Evidence of meeting #61 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 environmental.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Robert McLean  Executive Director, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environmental Stewardship Branch, Department of the Environment
Tovah Barocas  Director, Development, Earth Rangers
Mike Puddister  Director, Watershed Transformation, Credit Valley Conservation
Terri LeRoux  Executive Director, Credit Valley Conservation Foundation

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

Okay, thank you.

Mr. McLean, I was wondering if I could ask you about your comment regarding the broader landscape and how critical coordination and partnerships are, and how the work is so much more meaningful when you have these and can leverage the entities and make more of a difference. You mentioned that when private sector partnerships are part of the mix, they make a different contribution. Could you tell us what are some of the unique contributions made by the private sector that you've observed?

10:25 a.m.

Executive Director, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environmental Stewardship Branch, Department of the Environment

Robert McLean

That's a two-part question. I'll deal with the second part, as other witnesses have already talked about the unique contributions.

I think there's the in-kind provision of goods. There's the provision of expertise. If we're talking of the forest sector, companies can have particular expertise with respect to forest management. I can guarantee you that if I'm talking to ranchers, they will tell me that they know how to manage grassland habitat, the native prairie, way better than other people do. Absolutely, ranchers can manage native prairie very well because their business depends on it. Those would be the primary ways in which corporations can contribute.

With respect to the landscape approach and kind of roles of government, if I could turn back to that a little bit, there's tremendous interest, I think, at the community level in finding things to do. I think that organizations like the conservation authorities who have an eye on that broader landscape or watershed can help people understand where in the watershed action is needed, and what kind of action is needed, and then find ways to provide those goods and services, or the technical information on what to do.

I think the North American waterfowl management plan is successful because it provides a little bit of context, which then enables that kind of community-based action, or action by environmental organizations or corporate Canada, if you will. I think we need to do a little more of that. I can't get too far into it—it's not secret—but we've been working on multi-species approaches with respect to species at risk, working with provincial and territorial jurisdictions. We do have an action plan that I hope we can post this year under the Species at Risk Act, a multi-species approach that we call “South of the Divide”, meaning southwestern Saskatchewan, and we are working hand in hand, if you will, with the ranching community.

We're also working with the province, I would add. The role of the provinces is critical. With our provincial colleagues we are providing information on the important habitats, the characteristics of those habitats, but also talking about some of the tools—I was actually out west last week—moving beyond simply a plan to the tools that will work for that community. Here I refer to the habitat management tools around habitat restoration, conservation agreements around taking existing habitat and enhancing its values, talking about grass banking on private land and conservation banking on crown land, and whether or not there are opportunities to advance that. If we can move to that level, then I think it opens doors for the agriculture sector, both ranchers and agricultural corporations, to become involved.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you, Mrs. Ambler.

Thank you, Mr. McLean.

At this point Mr. McKay is the last person on our sheet.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Last and least. My goodness.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Last but not least, especially now with....

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Does line 9 run through the Credit Valley?

June 11th, 2015 / 10:30 a.m.

Director, Watershed Transformation, Credit Valley Conservation

Mike Puddister

Yes, I believe it does.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Did the authority or the foundation make any representations to the NEB about line 9?

10:30 a.m.

Director, Watershed Transformation, Credit Valley Conservation

Mike Puddister

Certainly, the foundation would not be providing advocacy in terms of that particular application. Our planning staff may have commented. I'm not responsible for that area, so I'm not certain.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

My recollection is that there was a huge aggregate proposal somewhere in and around Orangeville—and I'm not sure whether it was in the Credit Valley authority—which provoked enormous citizen opposition. I can't even remember the name of it.

Am I correct in my recollection, that there was an enormous aggregate proposal?

10:30 a.m.

Director, Watershed Transformation, Credit Valley Conservation

Mike Puddister

Yes. There was a large quarry proposal to the north and east of Orangeville, outside of our area's jurisdiction, but we were certainly made aware of it through a variety of public outbursts, if I might say.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

“Outbursts” is probably a good way to put it.

How did the foundation handle it, or did it get involved at all in that particular environmental issue?

10:30 a.m.

Executive Director, Credit Valley Conservation Foundation

Terri LeRoux

No, we weren't involved. As Mike mentioned, it was outside of the boundaries of our watershed.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I would argue that there is a lack of relevance to our study topic here. Not only is the quarry a done deal and no longer an issue in any way for the residents, or government, or the community, but it also has no relation to private sector involvement with environmental organizations.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Frankly, Mr. Chair, I don't think it's up to another member to determine relevance.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Mr. McKay, I wouldn't rule on this point of relevance, but I am questioning the point of relevance questioning the foundation as to whether they had been involved.... The foundation is responsible for fundraising, whereas the Credit Valley Conservation Authority—

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

The foundation doesn't raise money in the abstract and just raise it for nothing. The core point of any foundation is to raise environmental awareness.

In local terms, an aggregate or a quarry generates huge public interest. I know this particular one generated.... In fact, there were elections that were called on it.

I'm actually not so much interested.... I just want to know whether there was any participation. Ms. Ambler was objecting to this in terms of its relevance, and they said that, no, they didn't actually get involved, so I'm fine with that.

I'm curious about your 75:25 ratio in terms of donations. It's often said that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Does that bother you? Are you concerned about a ratio where your revenues are largely dependent on corporations?

10:35 a.m.

Executive Director, Credit Valley Conservation Foundation

Terri LeRoux

Actually our revenues.... The other split to be considered is our signature event portfolio and our grant portfolio. It's not that the corporations make up the remaining 75%. They would probably represent about 20% of our income, so in fact, they are lower than the individual donors.

The ratio overall does concern me as a fundraiser. From a sustainable point of view and in terms of wanting to increase the revenues in our supportive conservation, I would like to see more individual support of the foundation. I would love to see that up around 70%.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

I hear that various charities get very frustrated. They seem to spend a disproportionate amount of time fundraising and are frustrated because they'd rather be doing the charitable work itself. Have you broken down the amount of time you spend fundraising as a percentage of the overall activities of the foundation?

10:35 a.m.

Executive Director, Credit Valley Conservation Foundation

Terri LeRoux

We're in a unique position. Our foundation is strictly a fundraising foundation, so 100% of the activities we do are fundraising efforts.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Okay, so there's no aspect.... So the moneys get directed over to the authority after that. Is that how it works?

10:35 a.m.

Executive Director, Credit Valley Conservation Foundation

Terri LeRoux

Yes. Absolutely.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

They're the working arm of the foundation.

10:35 a.m.

Executive Director, Credit Valley Conservation Foundation

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON

Okay. That's a clarification. Thank you very much for that.

I'm also curious about this arrangement where a corporation is trying to build its brand. How do you price that? You in effect sell advertising for whatever project you're pursuing. How does that get priced?