Evidence of meeting #6 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 million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:40 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Thank you for the question. I have two brief comments.
First, we haven't raised user fees in our national parks or historic sites since 2008. And no decision has yet been made.
Second, all the revenue generated by a national historic site or national park stays in the local budget for reinvestment in the unit's activities. No money goes back to the federal government collectively or Parks Canada centrally.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you, Monsieur Aubin.
We'll go now to Mr. Storseth for five minutes.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Before I get started, I would like to invite Mr. McKay to my riding so he can see the difference between in situ oil sands and mining oil sands. There is a significant difference.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Well, then, you should know that it's not a mine, which is what you already called it. Also, there's the difference between bitumen and crude.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Now, for the witnesses, could I ask you for the definition of what a low-risk project would have been in the environmental assessments? Just give me an example of what we would have considered a low-risk project.
12:40 p.m.
President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Often, the significance will also relate to impacts on aboriginal communities, and that is determined through discussions with the aboriginal communities and the proponent in terms of what the expected effect will be.
I'm not an EA science practitioner, so I won't get myself into scientific details. I could ask for a follow-up, if you like. In terms of significance, it's normally about the scope and scale. For example, a mine can remove the top layer of earth of hundreds of square kilometres or square miles, compared to in situ, where the impacted area is relatively smaller.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Under the former environmental assessment regime, for example, would the painting of a park bench in a national park have required an environmental assessment?
12:40 p.m.
President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
I'm sorry. I'm having trouble hearing you.
12:40 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, in terms of doing maintenance work on our assets, it wouldn't have been. For example, special events or minor events in national historic sites of gathering would have historical.... But doing the minor work, like painting a bench, would not have been a—
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
What percentage of the 100% of environmental assessments we were doing would have been minor events?
12:40 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
In the case of Parks Canada specifically, they were quite significant. Again, because of the nature of our operation and the nature of the activities that we carry out, currently what we're doing is really focusing on the big projects that could have major impacts.
In fact, in his report, the Commissioner of the Environment reviewed specifically our implementation of the changes and confirmed that we are carrying them out diligently.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
In regard to Parks Canada, when it came to doing environmental assessments for even these minor events, you would have taken it very seriously, as it was a part of your protocol. Would that have represented a fairly significant cost in the overall costs that you had with environmental assessments?
12:40 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, we took it seriously because it was the law, so I want that to be clear. In terms of our investments, what we're doing now is focusing our investments on where there could potentially be the biggest impact from an ecological perspective. We have not produced in huge numbers, for example, the overall investments...what we're doing is putting that investment where it has the best return.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Absolutely. Thank you very much for that.
I'd like to talk to you a little about the social licence. We often talk about the social licence. Part of the social licence is making sure we have some of the best world-class monitoring and research done. When it comes to my area, which would be the oil sands area, that includes water and water quality measurements. Could you talk a little about the dollar figures that have been spent on research in water monitoring in Alberta?
12:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
Yes, I can speak to that.
As you've noted, we have a fairly significant project with the Government of Alberta to enhance monitoring in the oil sands area, which includes monitoring of water, air, land, and biodiversity. That's been agreed to relatively recently, and we are now starting to put in place a credible scientific plan.
We were always monitoring. Now we're increasing that in recognition of the fact that there is interest in the impacts of oil sands activity on the surrounding environment. We take that very seriously. We work very closely with Alberta, as the minister said. It's often important for us to work hand in hand with the provincial government.
The idea is a good thing for governments, industry, and citizens for a few reasons.
One, we'll have a better sense of what the impacts are. If there are impacts in the water, aquatic species, on the land, in the air, we'll know better because of this enhanced activity.
Two, it's also good for the industry itself because it shows we are paying attention. To the extent people outside Canada, or even within Canada, have concerns about the oil sands, we are making efforts to understand those impacts. If we see the impacts, we'll know better what to do.
Three, it's in our “open science” commitment. All of the information and the monitoring we do is available on the portal that we have established, and that is accessible to everyone. Again, it's putting that information out there that people, researchers, can use and can do their own subresearch projects on.
12:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
In terms of the amount of money, the industry has committed to fund this additional monitoring activity up to $50 million per year, and that would be between us and Alberta.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
That's excellent.
Could I get in one last quick question?
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
The chairman is just brutal when it comes to time.
