Environment Committee on March 5th, 2013

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

In the main estimates 2012-13 and 2014 the ozone funding appears as a grant, yet in the supplementaries the wording implies that it was a contribution, that total authorities of $400,000 are available within the vote due to a reallocation from contributions to fund a grant for the implementation of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.

I'm wondering why there is inconsistency in the wording.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I would turn to my deputy on that, but I think it's a matter of adapted accounting practices.

[Bob Hamilton, Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment]

I'll have to get back to you on the specific details of why that change was made within the grants and contributions.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

It's an important question, because contributions require a contribution agreement with other parties.

Could that be tabled with this committee, please?

[Bob Hamilton]

Yes, absolutely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Ms. Duncan, and Minister Kent.

We're going to move now to Madam Quach.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the minister and his officials for being with us this morning.

First, I have some questions about Parks Canada, more specifically regarding the $51.2 million cuts you announced. An amount of $19.7 million had already been announced in Budget 2012. These cuts have had some rather catastrophic repercussions on the number of visitors to parks.

There have been some direct impacts on services to the population for this winter alone, among them the maintenance of ski and snowshoe trails. They are not being maintained at all and are left to the care of volunteers who have agreements in principle with Parks Canada.

That is the case in several places, among them Point Pelee National Park, in Ontario, Prince Albert National Park in Saskatchewan, Riding Mountain National Park in Manitoba, Elk Island National Park in Alberta, and the Forillon National Park in Quebec. Fewer trails are being maintained in these parks, and in some cases, there is no service at all anymore. The parks are open to the population but there are no longer any trails. Certain skating rinks have been closed in Manitoba. There was a staff reduction and the staff has been replaced by volunteers.

Service varies from one park to another. At the Riding Mountain National Park, friends of the park estimate that for this winter alone, there has been a 40% decline in the number of park users. And yet, public appreciation and understanding are a part of Parks Canada's core mandate.

Do you agree with that mandate?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you.

Certainly that is Parks Canada's mandate and commitment.

One has to realize that Parks Canada, like all government agencies and departments, is doing its part to address deficit reduction. Our government isn't reducing health care transfers to provinces, as other governments have done in the past. We're not reducing social transfers to the provinces. Basically, what we're doing is resizing government. For Parks Canada, one must realize that we're trying to focus resources. Parks Canada, which is one of the best agencies in the world and a model for many countries in national parks programs, is focusing its services on the peak periods of usage. Barely 5% of those who visit Canada's national parks and historic locations actually visit during the wintertime.

You're quite right, and we're very proud of the volunteer programs that have been established in various parks across the country. Some parts of the country are more prone to volunteering than others.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Allow me to stop you here, Mr. Minister. In fact, the volunteers are not paid. You say that you champion job creation, but a lot of jobs have been cut. There were cuts of $19.7 million. The number of employees has been reduced, and there are repercussions on park attendance. I have here a table from Parks Canada that indicates that between 2007 and 2012, there was a 16% drop in the number of visitors to national historic sites. That is enormous.

In addition, you have replaced guides with signs. These were very well-paid employees who promoted the parks, and did awareness-raising and education with the population. You even put an end to all of the awareness-raising activities at the Montreal Biosphere, which was the only museum of that type in North America that offered educational activities to youngsters and to schools.

And yet, Environment Canada's mission is to ensure that the Canadian population has a sound, safe and sustainable environment. How can that mission be accomplished after cuts as deep as those you have just announced? How can you continue to say that one of the mandates of Parks Canada and Environment Canada is to improve people's appreciation? Those are really contradictory statements.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I will respectfully disagree.

I respect the list that you provided of parks where volunteer agreements have been made. There are many more. The word I get back, certainly, from Parks Canada is that it is working; the trail-making, whether for skiing or snowshoeing, has worked. This was the original operation plan for Parks Canada. It's only in recent years—

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

But it does not work. You have surely not gone to Forillon. People are not happy at all. There is no service.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Madam Quach, your time is up.

If we want an answer from the minister, we have to give him a little bit of time to answer.

We're going to move now to Mr. Sopuck.

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

Thank you very much.

