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.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you all for being here today to answer our questions.
I'd just like to clarify something regarding the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and a comment Mr. Storseth made. He was concerned about the painting of a bark bench. Keep in mind that, under the current list, in situ oil sands are no longer assessed, nor will they be. Let's not forget there are some pretty serious concerns, after all. We know that in situ oil sands development is growing.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
I just want to clarify that they were never part of it; it's not that they were taken out.
Sorry, Mr. Choquette.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Storseth.
Actually, the oil sands were never on the list because you were the ones who drew up the list. Prior to that, it worked on a trigger basis. So the oil sands could have triggered an assessment. Be that as it may, that's another matter.
Sir, there is something I'd like to know.
How many full-time employees have been cut or were later reassigned from each of your respective departments in each of the last three years?
I know you don't have time to answer that this very second, but could you send that information to the committee?
12:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
What information did you ask for?
12:45 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
If you can, how many full-time employees have been cut or were later reassigned from each of your respective departments? Can you provide us with that?
12:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
Yes, of course, we'll provide you with that information. I think we've already provided some details on that, but we'll provide more.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Do you want the others to respond, all three of them, or do you want to just—
12:45 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Actually, my question was for all the agencies. If each of them could provide that information, I would very much appreciate it.
Mr. Latourelle, of Parks Canada, you're aware I'm troubled by the 33% reduction in science-related positions. Now I'm learning that, in supplementary estimates (B), you are requesting emergency funds to repair highways and bridges in national parks.
Can you shed some light on those urgent needs? Why weren't those costs already planned for? How is it that urgent repairs are necessary all of a sudden?
After giving the committee some general information on that, would you mind providing us with details on the specific needs of each park? That way, we will be able to see whether a park like the one near my colleague Robert Aubin's riding is experiencing those problems.
12:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, the supplementary estimates reflect the decision made by the Canadian government, in Budget 2013, to invest $18.9 million more in highways and bridges in national parks. In our case, that involves a number of spots along the Trans-Canada Highway, for example. We have investments in Terra Nova National Park of Canada, in Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as in parks in the Rockies. We are responsible for sections of the highway located in national parks.
I can provide a full list of the investments. They all flow from the Budget 2013 decision and are being presented to you today for your consideration.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
I'd like to revisit the 33% reduction in scientific positions at Parks Canada.
As you know, you accepted a number of the recommendations made by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. But you did not want to accept that there may have been a lack of resources that would explain the delay in following through on many of the reports and strategic plans you are responsible for. Why do you refuse to evaluate your resources?
12:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada
Mr. Chair, I have to tell you that's an area where we very much disagree with the commissioner, and I want to make that perfectly clear. Parks Canada's resource conservation team has nearly 600 members. They are incredible men and women who work on fulfilling our conservation objectives every single day. I see the tremendous amount of work they do around the country. We're working on our organization's largest ecological restoration project in a hundred years.
I'm very comfortable with the decisions we've made that affect our organization and our investments. Those investments are actually going a long way, from a conservation standpoint.
Unfortunately, in my view, the commissioner's report focused too much on the 15% of our activities where we still need improvement and not enough on the 85% of our endeavours that make us world leaders, whether it's developing a science program or reporting on ecological health. We are the only organization in the world that reports on its entire system.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you.
We're going to move to a final question from Mr. Sopuck, for five minutes, and then we need about three minutes with the committee to deal with the supplementary estimates.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
Thank you very much.
Does Environment Canada conduct environmental monitoring across Canada?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
Well, for example, we measure water quality across the country, and we measure air quality, the emissions in a variety of constructs, looking for what particles might be in the atmosphere. We also monitor the numbers of species, numbers of caribou, whatever it might be.
We monitor all facets of water, air, and biodiversity. In a number of circumstances, we do it in conjunction with the provinces, and there might even be funding going back and forth, but yes, we're pretty much in all areas of monitoring. There are some areas of special concern. Oil sands was an area we talked about earlier, and the Great Lakes, other lakes.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
Given that you do extensive environmental monitoring, generating environmental indicators across a wide variety of areas, what have been the trends in Canada's environmental indicators, let's say, over the last decade?
12:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of the Environment
We produced an environmental indicators publication, which I'd be happy to go back to. I think we're seeing improvements, if I could put it, overall. You need to go into particular details. Some things improve. Some things don't. We could provide the committee with a summary of some examples within that indicator study, although it is available publicly. Also, in our plans and priorities within Environment Canada, we set certain goals for ourselves in what improvements we'd like to see in different areas—water quality, air quality.
I'd be happy to provide more information to the committee. I don't have the document in front of me.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB
Sure, but you're saying that most environmental indicators in Canada are showing an improvement over the last decade. Is that a fair characterization of what you've said?