Evidence of meeting #107 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-69.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Peter C. Watson  Chair and Chief Executive Officer, National Energy Board
Scott Tessier  Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board
Michael Binder  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Robert Steedman  Chief Environment Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Roland Willson  West Moberly First Nations
Harold St-Denis  Wolf Lake First Nation
Lance Haymond  Chief, Kebaowek First Nation, Wolf Lake First Nation

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

William Amos Liberal Pontiac, QC

That was a process that I thought did engender public confidence, but there have been other proceedings that the NEB has been involved in where such confidence wasn't achieved. What can you comment, or are you willing to comment, on how Bill C-69 may best help engender public trust and public confidence in our regulatory process?

4:45 p.m.

Chair and Chief Executive Officer, National Energy Board

Peter C. Watson

Maybe I'll mention some of the things that we have already begun doing. I believe they're consistent with and supported by Bill C-69.

We recognized some time ago that we needed to be more proactive with our engagement with stakeholders across the country and participants in our hearing processes. Engagement with Canadians is necessary and appropriate, and we note that this feature is enabled and expected under Bill C-69.

I think regulators can also take steps to increase transparency associated with what they do. I would point to one of the initiatives that has been taken on both the Trans Mountain expansion and the Line 3 replacement project with our indigenous monitoring and advisory committees, where we're working collaboratively with them to be completely transparent regarding our activities on life-cycle oversight and how things are done that actually ensure safety and reduce harm associated with the potential effects of an operating pipeline.

Through that process, we're learning how to work better together and engage within first nations and the Métis Nation to ensure that we're really transparent and effective in our engagement with them, particularly around life-cycle oversight matters.

There are a number of things that I think we've been attempting to do, and I see that they will be able to be continued as we move forward.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

That's great.

We have time for one more questioner, Mr. Fast.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Thank you to all our witnesses for appearing here.

The first question is for Mr. Tessier. I took note of the fact that you said we have a world-class regulatory regime. Do you stand by that statement?

4:50 p.m.

Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

Scott Tessier

Absolutely. Yes.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

It has been suggested by many on the Liberal side that, in fact, the regulatory system in Canada is broken when it comes to impact assessments and when it comes to our energy regulator. Tell me about the kind of consultation that typically goes into a project proposal that comes before you.

4:50 p.m.

Chair and Chief Executive Officer, Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

Scott Tessier

There are two levels. With respect to environmental assessment, there are a couple different venues through which we will engage the public and stakeholders and indigenous groups. As I mentioned, we do strategic environmental assessments—broad based, large geographic areas—every five to seven years, looking at the biological and geophysical sensitivities of an area. Layered on that is project-specific environmental assessments, of course, with which the committee would be well familiar.

The third primary venue through which we invite public feedback and input is through something like a development plan approval process for something like a Hebron project or Hibernia—the big household name projects. There is a third process there wherein you can look at the socio-economic and other considerations in a megaproject, and they often include public hearings.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Thank you.

I have a question for Mr. Binder. You stated that industry can accept a quick yes-or-no decision, but what is unreasonable is to get a maybe. Then you use as an example the 15 years since Ontario Power Generation started discussions about the deep geologic repository. I'm assuming you are lamenting the fact that it's taken at least 15 years to get that project approved. Is that correct?

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Can you tell me what in this bill, Bill C-69, would actually speed up that process?

4:50 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

Dr. Michael Binder

As I think I pointed out in my remarks, real clarity on timelines every step of the way.... The bill can improve things if the early planning of a project can be done very quickly and get to a no quickly, so industry can move on. If it's a no, tell us quickly. If it's a yes, then allow them to go through the environmental assessment in a reasonable timeline, and then punt the conclusion of the environmental assessment to the regulator to implement. To me, that would be the ideal thing. If you focus on the exact timelines with limited showstoppers, etc., then I think there's room for improvement.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

As you know, Bill C-69 includes significant discretion on the part of the minister to suspend and extend timelines. In fact, the bill is riven with opportunities for the minister to delay the moving forward of a particular application. Do you feel that is helpful in moving these projects forward in a timely way?

4:55 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

Dr. Michael Binder

I can't comment on that. All I can say is that in the bill there were some time limits, and if they adhere to the time limits then it looks okay. I cannot comment on whether the minister then will find some way to stop it. That's built into the process.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

It certainly is built into the process, which brings me to my last question to you. You've suggested that at the end of the day the decision on whether a project should be approved should not be a political one. It should be a decision based on science, made by the regulator. Am I correct in understanding that?

4:55 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

Dr. Michael Binder

No. What I said was that we have a lot of experience in doing joint review panels. In fact, as a control board we have been involved in joint projects where there were all kinds of models. I think what people forget is that the EA is a planning tool, and we would like to get that plan approved quickly. Once it's done, give it to the regulator to manage. All I'm focusing...we will leave with what is being structured here as long as the planning process is quick.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC

Thank you.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

On behalf of the committee, I want to thank our guests today for their very thoughtful briefs and answers to the questions. We also appreciate their patience as we run back and forth.

