Environment Committee on Oct. 17th, 2012

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Is it the premier one or has it become one among many? There's concern from the stakeholders that there's been some slippage.

[Andrew Campbell]

Absolutely in everything we do, as the act says, it is the first priority of our decision-making. I can't comment more than that.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Okay, I appreciate that. That will be going forward, so when we're talking about urban conservation, ecological integrity should be the premier management principle. Is that correct?

[Andrew Campbell]

It will continue to be the first priority, as long as that's our legislative base.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, I appreciate that.

I will continue with this. How can we protect ecological integrity when scientists are being cut at Parks Canada?

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

On a point of order, I'm not sure this is relevant to the topic we are addressing today, Mr. Chair.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Can I address that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

You can speak to that, Ms. Duncan.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

I think it is relevant, because if we're saying the premier principle is ecological integrity, we have to ensure that's the best practice. If we're talking about best practices in urban conservation, we have to make sure we have the monitoring to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Ms. Leslie.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I would agree with Ms. Duncan. I do think it's relevant, especially when you consider the aspect of our mandate to consider the role of the federal government. These are federal government jobs and their roles are ever changing, what with constant cutting, so it would be important to figure out how the goals of the department will change based on those cuts.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Mr. Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I completely agree with my two colleagues who have just had the floor. Since you really like to reread the guidelines for the studies, I am going to give you a chance to do so. You will be able to do so as many times as you wish. Those studies clearly show the role that the federal government may play, as my colleagues said. Furthermore, science is an absolute must if we want to set up conservation practices, particularly in urban centres.

In fact, it has already been said that science is essential under the national conservation plan. As a result, cuts like those affecting the experimental lake areas and the ecotoxicity in the St. Lawrence River prevent us from developing good plans, good practices, and good strategies, as well as from using the appropriate knowledge to implement a biodiversity conservation program, whether in urban or national areas.

That is why I think Kirsty Duncan’s question is completely relevant and I express my support to that effect.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Ms. Rempel.

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

Mr. Chair, I do appreciate my colleague's questions. I think ecological integrity in Parks Canada is a very important part of its mandate. In fact, our government has, I believe, increased the funding for Parks Canada significantly since we came to office. We've also increased funding to ensure ecological integrity across the country in a variety of areas, including the natural areas conservation program and the ecological gifts program. I could go on and on today about all of the things we've done to promote ecological integrity, not to mention the billions of dollars in research funding we've increased since we've been in government to academic research, through funding to non-governmental organizations.

The bottom line is that we can certainly have a debate about what has been done to support ecological integrity and conservation by this government. I believe my colleague is asking how ecological integrity in Parks Canada will be maintained. I would suggest it would be a more productive line of questioning and more within the scope if that were somehow brought back to urban conservation principles.

I have not heard rationale on how that lines up, but I would ask you to consider that evidence when you make your decision.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Thank you.

Mr. Woodworth, you are next, on the point of order.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

In considering this point of order, I would ask the chair to also take into account that we shouldn't be asking witnesses to speculate about things.

For example, when Mr. Choquette mentions the Experimental Lakes Area, I don't know whether that's a national park the witness would know anything about or whether, in fact, it has to do with the Canadian Wildlife Service, which this witness is familiar with.

I know that we're not proceeding here the way I would in a courtroom, and we're not necessarily required to lay a foundation, but certainly, I point out that there hasn't been any foundation with this witness to demonstrate that this witness would even say there have been cuts to scientific contributions to the Canadian Wildlife Service, which he is here to talk about. I just have a feeling that the question is asking the witness to speculate on things far beyond the scope of his own area of experience and responsibility. In making your ruling, I hope you will take into account that it might not be appropriate to do so.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Thank you.

We have Ms. Duncan speaking to the point of order.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to recognize that the parliamentary secretary said that monitoring is very important. The way to ensure monitoring is through science.

Criticism has been levelled at Parks Canada that cuts are undermining the health and integrity of Canada's renowned parks, risking some of our world heritage sites, significantly reducing the number of scientists, hurting the relationships with aboriginal peoples, and attacking rural communities. If we are saying that ecological integrity is the premier management principle, we have to ensure that the science is there.

I would like to keep my question on the record as to how we protect ecological integrity, and this is about best practices, when scientists are being cut.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Mr. Lunney, you are speaking to the point of order.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

With all due respect, I appreciate my colleague's enthusiasm for science. We're talking about understanding complex ecological systems. There will always be a need for more science.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

So let's leave it.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Today we are talking about urban conservation. We're talking about something that is at a far more basic level. We're talking about ecosystems that have been disturbed. We're talking about helping young people engage with ecological systems. The best practices in this area are not rocket science. We actually have some good examples out there that I would like to flesh out in my question period. The two subjects are quite different, actually.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Okay, I think we have had adequate discussion on the point of order. I want to thank my colleagues for that.

I am going to rule that the questioning is outside the scope. The way the question on cuts to Environment Canada was put is outside the scope. Do I need to read the scope to the members of the committee?

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

Sure.