Environment Committee on Nov. 17th, 2014

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

If that's true, and the overwhelming majority wanted to preserve the south watershed, wouldn't it be a reasonable conclusion to say that the aboriginal wishes for this particular area are to preserve the entire South Nahanni watershed? Wasn't that the overwhelming choice of the people who were consulted, many of whom would have been aboriginal by definition?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

A whole range of groups and organizations are involved in discussions of the boundaries. I think I've outlined these before quite clearly.

Consultation on the boundaries issue was extensive. Sixteen hundred groups were consulted. Those ranged from aboriginal groups to governments to people in the surrounding areas and various communities. We consulted with groups to determine the boundaries.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

I'm just quibbling with your interpretation of the consultation. I'm looking at the Library of Parliament briefing note here, and it states:

While the great majority of people consulted supported the protection of the entire watershed, of the 65 people who expressed a preference for any of the options, only two supported option 3.

That doesn't seem like a lot of people. Does the Library of Parliament have it wrong? It doesn't strike me, as you said, as overwhelming support from stakeholder groups.

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Again my understanding is that from the 1,600 individuals who had submissions and comments, only 60 expressed a preference for one of the three boundaries. The remaining respondents did not express any preference. So 60 of the 1,600 had other views on the proposed options.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Mr. McKay, your time is up; you're well over.

I'm going to move to Mr. Choquette, for five minutes, please.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also thank you, Madam Minister, for being here with us.

While the minister is here, I will take this opportunity to table a notice of motion we can discuss at the end of the meeting, if my colleagues agree.

The motion is the following:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), the committee invite the Minister of the Environment to testify for a two-hour televised meeting related to the referral of Supplementary Estimates (B), and that this meeting take place at the latest on November 28, 2014.

Colleagues, I would like us to vote on this motion at the end of the meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Mr. Choquette, I think it's unfortunate that you bring that up in the time that the minister is here, but it's your choice of use of time.

Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

To discuss this, we would need to go in camera and I'm not sure if Mr. Choquette has just indicated that he's prepared to defer the discussion as well as the vote to the end of the meeting, but as a point of order, I think we need to clarify that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Mr. Choquette, are you willing to—

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

That is exactly what I am proposing, that is to say that we postpone the discussion to the end of the meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

We will discuss it at the end of the meeting, after our other witnesses have appeared, in the next hour.

Proceed.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

We should vote on whether we're going to go in camera.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I agree with Mr. Bevington that this is an interesting bill and that it is a step forward. It has already been studied in the Senate, where certain concerns were expressed. I will paraphrase what Ms. Alison Woodley said. She feels that the bill is a good start, but does not protect the important habitats of the woodland caribou, the grizzly and the Dall thinhorn sheep.

Have you something in mind to protect those habitats?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

On the issue of the grizzly bears, the boundaries achieve the key conservation gains, including the protection of the upper reaches of the South Nahanni River, as well as the habitats for the woodland caribou and grizzly bears.

With Bill S-5, our government has also expanded by sevenfold the nearly 5,000 square kilometre boundary of the Nahanni National Park Reserve, to the point where the Nahanni and Nááts'ihch'oh national park complex is the third largest in Canada at 35,000 square kilometres.

Together Nahanni and Nááts'ihch'oh protect 86% of this entire South Nahanni watershed. The two parks jointly provide habitat for up to 600 grizzly bears in that region.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Minister.

I am trying to understand exactly what happened when replies were submitted. According to what I understand, out of 1,603 replies, only 60 supported the third option. All of the others were in support of the first option. Is that correct?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

Again, going back to determining the boundaries, of the 1,603 submissions that were made, my understanding is that 60 supported the current boundary. At the same time, we've also solicited comments from the GNWT, the Northwest Territories government, which also has responsibilities for managing lands in the north. We've also consulted with the mineral and energy resource assessment, which was also mentioned.