I will suspend, as we do have to go into the House for votes. We'll be back for the next panel.

Thank you.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I will start the next part of the meeting.

I want to introduce our guests. From West Moberly First Nations, we have Chief Roland Willson and Bruce Muir, senior environmental planner. From Wolf Lake First Nation, we have Chief Harold St-Denis. We have Chief Lance Haymond from Kebaowek First Nation.

I have heard that you might want a little bit more than the 10 minutes that we have assigned. I understand that and I appreciate that. We are mindful that we want to get in as many questions as we can, so if we can keep it close to the 10 minutes it would be very much appreciated. When you are one minute out from 10 minutes, I put up a yellow card to help you. This means you are out of time, but don't just stop in the middle of a sentence; wrap up what you are saying.

Chief Willson, would you like to go first?

5:20 p.m.

Chief Roland Willson West Moberly First Nations

Thank you for requesting us to come and present.

I am Chief Roland Willson from West Moberly First Nation. I am located in northeastern B.C. My nation is Dunne-za. We are the Dunne people of northeastern B.C., the heart of oil and gas, forestry, coal mining, wind farms, large hydroelectric projects, Site C dam—I hope everybody here knows what that is. Our presentation was put together really quickly to talk about the changes to Bill C-69.

Thank you for inviting us here and for considering what we have to say. Part of my presentation is the considerations that got us to this point in our territory. I know I've got 10 minutes, so I'm going to be going through this really fast.

The title of our presentation is, “Neither “Subject To, Or Inferior To, The Crown's Right” To Sustainability”. This comes out of our court case that we had with B.C. and a mining company in northeastern British Columbia. The province had proposed a mine in the area of critical wintering caribou habitat, the Burnt Pine caribou herd, which, because of that activity, is now extinct. The caribou in the North Peace are considered to be endangered now—they're on the Species At Risk Act—and there's not supposed to be any kind of activity like that happening. The court in British Columbia stated that the crown's responsibility to develop does not supersede the first nations right on that; they're equal. They're supposed to take that into consideration when they're doing their permits and things like that.

The third page is the treaty territory. Treaty 8 is the largest, most comprehensive of the historic treaties. It encompasses B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, and part of the Northwest Territories. The Dunne-za people have been on the ground in northeastern B.C. for over 13,000 years We hunted the mammoth that lived there, so we've been there and are continuing to be there and we plan on staying much longer. The Dunne-za people are dreamers—that's our culture—and profits are very much land-based; small family groups move through the territory. In 1914 the West Moberly First Nations adhered to Treaty 8 under the Hudson's Hope band. We became the West Moberly First Nation in 1974 when we separated from the Hudson's Hope band and became the Halfway River First Nation and the West Moberly First Nation, reasoning we were in two separate spots, and it was easier for us to maintain our own identity that way.

Treaty 8 promises us a number of things. Of those promises are the oral promises that have been taken into consideration. One of those oral promises is free from white competition. It gets talked about quite a bit. The other big one is no forced interference, which was used from the commissioner's report in 1899 in the Mikisew Cree court case as the oral promises are part of the context of the actual treaty.

Page five is the outcomes of the environmental assessment. We've been poring over the changes recommended from the EA document to what is now considered to be Bill C-69. It's pretty much the same document, just different words. When I said we thank you for your considerations, now I'm going to take you through the considerations that have got us to this point.

Page 6 is entitled “Air We Cannot Breathe”. Throughout our territory, we have signs up all over the place about sour gas, and oil and gas activities here and there.

Page 7 is entitled “Fish We Cannot Eat”. The image on the left is my son. That's the first fish he caught, but we caught it out of the Williston Reservoir, and the Williston Reservoir is contaminated with methylmercury. All of the fish in the reservoir system have high concentrations of methylmercury, and a fish this size is very unhealthy to eat. Typically we would have released that fish, but he snagged it so bad that it was damaged and we had to take it and put it in.

You can't see the pictures on the right unless you have the digital copy. There's a map that has red lines through it. Those red lines are the extent of the mercury filtration system in the Williston Reservoir. On the right-hand side, that light blue area is where the W.A.C. Bennett Dam is. In 1968 they commissioned the dam, and in 1969 they went to full pool on the Williston Reservoir and created what they call the largest man-made lake in western Canada. I think it's the third-largest in North America. The whole thing is full of methylmercury. All of the fish in it are contaminated and we can't eat them.

Page 8 is entitled “Land we Cannot Use to Hunt or Trap”. There are signs throughout the whole area that restrict our activity in those areas. There's no hunting and shooting by residents. There are camps everywhere in the bush out there.

Page 9 is entitled “Animals We Cannot Eat”. The image on the left was a female caribou. It's identified as a species-at-risk animal, and it was eating contaminated soil in a lease site that hadn't been cleaned up. She died. The image on the right is a species-at-risk protected bison that got into a well site that was not fenced, and got her head stuck under the pipes. They had to put her down in order to get her out of there. That was a species-at-risk animal, and we're not allowed to hunt these animals.

