Environment Committee on March 26th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Bigras.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I'd like to go back to page 11, where it talks about compliance orders designed to enforce measures to put an end to certain infractions of the law. You say that "These may be imposed on any person who causes or contributes to the contravention and may require them to: refrain from such activity; stop or shut down activity; [...]"

Are criteria or guidelines going to be provided so that enforcement officers can determine which measures they are going to impose, or are they going to be given complete discretion in this regard?

[Albin Tremblay]

Certainly there will be criteria and procedures to follow. This will be included in the training that all our officers are going to take regularly to keep abreast of any amendments. All our officers benefit from a highly developed training program. At the beginning of every year, updates must be made. All the decisions made by our officers, even if they are founded on their judgement, are based on a series of criteria and tools. This is part of a process within which a series of decisions is made within the organization.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

So, from what I understand, under the act, power is discretionary.

[Albin Tremblay]

It is the enforcement officer's decision.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

You're telling us that directives should follow.

[Albin Tremblay]

There will certainly be some directives, decision-making tools, well defined criteria, which will support their judgement.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

There is an amendment to the act, but the department must have some idea of the type of measure to enforce, between measures aimed at stopping certain activities, on one hand, and, on the other, measures designed to shut down an operation.

I'll give you an example. In February 2009, charges were laid against Syncrude, which was dumping so-called harmful substances into settling ponds. By acting thus, the company was contravening the Migratory Birds Convention Act. In such a case, since additional powers are going to be given to enforcement officers, under the act, would the recommendation be to shut down the operation or to stop certain activities? What would the recommendation be?

[Albin Tremblay]

As far as this very specific case is concerned, the offence was not due to the fact that the company was dumping substances. These ponds are indeed designed to store processing residue. Under their permit, however, these people should have made use of tools, of very specific measures, to ensure that birds would not land on these ponds, for example, nets, warning signals and so on.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I see.

[Albin Tremblay]

However, they were not all functional. In such a case, we could have recommended that the company ensure that, by the next day, or at least as quickly as possible, it put back into operation the tools serving to warn the birds and prevent them from landing on the pond in question. This is a theoretical example of how to use directives to enforce measures or stop activities. What determines the choice of one or the other? It's the importance of the impact of this situation on the environment. Even there, though, it's a matter of judgement.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

If the proposed measure consists of closing down the operation and that has financial consequences for the company, is that taken into consideration? Are there provisions in the act that take such impacts into account?

[Albin Tremblay]

Not in the act, but in the procedures.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

So the financial impact on the company of the measure imposed on it is taken into consideration.

[Albin Tremblay]

For us, environmental law enforcement officers, the environmental criteria are the most important ones.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I'd like to know whether financial criteria are taken into consideration, for instance, if the consequence of the measure is the closing-down of the company.

[Albin Tremblay]

Not to the detriment of the environmental criteria.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

So, if we consult past cases, we will never find a single example of a situation where it was decided not to enforce a measure because of the impact it would have on the company.

[Albin Tremblay]

Not in cases where we have judged that it was absolutely necessary to put an end to a situation for environmental reasons.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

All right.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Madam Duncan.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for Ms. Pearson. I note that one of the proposed amendments to the Canada National Parks Act appears to be a very progressive measure. I don't know if I'm interpreting it properly. The proposed subclause 19.1(1) is an addition that now allows parks to appoint representatives from aboriginal governments. Am I reading it correctly? Is it the intention of Parks Canada, in some of the northern or isolated parks, to potentially appoint some first nation members as officers to enforce the Parks Act?

[Darlene Pearson]

We actually have that provision in our current act. In the new legislation, we have differentiated between enforcement officers who will be our warden complement and will be armed and other people who can carry out enforcement duties that could be more related to prevention and would not put them at the front line and that would include representatives of aboriginal governments.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Unless they happen to be appointed as wardens.

[Darlene Pearson]

Unless they're already wardens or they're already members of a police force in another jurisdiction.