One of the items I saw in Environment Canada was an election commitment of this government. It was the creation of the hunting and angling advisory panel. It's something that the four to five million hunters and anglers in Canada very much appreciated. This is a group of people, individuals and groups, who don't just talk about environmentalism. They actually do something in terms of active conservation programming. The money they spend is raised by themselves. I was really pleased to see an acknowledgment by our government of this very important group of citizens who, in my view, have not got their due until now.

Could you express a vision for the hunting and angling advisory panel and how you see them interacting with your department and the government at large?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Certainly, and thanks for the question.

Yes, the creation of the panel last fall fulfills a commitment by the Prime Minister to acknowledge and recognize a constituency that does have an important contribution to be made across a variety of environmental areas. The initial meeting of that panel, which is to be followed by our second meeting very shortly, will take a look at everything from species at risk to conservation practices, whether through conservation within Parks Canada or Ducks Unlimited.

Also we'll look at things such as working with the agricultural community in terms of wetland restoration, the entire spectrum. But it has been very good to see the enthusiasm with which these various organizations—fish and game organizations, provincial wildlife organizations, hunters, anglers, as well as the trapping industry—have joined in this and are offering some valuable advice, as I said, across a spectrum of environmental areas.

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

That's much appreciated quite frankly, as far as I'm concerned. Getting advice from people who are actually on the land for the better part of the year is very important and, again, they are voices that are not too often heard.

Just to continue on the theme of partnerships and the collaborations with the Nature Conservancy of Canada. Where I live, south of Riding Mountain National Park, is a target area for the Nature Conservancy of Canada in terms of land conservation. Even though the amount of land we're looking at here, 338,000 hectares, doesn't seem like a lot compared to the national parks that have been created, to me—given that most of this land is in the working landscape—this is a very significant conservation gain for Canada. Can you talk about the ecological value of the lands that have been conserved under this program?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Certainly.

Again, the Nature Conservancy of Canada is a wonderful partner in terms of protecting increasing thousands of hectares of nature, of land, while still allowing, as you say, the working landscape. In some parts of Canada and British Columbia, for example, some forestry operations are still allowed within a protected landscape, while at the same time other industrial operations, mining for example, will not be allowed. It also allows visitation more in the sense of a rugged adventure in pristine natural areas as opposed to visiting some of our traditional national parks, although it's still possible to have a great adventure in the Nahanni, the Nááts'ihch'oh, and Torngat parks.

As I've remarked here, the allocation under the supplementaries (C) is the final spending under a five-year program that the government funded with the Nature Conservancy of Canada. But if I could just caution against any reaction of dismay at the end of this program, when programs are created for a set period of time with a fixed budget, it is intended that, at the end of that term, the program be evaluated to see if it achieved its outcomes. Worthy programs tend to be renewed, others may not. I would just suggest here that for an answer one must wait for the budget.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Minister Kent.

Monsieur Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Minister. I also thank the officials for being here with us today.

I would like to continue on the topic of nature conservation. With regard to supplementary estimates (C), about $24 million are going to be attributed to Nature Conservancy of Canada.

Can you tell me why the government is granting that amount of money for nature conservation that is outside of parliamentary control?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you. That is a good question, a valid question.

Federal taxpayers' dollars are very much front of mind when we embark on any funding programs. The Nature Conservancy of Canada has a sterling track record of multiplying federal dollars invested, with the private sector, with the charitable sector. For example, a very large territory of southern British Columbia was dedicated last year, which involved a 5:1 benefit on the federal dollars invested in the program. It allowed the protection of vast spaces of natural land that might otherwise be at risk of industrial development.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I agree with you, Mr. Minister. However, Nature Conservancy of Canada is not accountable to you. The Parliamentary Budget Officer does not check on how that organization manages its finances. And so we just do not know.

Given those circumstances, perhaps we could at least vote on that allocation of $24 million, don't you think?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

It is a program that our government is very proud of, and this final allocation of funds is to allow the Nature Conservancy to continue its work to, I believe, October of this year. Whether or not this program is renewed, we'll have to wait for the budget.

We're very proud of this program. We believe this is a significant investment, not only for our generation, but for generations to come, in terms of adding protective areas.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

According to what I understand, you are making the commitment to see to it that such amounts be voted on in future.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

This is the last phase of the program.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

As you mentioned that Nature Conservancy of Canada is a good partner, I suppose there will be another phase. Can you tell us about the next phase?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

We have to wait for the budget.