Page 10 is entitled “Water We Cannot Drink”. Areas where rivers and waterways are not affected by the Williston Reservoir and the methylmercury have coal mines on them, with high levels of selenium being dumped into them. There are signs throughout the territory about being careful not to drink the water or eat the fish because of the high levels of mercury there.

Page 11 is entitled “Forests we Cannot Use To Camp”. Throughout the territory, signs are up that restrict us from camping through our areas. On the right, in the image of the cabin on the edge of the bank, that's the Williston Reservoir, and sloughing has been happening since they flooded and went to full pool on the Williston Reservoir. When they first considered the Williston Reservoir, they said this would eventually stop. It hasn't stopped. It has been 40 years and it's still sloughing there. New debris goes into the water every year. That cabin has since fallen into the reservoir.

On page 12, I apologize for this, but this is our reality. This is a dead caribou. This is the last male caribou of the Burnt Pine caribou herd. When the province issued the mining permit for the mining company to go up there...an illegal permit.... They didn't actually give them the permit. They told them to go ahead and get started and that they'd get them the permit, and they never did. They went up there and built this big pit, and then when we got involved and the court case ensued, they didn't claim the pit. They left the pit there. There were two caribou left up there, and the male of the two got too close to the edge of the pit and fell into the pit and died. We discovered him that spring at the bottom of the pit. He fell far enough that he actually broke one of the antlers off his head.

That Burnt Pine caribou herd has now become extinct. When we went to court to try to protect the Burnt Pine caribou herd, from the provincial analysis of the caribou in the region, there were 425 caribou left in the southern Peace area. Now there are 219 caribou. This is after our court case and everything that we've been doing to try to protect the caribou. The West Moberly First Nations and the Sto:lo Nation, our next-door neighbours, have come together and we've been running a penning program, a maternity pen, where we have one of the herds, the closest to the communities, going from 19 caribou back up to 70 caribou. We're doing a recovery program ourselves on that because we couldn't wait for the federal and provincial governments to come together and do this.

Now the government has piled in. I don't know if anybody has heard that there's a herd in the south end of the province, called the South Selkirk herd. They're believed to be functionally extinct now. There are only three left and they're all females. This is all since the planning started. This is the state we're in here.

In the beginning I talked about the oral promises and the no forced interference with everything. We can't hunt the caribou because there are not enough of them there. The federal and provincial governments, in their recovery program, are not recovering the caribou to levels of harvesting; they're recovering to levels of sustainability. They want to stop the wipeout of the caribou, but they're not curtailing development and they're not doing any recovery program of the land, to rebuild the habitat zones. They're flying around in helicopters and shooting all the wolves and protecting the high-elevation habitat, not understanding that in the spring the caribou come out of the mountains and back down into the valley to live. They're being annihilated down there.

We went from having a sea of caribou. Caribou are considered to be an animal that we could always go to the mountains and get. They were considered to be a convenient food. We'd want to get a moose or an elk, but if we couldn't find them, we could always go to the mountains and find a caribou. It's like the fish. If you were hungry and you couldn't find anything else, you could always go to the river or the lake and catch a fish. Right now—

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Sorry to interrupt. You're giving very powerful testimony and we do want to hear it. I'm just mindful of the time because we do have votes that we're going to have to go back to.

5:35 p.m.

West Moberly First Nations

Chief Roland Willson

I'm just about done.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Awesome. Thank you so much.

5:35 p.m.

West Moberly First Nations

Chief Roland Willson

Page 13 shows probably the only cumulative effects study that has ever been done. The image on the left was done by Dr. Faisal Moola of the David Suzuki Foundation and Global Forest Watch. This is all the current B.C. and federal development that has happened on the land. These are the five watersheds around my community. The image on the left is the actual footprint, and the image on the right is the footprint with the 500-metre buffer that the federal government uses in the area. When I talk about no forced interference, this is what we're presented with in our territory.

Regarding page 14, when we went through the paperwork and looked at the recommended changes, suggested changes to the environmental assessment, the current issue with the B.C. and federal governments' environmental assessment is that there is nothing in there about first nations. When we go through what's being recommended now, there is no consideration of first nations.

What we hear and see is that they'll take it into consideration. Well, we've seen what consideration gets us. What does that mean, “take it into consideration”? Is it the intent of the environmental assessment to unjustifiably infringe on the treaty? That's a question I have for you guys. Is that the intent?

We're not in here. The first nations are not in here anywhere. We should be at the very beginning. The treaty is a constitutional document. It's part of the Constitution of Canada, yet we don't show up until the very end of it, after permits have been released, after studies have been done. This is where we find ourselves in Site C.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I hate to do this, but we've gone almost five minutes over.

5:35 p.m.

West Moberly First Nations

Chief Roland Willson

You didn't put your card up.