goes to conservation work of outstanding merit. It recognized our government through its work in Parks Canada.

Additionally, the Royal Canadian Geographical Society awarded Parks Canada its gold medal, its highest honour, for our government's leadership role in the expansion and preservation of Nááts’ihch’oh National Park. It is a great honour for me to congratulate Parks Canada and its staff for the work that it does to maintain our national park system.

Year over year, since our government came to office, not only have we increased the amount of parkland that is protected in Canada, we have also increased the budget year over year. There has been an increase, but the difference between our government and the NDP is that, first of all, they continue to vote against any sort of measures that we take to increase Canada's national parks.

I certainly hope that with Bill S-15, the bill to create Sable Island, my colleague opposite will support it in the House.

She also speaks about the need to protect habitats. Through our government's efforts, through the national areas conservation plan, a quarter of a billion dollars have already been invested to create easements for the NCC and other organizations, such as Ducks Unlimited Canada, which we are proud to partner with. We have seen habitat conservation measures taking place and land protected.

This is pure rhetoric.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, our government has moved forward this week to conduct business in the House of Commons in a productive, orderly and hard-working fashion, and we have tried to work in good faith.

We began the week debating a motion to add an additional 20 hours to the House schedule each week. Before I got through the first minute of my speech on that motion, the hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley interrupted with a dubious point of order to prevent the government from moving forward to work overtime. His was a bogus argument and the Speaker rightly saw the NDP delay effort as entirely devoid of merit and rejected it outright.

During its first speech opposing the motion to work hard, the NDP then moved an amendment to gut it. That amendment was defeated. The NDP then voted against the motion and against working overtime, but that motion still passed, thanks to the Conservatives in the House.

During the first NDP speech on Bill C-49 last night, in the efforts to work longer, the NDP moved an amendment to gut that bill and cause gridlock in the House. I am not kidding. These are all one step after another of successive measures to delay. During its next speech, before the first day of extended hours was completed, the NDP whip moved to shut down the House, to go home early. That motion was also defeated. This is the NDP's “do as I say, not as I do” attitude at its height.

Take the hon. member for Gatineau. At 4 p.m., she stood in the House and said, “I am more than happy to stay here until midnight tonight...”. That is a direct quote. It sounded good. In fact, I even naively took her at her word that she and her party were actually going to work with us, work hard and get things done. Unfortunately, her actions did not back up her words, because just a few short hours later, that very same member, the member for Gatineau, seconded a motion to shut down the House early.

I am not making this up. I am not kidding. She waited until the sun went down until she thought Canadians were not watching anymore and then she tried to prevent members from doing their work. This goes to show the value of the word of NDP members. In her case, she took less than seven hours to break her word. That is unfortunate. It is a kind of “do as I say, not as I do” attitude that breeds cynicism in politics and, unfortunately, it is all too common in the NDP.

We saw the same thing from the hon. member for Davenport, when he said, “We are happy to work until midnight...”, and two short hours later he voted to try to shut down the House early. It is the same for the hon. member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing and the hon. member for Drummond. They all professed an interest in working late and then had their party vote to shut down early. What is clear by their actions is that the NDP will try anything to avoid hard work.

It is apparent that the only way that Conservatives, who are willing to work in the House, will be able to get things done is through a focused agenda, having a productive, orderly and hard-working House of Commons. This afternoon, we will debate Bill C-51, the safer witnesses act, at report stage and third reading. After private members' hour, we will go to Bill S-12, the incorporation by reference in regulations act, at second reading.

Tomorrow before question period, we will start second reading of Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act, and after question period, we will start second reading of Bill S-13, the port state measures agreement implementation act.

Monday before question period, we will consider Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act. This bill would provide protection for aboriginal women and children by giving them the same rights that women who do not live on reserve have had for decades. After question period, we will debate Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act, at second reading, a bill that makes a reasonable and needed reform to the Criminal Code. We are proposing to ensure that public safety should be the paramount consideration in the decision-making process involving high-risk accused found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. It is time to get that bill to a vote. We will also consider Bill C-48, the technical tax amendments act, 2012—and yes, that is last year—at third reading.

