Evidence of meeting #20 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chemicals.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Halifax, NDP
Picking up on this idea of what we need, sometimes groups will come and say, “We don't need anymore studies”, or “We don't need to know the science; we know the science”.
Is there anything we can eliminate? What should we not worry about or not focus on? What do we have? Or do we need all of it? If that's the answer, that's the answer.
5:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Water Network
I think we need all of it, but the question in front of all of us is whether it's our household budget or our national budget there are only so many things we can do.
The reason I'm pushing for a framework is that the question of whether we have enough investment in the science is best answered in a framework saying where it is we want to go and what the priorities are.
I wouldn't say there's any overall we can drop the science, but what I would say, coming from the science community, is it should be done in parallel. You don't need to stop and say we don't need to do something now until we figure out what the cycling is.
In terms of management of the discharge of contaminants, of persistent contaminants, of nutrients, we know that those things should be done. There are lots of things on the ground that conservation authorities and others, and municipalities, can be doing, but it needs to be done in parallel.
But decisions need to be made, and it should be done in a framework to suggest which of this information is most likely to move us ahead. I think it's just a management approach.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Council Member and Technical Advisor, Manitoulin Area Stewardship Council
I want to make a point.
In our funding of NSERC grants, too often studies that have been undertaken by graduate students working on their theses have focused on things that really haven't achieved tangible results for what we need today.
Too often in my 36-year career as a civil servant, I've seen studies done that collected dust on the shelves, not because...they were done in a practical, applicable manner; they were done just because somebody had a particular interest.
This government needs to really look and the community really needs to look at where this funding is. We have so many issues right now just in the Great Lakes alone, forget about everything else in the country, that we need to focus those resources directly to achieve the results that we need today.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you very much.
I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today, including our witness who is here by video conference. Thank you for joining us today.
With that we're going to recess for two minutes while we reconvene for an in camera session.
[Proceedings continue in camera]