Environment Committee on June 8th, 2010

[Alan Latourelle]

First, I think in Lancaster Sound there was a project proposal to do that. The project did not go ahead, and the government has stopped that project, so it will not be proceeding.

In this area no such program is planned. We are ensuring that once it's been added to the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act, Parks Canada, the Haida Nation, and DFO will be managing this area and making the decision as it affects this area. As part of the legislation that governs national marine conservation areas, there is no resource extraction and no dumping.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

We've been advised--and I can't remember if it was in the House or outside--that the government has apparently lifted the moratorium on tanker traffic. I'm not sure, frankly, of the geography there. So where in the vicinity of Haida Gwaii would the Enbridge pipeline, if approved, come out, and where would the tanker traffic be going?

[Alan Latourelle]

We don't have that information. We can provide it to you.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Okay. I'd appreciate if that could be provided. I'm just not sure of the geography of that.

[Alan Latourelle]

Yes, I'm not sure either.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I notice that you said there was a boundary of 10 kilometres, but as we have learned--as my colleague from the Bloc has said--from the situation in the Gulf of Mexico, where they said they didn't have to have the relief well because it was 30 or 50 kilometres off... I'm wondering on what basis you set that 10-kilometre boundary. Did matters factor in? I flipped through your report quickly because I was interested in the mineral interests. When I was an assistant deputy minister for renewable resources in the Yukon, we were negotiating park agreements there, and that's obviously a big issue. Do you remove it? Do you put the boundary around it? I notice in here they note there are not substantial oil and gas reserves, so there wasn't much to give up. But I'm wondering, looking at the area, if there are substantial oil and gas reserves at a certain point offshore. Does anybody know if there are, or was that part of setting the boundary?

[Alan Latourelle]

A mineral and energy resource assessment was done, and as a result of that, and also, for example, of some of the petroleum companies giving up their rights, basically the boundary was negotiated with the Province of British Columbia, but also with the Haida Nation. So the boundary we have now is the boundary that we agreed to way back. This is somewhat different from, I would say, the standard national marine conservation areas. Usually we look at a broad area and then we negotiate a boundary. This was done for us some time ago, in the 1990s, so this was--

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

The boundary that is set there is based on all that negotiation about where there may be mineral resources and so forth. So there could potentially be oil and gas extraction in that area.

Will the management plan and the budgeting for this park also factor that in and consider spill-response equipment, capability, and so forth? I didn't see the Coast Guard mentioned in here.

[Alan Latourelle]

No, and I think there are a lot of roles and responsibilities of Transport or the Coast Guard or DFO, for example. We would work with them in terms of overall response in the area, similar to the situation in national parks where we do offer services outside the park for public search and rescue, for example. We would be working with them as we would with any other owner in the area.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Will their budgets also be reviewed to ensure their capability to respond?

[Alan Latourelle]

I assume that currently their responsibilities for the area would not change, because we have an NMCA in terms of response if something occurs outside of this area.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. McNamee mentioned that this is only an interim management plan, so I'm presuming it has no legal status, but once the order in council goes through, can I presume that this is the beginning of a baseline for starting a management plan?

[Alan Latourelle]

As soon as the legislation is passed, it will govern our action as an agency in terms of how we manage this area with the Haida Nation. It is the first plan. It's an interim management plan. We will continue, as we learn, through our science program--

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I'm just trying to figure out, though, if the act provides for an interim plan. Does it?

[Alan Latourelle]

Yes, it does.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Will you then adopt this as the official interim plan once the area is designated? That's my question.

[Alan Latourelle]

That is correct.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Go ahead, Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I want to thank the witnesses for coming here so quickly and being available to answer our questions. I believe we also have a representative from CPAWS here as an observer; I want to welcome them and thank them for being here.

I want to address a comment made by Mr. McGuinty. I think he said about 20 minutes ago that he received this material one hour ago, so that would be about an hour and 20 minutes ago. The fact is, Chair, that this material was tabled in both lobbies yesterday right after QP. The minister made a statement, Mr. McGuinty made a statement, and Mr. Duncan made a statement. These were available in both government and opposition lobbies.

Also, at four o'clock yesterday we made sure that this was hand-delivered to Mr. McGuinty's office because he's the Liberal critic. Copies were also delivered to Mr. Bigras' office and to Ms. Duncan's office yesterday.

I spent quite a bit of time yesterday, Chair, actually--

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair.

It is true that these materials, which are being redistributed today, arrived at my office just before 5 p.m. yesterday.

I haven't seen these materials before today, and they were not tabled forthrightly in the lobby of the official opposition after the minister's statement. Had they been, I would have received a copy immediately. My whip would have automatically given me a copy on the spot.

Chair, whether Mr. Warawa is going to argue that these materials were received an hour ago or 12 hours ago, I hope he's not trying to justify 12 hours of distribution as being reasonable for the creation of a major marine protected area for Canada. I'm sure he's not expecting his own caucus colleagues on this committee to have read the agreements that backstop it, the agreement that was signed in January of 2010 by Mr. Latourelle and others. I'm sure he's not trying to apply that, sir. As a matter of a point of order, I just want to clarify the record.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

It's not a point of order; it is a matter of debate.

But, Mr. Warawa, I suggest that you be relevant for the witnesses.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

The relevance, Chair, is that it was assured in this committee that this information was available to committee members approximately an hour ago, and in fact it was referred to this committee yesterday afternoon, a little over 24 hours ago--about 26 hours ago. This information was made available in good faith. We wanted to make sure every critic had it, so it was hand-delivered to their offices yesterday so that had they wanted to read it last night, they could have done so.

Actually, this is great reading material, Mr. Latourelle. I went through a lot of it. I'll have to be honest and say that I didn't read through all of it--it's better than a sleeping pill, to be honest with you--but it's actually good that we're moving forward.

In the short time that I have, please tell us what the advantage is of this moving forward. If this committee wanted to linger, this has been in the works since the mid-1980s, so this has been in the works for a lot of years. I think Mr. McGuinty even served on the national round table on the environment, so I'm sure he's quite aware of this. It has been through a number of different governments--Conservative governments, Liberal governments, and now a Conservative government--and the Haida Nation and environmental groups have been at work on this as well.

What's the advantage of our moving forward now and letting Parliament know we support this measure? To me it seems like a slam dunk. What would be the advantage of moving forward now, as opposed to waiting, lingering, considering, and possibly even filibustering as this moves forward?

[Alan Latourelle]

A few things. First, I think as soon as this national marine conservation area reserve is added to the schedule of the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act, resource extraction is prohibited in this area, and so is dumping, for example, so there are immediate controls in place that prohibit certain activities. But I think more importantly for Parks Canada, and I would say for the Haida Nation, is that we can start the process collaboratively to really put in place the interim management plan and cooperatively manage this national treasure. So, from our perspective, as soon as the legislation is through, then we have the ability to start continuing our work with the Haida Nation and really start putting in place activities for the management of this national marine conservation area.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Okay. So Chair, again, in the interest of time—and thank you for that—it would enhance the environmental protection of this very sensitive area, and it is our responsibility as parliamentarians to make sure that we are protecting the environment for this generation and future generations. I appreciate your work involved in it personally, Parks Canada, the Haida Nation, and CPAWS.

I think, Chair, if we had a vote right now, we would be able to approve this and move on and get back to the other important work the committee is on. I hope I'm wrong, but I sense that some of our Liberal members are not wanting this to proceed now. But they've heard that there's a huge environmental advantage to moving forward with this now.

I think my time is just about up.

So procedurally, Chair, can we vote on this right now?