On Tuesday, we will continue the debates on Bill C-48 and Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act.

On Wednesday, we will resume this morning's debate on Bill C-52, the fair rail freight service act, at third reading.

On Thursday, we will continue this afternoon's debate on Bill C-51. Should the NDP adopt a new and co-operative, productive spirit and let all of these bills pass, we could consider other measures, such as Bill S-17, the tax conventions implementation act, 2013, Bill C-56, the combating counterfeit products act, Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, and Bill C-57, the safeguarding Canada's seas and skies act.

Optimism springs eternal within my heart. I hope to see that from the opposition.

Extention of Sitting Hours

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will pick up where I left off. Obviously my hon. friend did not hear this and has not read the motion. I will respond to his macho riposte at the end of his comments by pointing out that the motion would do three things: first, it would provide for us to sit until midnight; second, it would provide a manageable way in which to hold votes in a fashion that works for members of the House; and third, it would provide for concurrence debates to happen and motions to be voted on in a fashion that would not disrupt the work of all the committees of the House and force them to come back here for votes and shut down the work of committees.

Those are the three things the motion would do. In all other respects the Standing Orders remain in place, including the Standing Orders for how long the House sits. Had my friend actually read the motion, he would recognize that the only way in which that Standing Order could then be changed would be by unanimous consent of the House.

The member needs no commitment from me as to how long we will sit. Any member of the House can determine that question, if he or she wishes to adjourn other than the rules contemplate, but the rules are quite clear in what they do contemplate.

As I was saying, the reason for the motion is that Canadians expect their members of Parliament to work hard and get things done on their behalf.

Canadians expect their members of Parliament to work hard and get things done on their behalf.

We agree and that is exactly what has happened here in the House of Commons.

However, do not take my word for it; look at the facts. In this Parliament the government has introduced 76 pieces of legislation. Of those 76, 44 of them are law in one form or another. That makes for a total of 58% of the bills introduced into Parliament. Another 15 of these bills have been passed by either the House or the Senate, bringing the total to 77% of the bills that have been passed by one of the two Houses of Parliament. That is the record of a hard-working, orderly and productive Parliament.

More than just passing bills, the work we are doing here is delivering real results for Canadians. However, there is still yet more work to be done before we return to our constituencies for the summer.

During this time our government's top priority has been jobs, economic growth and long-term prosperity. Through two years and three budgets, we have passed initiatives that have helped to create more than 900,000 net new jobs since the global economic recession. We have achieved this record while also ensuring that Canada's debt burden is the lowest in the G7. We are taking real action to make sure the budget will be balanced by 2015. We have also followed through on numerous longstanding commitments to keep our streets and communities safe, to improve democratic representation in the House of Commons, to provide marketing freedom for western Canadian grain farmers and to eliminate once and for all the wasteful and inefficient long gun registry.

Let me make clear what the motion would and would not do. There has been speculation recently, including from my friend opposite, about the government's objectives and motivations with respect to motion no. 17. As the joke goes: Mr. Freud, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. So it is with today's motion. There is only one intention motivating the government in proposing the motion: to work hard and deliver real results for Canadians.

The motion would extend the hours the House sits from Monday through Thursday. Instead of finishing the day around 6:30 or 7 p.m., the House would sit instead until midnight.

This would amount to an additional 20 hours each week. Extended sitting hours is something that happens most years in June. Our government just wants to roll up our sleeves and work a little harder, earlier this year. The motion would allow certain votes to be deferred automatically until the end of question period, to allow for all honourable members' schedules to be a little more orderly.

As I said, all other rules would remain. For example, concurrence motions could be moved, debated and voted upon. Today's motion would simply allow committees to continue doing their work instead of returning to the House for motions to return to government business and the like. This process we are putting forward would ensure those committees could do their good work and be productive, while at the same time the House could proceed with its business. Concurrence motions could ultimately be dealt with, debated and voted upon.