There's a whole bunch of factors that are considered in this process, but of the 1,603 submissions that were made, my understanding is that the majority of these groups submitted comments that supported and expressed support for our initiative. Of the 60 that didn't, we factored in every one of them, but the majority were in support.

Also, the Sahtu Dene groups had supported this initiative to make changes. We've supported their request to make changes since 2012, and those are all reflected in this plan.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I will move to Mrs. Ambler, for five minutes.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Thank you, Minister and officials, for being with us today to talk about Nááts'ihch'oh park.

In fact, I'm particularly delighted that we're talking about more than one national park at this committee. Being a member of Parliament from the greater Toronto area, I can say that the Rouge national urban park is going to be another wonderful commitment and promise kept. I know that expanding parklands in Canada is a priority for this government and we really appreciate that you are making it a priority as well.

In your opening remarks, Minister, you talked about protection of woodland caribou and grizzly bears. You also mentioned the protection of and respect for the traditional use of lands, and for harvesting wildlife and plants in the parklands. Can you also please explain to the committee how first nations sacred sites will be protected within the Nááts'ihch'oh national park reserve?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

The government takes the protection and preservation of cultural and spiritual sites seriously. We work in partnership with the aboriginal groups with whom we're negotiating regarding the parks.

The parks will offer these sites that are under the full protection of the Canada National Parks Act. Additional protection for the sacred sites of the Sahtu Dene and Métis that are within the park is detailed in the impact and benefit agreement that we've signed with the aboriginal groups, which states that the management committee may recommend to the minister as to what protections are needed.

Parks Canada also urges the best practices when planning and operating the parks to help protect these sacred sites. The superintendent's orders can be given and there is a park zoning regime under the management plan.

The Government of Canada is confident that these measures will help protect and preserve those sites within the park that are being considered as sacred by the Sahtu Dene and Métis people. There is work in progress identifying how we will proceed in protecting those areas.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

I'm glad to hear that. In fact, I'm sort of comparing it in my own mind to similarities with the Rouge national urban park with respect to cultural and historical sites located on those lands as well, taking into consideration those who have made their livelihoods from farming on those sites as well.

It's interesting for me personally to see the juxtaposition of a park in the city of Toronto and the greater Toronto area with one in the Northwest Territories. It's kind of fascinating.

I know that for both parks, economic opportunity is a priority. Could you share with the committee the short-term actions and initiatives that are creating employment for first nations in relation to the park?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

We are moving on with plans for the Nááts’ihch’oh national park reserve parks office. We are also establishing a visitor's centre, a warehouse, and proper garage facilities for the park's operations equipment, as well as housing for the park staff in Tulita.

Through that process the local people will be employed in the construction and maintenance of that infrastructure in those communities. At the same time, we have moved forward with capital funds of about $2.8 million to be committed for the construction of the projects I just identified.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

You also mentioned that the park is subject to the provisions of the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. I'm not an expert in that area. Could you fill me and the rest of the committee in on the requirements of the land claims agreement?

[Leona Aglukkaq, Conservative, Nunavut, NU]

You have the map. The park is located in the Sahtu settlement area. It is subject to the provisions of the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. The land claim agreement requires that an impact and benefit agreement be negotiated and signed before the establishment of a park.

In March 2012, the three land corporations and two renewable resource councils agreed to the establishment of the park, its boundaries, and a cooperative management regime. The impact and benefit plan for the Nááts'ihch'oh covers cooperation, management agreements, the exercise of traditional harvesting rights within that agreement, as well as employment and economic development opportunities identified in that impact and benefit agreement.

In order to move on the park piece, the impact and benefit agreement must first be agreed to in order to trigger the development of the use of that park as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Ms. Ambler.

We'll move now, for the last question, to Mr. Bevington, for five minutes.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Minister, I want to go back to a question I asked, because Mr. McNamee didn't really answer the question. I wasn't asking about Nahanni. I was asking about the provisions that have been put in place to ensure that Tulita would see this action going ahead. I'm really just looking for the action plan going forward on the capital facilities and the development of the staffing there. That was the question.