Evidence of meeting #51 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was monitoring.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mark Warawa
Your time has expired. Thank you.
Mr. Woodworth, you have five minutes.
November 5th, 2012 / 4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Thank you.
I hardly know where to start, but perhaps I'll begin with what was almost a drive-by shooting a few minutes ago.
Some mentioned that the individual in your department who was responsible for monitoring the data isn't qualified, and there was some reference to somebody from who-knows-where saying that person wasn't qualified.
First of all, have you satisfied yourself that the individual is qualified? I'm not going to mention names, because it's bad enough we're even having this discussion. Have you satisfied yourself that the person is qualified?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
Yes, I have. The World Meteorological Organization actually—my colleague David Grimes is the current president—sets international standards, and it has for years. We've made sure that we meet those standards.
All the scientists who work in Charles' shop, or the large majority, know how difficult it is to meet those standards, because that includes ISO certification.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
All right. That's good enough for me. Thank you.
I also want to apologize for some of the questions you had from some of my colleagues earlier that were very clearly torqued to get you to come up with a specific phrase without explanation.
I'd like to go back to one point regarding ARQX, and whether or not it was always part of air quality. I think it was Dr. Lin who answered that question.
I think at some point you were required to say, without explanation, that ARQX doesn't exist. But what I sort of heard you saying was that all of the functions that were being performed are still being performed.
Am I right about that, or did I miss that?
Director General, Atmospheric Science and Technology, Department of the Environment
That is correct. In terms of the ARQX organizational changes, what I did not mention was that the manager resigned—left for, shall we say, greener pastures, for personal reasons—and also a senior research scientist left as well.
So it's not like we are laying off people and reducing, through budget cuts, staff.
Conservative
Director General, Atmospheric Science and Technology, Department of the Environment
Yes. The oversight function for the ozone data centre, the capacity to do ozone science, still remains within Environment Canada.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
All right. To be honest with you, I think it would be nothing more than partisan torquing to worry about whether it's being performed by one group or another.
With respect to a good phrase that Ms. Leslie used in the course of her questions, it was “these folks in the scientific community on the ground”. I happened to come across an article in the British scientific journal Nature, published September 12, 2011, that relied on informal information—I imagine pretty much from the “folks in the scientific community on the ground”. It resulted in a lot of alarmism and running around by politicians critical of Canada—I might say none on the government side—but it made a few statements. I'd like to test them out and see if they came true.
In the article by Quirin Schiermeier, it said that it's been learned “…that Environment Canada…has decided to drastically reduce its ozone science and monitoring programme.”
Did that ever happen?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
No.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
It said the ozone monitoring network would be “shut down as early as this coming winter”. That would be last winter.
Did that happen?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
No.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
It said that it would be “the end of in situ ozone measurements”.
Did that ever happen?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
No.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
It said that Environment Canada's ozone and radiation research group will also be substantially reduced as a result of staff cuts driven by financial constraints.
Did that happen?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
No.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
I'm really not too impressed with some of these reports that come out from the folks in the scientific community on the ground.
It also mentioned that Environment Canada would “no longer host the Toronto-based World Ozone and Ultraviolet Radiation Data Centre”.
As I understand it, that has gone to the Meteorological Service of Canada. Is that correct?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
Yes, and that is also part of Environment Canada.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
So that's another prediction here, or report, that wasn't true.
I appreciate that clarification. I think altogether too much alarmism goes on as a result of uninformed comment.
I want to ask you one or two—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mark Warawa
I want to thank the witnesses, Dr. Dodds and Dr. Lin, for being with us again and for the good work they do.
Colleagues, we will suspend to move in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]
