Environment Committee on Oct. 27th, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

I call the meeting to order.

My apologies for starting a little late. We had a vote in the House. This seems to be a habit, so our apologies.

The agency would like to share for a minute or two and then we will begin questioning. Who's going to be presenting, please?

[John McCauley, Director, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Division, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency]

Mr. Chair, we provided earlier this week summaries of a number of assessments that had been completed dating back to the passage of the act in 1995, and attached to that was a summary table. We noticed that due to some discrepancies in the way in which we were reporting the information in our DPR, there are some inconsistencies in the table as it relates to comprehensive studies and review panels. We're working now to correct that information, and we'll provide it to the clerk and the committee as soon as possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Thank you so much.

We'll begin the first round of questioning. We only have approximately 16 to 17 minutes, so each opportunity will be for four minutes, not the typical seven, which will give everybody a chance to ask a question.

We'll begin with Mr. Woodworth for four minutes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Just when I thought the questioning time couldn't get any shorter.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate your attendance again with us, gentlemen.

I'm interested in a report that I've been made aware of from 2009 from the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. One of the issues identified in that report in respect to the matter we're studying was the problem of multiple federal authorities, not just interjurisdictional, but multiple federal authorities being responsible sometimes for assessing the same project.

First of all, are you gentlemen aware of the report to which I am referring?

[Yves Leboeuf, Vice-President, Operations, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency]

Yes. I was actually one of the co-chairs of the working group that led the development of this report.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

You'll be very aware of it then.

Is it in fact the case that there are projects for which multiple federal authorities might be engaged in an assessment?

[Yves Leboeuf]

That's correct. We need to keep in mind that this report was prepared in 2009, as you said, so the legislative changes that were made last year and that made the agency legally responsible for the conduct of the comprehensive studies for the larger projects were not in place at the time.

What was behind these comments in the CCME report was a recognition that to improve federal-provincial coordination in environmental assessment, this is not only about having tools to harmonize the process, but it's also about having the federal family and the federal process itself getting in order first before talking about how to harmonize with the provincial jurisdictions.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I understand that in a comprehensive report, at least that is done by the agency, that problem is resolved. But there are some comprehensive reports by other agencies too. Am I correct about that?

[Yves Leboeuf]

Not any more, since last year, except for projects that are regulated by the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

This is what I was referring to. And there also may be other projects that are reasonably large, but not quite at the stage of requiring a comprehensive report where this problem of multiple federal authorities might remain. Is that correct?

[Yves Leboeuf]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

You would have heard evidence or you would have received reports, I assume, about the frustration that this may cause to project proponents. Is that correct?

[Yves Leboeuf]

That's correct. They are valid concerns that have been raised, and they continue to be raised.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Do they continue to be raised to CEAA?

[Yves Leboeuf]

We hear about them, but we don't hear many concerns any more with respect to those projects that are subject to the comprehensive study process. As we explained last week, for all those that were started since the amendments came into force, they're very well aligned with the provincial process.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I'm really referring to projects other than those, that are still the subject of screenings by multiple federal authorities.

So I assume that the system of putting comprehensive reports under CEAA has worked well to solve this problem, correct?

You have to say yes or no for the transcript.

[Yves Leboeuf]

Yes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

And perhaps we might consider extending that to other larger projects, even if they're not perhaps at the stage of requiring a comprehensive assessment. Would that be a fair...?

[Yves Leboeuf]

It's certainly something the committee may want to consider. I think the related issue, which you heard of with the two witnesses two days ago, goes to the notion of whether there should be a single agency responsible for all the assessments or we should continue with this diffused accountability system we have currently.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mark Warawa]

Unfortunately, the time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Woodworth.

Next is Ms. Liu. Four minutes.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to come back to the consultations with aboriginal people.

Last week , when the representatives of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency appeared, you confirmed that if the budgets that are expiring are not renewed, the consultations with aboriginal people could be affected. Is that the case?

[Yves Leboeuf]

Last week we heard that the government is at this time considering the matter of renewing that budget. A decision will be taken in the context of Budget 2012. If the funds are not renewed, this will obviously have repercussions on our activities regarding environmental evaluations, and our consultations with aboriginal people.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Concretely, what were the budgets allocated to consulting aboriginal people used for over the past years? Were they used to fund the groups that took part in them? Can you tell us exactly how those amounts were used?

[Yves Leboeuf]

They were used in the main for two purposes.

Firstly, an envelope of money, a contribution, was given to the aboriginal communities that were consulted in the context of the environmental assessments. So funds were made available to them both for in-depth studies and for the projects evaluated by an assessment commission. That is the first part.

Additional resources were also provided to our agency, such as employees assigned to the aboriginal consultations, and to cover the expenses related to those consultations. It was both an operational budget and a budget for contributions to the aboriginal groups.

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

If the budget is not renewed, this could have an adverse effect on the participation of aboriginals in the consultation process.