We are interested in working hard and being productive and doing so in an orderly fashion, and that is the extent of what the motion would do. I hope that the opposition parties would be willing to support this reasonable plan and let it come forward to a vote. I am sure members opposite would not be interested in going back to their constituents to say they voted against working a little overtime before the House rises for the summer, but the first indication from my friend opposite is that perhaps he is reluctant to do that. Members on this side of the House are willing to work extra hours to deliver real results for Canadians.

Some of those accomplishments we intend to pass are: reforming the temporary foreign workers program to put the interests of Canadians first; implementing tax credits for Canadians who donate to charity; enhancing the tax credit for parents who adopt; and extending the tax credit for Canadians who take care of loved ones in their home.

We also want to support veterans and their families by improving the determination of veterans' benefits.

Of course, these are some of the important measures from this year's budget and are included in Bill C-60, economic action plan 2013 act, no. 1. We are also working toward results for aboriginals by moving closer to equality for Canadians living on reserves through better standards for drinking water and finally giving women on reserves the same rights and protections other Canadian women have had for decades. Bill S-2, family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, and Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act would deliver on those very important objectives.

We will also work to keep our streets and communities safe by making real improvements to the witness protection program through Bill C-51, the safer witnesses act. I think that delivering these results for Canadians is worth working a few extra hours each week.

We will work to bring the Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012, into law. Bill C-48 would provide certainty to the tax code. It has been over a decade since a bill like this has passed, so it is about time this bill passed. In fact, after question period today, I hope to start third reading of this bill, so perhaps we can get it passed today.

We will also work to bring Bill C-52, the fair rail freight service act, into law. The bill would support economic growth by ensuring that all shippers, including farmers, are treated fairly. Over the next few weeks we will also work, hopefully with the co-operation of the opposition parties, to make progress on other important initiatives.

Bill C-54 will ensure that public safety is the paramount consideration in the decision-making process involving high-risk accused found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. This is an issue that unfortunately has affected every region of this country. The very least we can do is let the bill come to a vote and send it to committee where witnesses can testify about the importance of these changes.

Bill C-49 would create the Canadian museum of history, a museum for Canadians that would tell our stories and present our country's treasures to the world.

Bill S-14, the Fighting Foreign Corruption Act, will do just that by further deterring and preventing Canadian companies from bribing foreign public officials. These amendments will help ensure that Canadian companies continue to act in good faith in the pursuit of freer markets and expanded global trade.

Bill S-13, the port state measures agreement implementation act, would implement that 2009 treaty by amending the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act to add prohibitions on importing illegally acquired fish.

Tonight we will be voting on Bill S-9, the Nuclear Terrorism Act, which will allow Canada to honour its commitments under international agreements to tackle nuclear terrorism. Another important treaty—the Convention on Cluster Munitions—can be given effect if we adopt Bill S-10, the Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act.

We will seek to update and modernize Canada’s network of income tax treaties through Bill S-17, the Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 2013, by giving the force of law to recently signed agreements between Canada and Namibia, Serbia, Poland, Hong Kong, Luxembourg and Switzerland.

Among other economic bills is Bill C-56, the combating counterfeit products act. The bill would protect Canadians from becoming victims of trademark counterfeiting and goods made using inferior or dangerous materials that lead to injury or even death. Proceeds from the sale of counterfeit goods may be used to support organized crime groups. Clearly, this bill is another important one to enact.

Important agreements with the provinces of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador would be satisfied through Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, which would, among other things, create the Sable Island national park reserve, and Bill C-61, the offshore health and safety act, which would provide clear rules for occupational health and safety of offshore oil and gas installations.

Earlier I referred to the important work of committees. The Standing Joint Committee on the Scrutiny of Regulations inspired Bill S-12, the incorporation by reference in regulations act. We should see that committee's ideas through by passing this bill. Of course, a quick reading of today's order paper would show that there are yet still more bills before the House of Commons for consideration and passage. All of these measures are important and will improve the lives of Canadians. Each merits consideration and hard work on our part.

