Evidence of meeting #33 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 rouge.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you, Mr. Calandra.
We'll move now to Mr. McKay, for seven minutes.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Mr. Chair, I'd like to join Mr. Calandra in expressing that I don't trust government either—
4:55 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
In fact, Mr. Sopuck said that the difference between ecological health and ecological integrity was a distinction without a difference. Well, if it were a distinction without a difference, then I guess we would have reference to ecological integrity in the bill.
Do you agree with Mr. Sopuck that ecological health and ecological integrity are one and the same—distinctions without differences?
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
What I would agree with is that in clause 6 of the bill, it goes beyond ecological health. What is being proposed is to protect the “natural ecosystems”, the “cultural landscapes”, “the maintenance of...native wildlife”, and the “health of...ecosystems”. That is what is in the bill.
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Essentially, clause 6 says that the minister “must...take into consideration...”. It is not, however, a legislated commitment to any particular.... It certainly wouldn't meet the standard of ecological integrity that's put out in the Parks Act. You have to agree with that.
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
I think it's important for members to understand that the National Parks Act states that the minister shall give “ecological integrity” the “first priority”. That clause was challenged by CPAWS legally against a previous minister, and what the court ruled is basically that there can be several priorities, and if the minister has considered that, in that case she met her objective.
From our perspective, when I look at the history from a court perspective and I look at what's before you for debate, I think we will ensure that this place is strongly protected for future generations.
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
That's why a lot of us like the idea of ecological integrity. I buy your argument that you can't apply the Nahanni park concept to the Rouge park. No one is going to dispute that, but the issue here is that there is no definition of “ecological health”.
You've put your hat on the concept of ecological health, but there is actually no definition. If CPAWS or anybody else challenged your idea, you'd be swinging at puffballs, because the way you have clause 6 written, it's essentially good faith on the part of the minister to be nice to the ecology.
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, first I would say that nowhere in the bill do you see “ecological health”. What you will see is “the health of those ecosystems”. I think that is one important point.
The second point is that through the management plan, which is a requirement under the bill that's being proposed, there are some specific obligations on the minister, including reporting on the state of those—
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
For that part, we will ensure that we protect the natural ecosystems and the cultural landscapes, and the—
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
It's not ecological integrity and it's not ecological health. It's something called “the protection of the health of these ecosystems”.
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
What does that mean? We're writing law here. What does that mean?
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
For the definition of “ecosystem”, I think there are several of them, and there are some that are very complex. We can provide a list to the committee, but—
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I appreciate that, because this seems to be the locus of the argument. It's that you have ditched ecological integrity. You tell me you're not going to go with ecological health, which is where I thought you were going first, and now there's something else.
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, as an example, I'll read for you the definition of “ecosystem” under the National Marine Conservation Areas Act:
“ecosystem” means a dynamic complex of animal, plant and microorganism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional unit.
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
I'm not sure that's clearer than what we have before you.
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
If you can put forward a definition like that on what is a complex ecosystem in a marine park, why is it that you can't put forward a definition, whatever it is, of what constitutes whether it's ecological health or health of the ecosystem? Why can't you put that either in the bill or in an amendment to the Parks Act?
5 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, I can't commit the government, but what I will say once again is that the concept of protecting the natural ecosystems and cultural landscapes, and the maintenance of native wildlife is, from where I sit, a pretty simple and basic concept that we can implement. If Parliament decides that this legislation goes forward, we can implement that, supported by all the other clauses that reinforce the conservation objectives of the bill.
5 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Do you appreciate, though, that for the level of government that is about to contribute 44% of the land to this park, this might be a little on the thin side as far as kind of a “trust me” definition?
5:05 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, what we've committed to—Andrew negotiated that—is basically that we have a signed agreement at the ministerial level with specific obligations on both the federal and provincial governments.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
It was for us, the federal government, to meet the policies of the provincial government. Nowhere are there obligations in terms of legislation. When we finalize that draft management plan, we're looking forward to receiving from the Government of Ontario their perspective and their comments on the management plan. We are very comfortable that we have met that threshold that we've committed to.