In my weekly business statement prior to the constituency week, I extended an offer to the House leaders opposite to work with me to schedule and pass some of the other pieces of legislation currently before the House. I hope that they will respond to my request and put forward at our next weekly meeting productive suggestions for getting things done. Passing today's motion would be a major step toward accomplishing that. As I said in my opening comments, Canadians expect each one of us to come to Ottawa to work hard, vote on bills and get things done.

In closing, I commend this motion to the House and encourage all hon. members to vote for this motion, add a few hours to our day, continue the work of our productive, orderly and hard-working Parliament, and deliver real results for Canadians.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we will continue the debate on today’s opposition motion from the NDP. Pursuant to the rules of the House, time is allocated and there will be a vote after the two-day debate.

Tomorrow we will resume the third reading debate on Bill S-9, the Nuclear Terrorism Act. As I mentioned on Monday, I am optimistic that we will pass that important bill this week.

Should we have extra time on Friday, we will take up Bill C-48, the Technical Tax Amendments Act, 2012, at report stage and third reading.

When we come back from constituency week, I am keen to see the House make a number of accomplishments for Canadians. Allow me to make it clear to the House what the government's priorities are.

Our government will continue to focus on jobs, growth and long-term prosperity. In doing that, we will be working on reforming the temporary foreign worker program to put the interests of Canadians first; implementing tax credits for Canadians who donate to charity and parents who adopt; extending tax credits for Canadians who take care of loved ones in their homes; supporting veterans and their families by improving the balance for determining veterans' benefits; moving closer to equality for Canadians living on reserves through better standards for drinking water, which my friend apparently objects to; giving women on reserves the rights and protections that other Canadian women have had for decades, something to which he also objects; and keeping our streets and communities safer by making real improvements to the witness protection program. We will of course do more.

Before we rise for the summer, we will tackle the bills currently listed on the order paper, as well as any new bills which might get introduced. After Victoria Day, we will give priority consideration to bills that have already been considered by House committees.

For instance, we will look at Bill C-48, which I just mentioned, Bill C-51, the Safer Witnesses Act, Bill C-52, the Fair Rail Freight Service Act, and Bill S-2, the Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, which I understand could be reported back soon.

I look forward also to getting back from committee and passing Bill C-60, , the economic action plan 2013 act, no. 1; Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act; and Bill C-21, the political loans accountability act.

We have, of course, recently passed Bill C-15, the strengthening military justice in the defence of Canada act, and Bill S-7, the combating terrorism act. Hopefully, tomorrow we will pass Bill S-9, the nuclear terrorism act.

Finally, we will also work toward second reading of several bills including Bill C-12, the safeguarding Canadians' personal information act; Bill C-49, the Canadian museum of history act; Bill C-54, the not criminally responsible reform act; Bill C-56, the combating counterfeit products act; Bill C-57, the safeguarding Canada's seas and skies act; Bill C-61, the offshore health and safety act; Bill S-6, the first nations elections act; Bill S-10, the prohibiting cluster munitions act; Bill S-12, the incorporation by reference in regulations act; Bill S-13, the port state measures agreement implementation act; Bill S-14, the fighting foreign corruption act; Bill S-15, the expansion and conservation of Canada’s national parks act, which establishes Sable Island National Park; and Bill S-17, the tax conventions implementation act, 2013.

I believe and I think most Canadians who send us here expect us to do work and they want to see us vote on these things and get things done. These are constructive measures to help all Canadians and they certainly expect us to do our job and actually get to votes on these matters.

I hope we will be able to make up enough time to take up all of these important bills when we come back, so Canadians can benefit from many parliamentary accomplishments by the members of Parliament they have sent here this spring.

Before taking my seat, let me formally designate, pursuant to Standing Order 81(4)(a), Tuesday, May 21, as the day appointed for the consideration in a committee of the whole of all votes under Natural Resources in the main estimates for the final year ending March 31, 2014. This would be the second of two such evenings following on tonight's proceedings.

Expansion and Conservation of Canada's National Parks Act

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

moved that Bill S-15, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, be read the first time.

(Motion agreed to and bill read the first time)

Message from the Senate

[The Acting Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.