Evidence of meeting #123 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 audit.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
That's really good. It's progress.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
We're getting there. It's progress.
In 2018, you noted that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans implemented measures to reduce the threat to the North Atlantic right whale and the southern resident killer whale.
As you noted in 2017, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, along with Transport Canada, worked to implement a vessel slowdown to protect the North Atlantic right whale. In your conclusion, you mentioned that the actions of the departments suggest a change in approach that could reduce the threats to these marine mammals. Can you elaborate on why you determined that?
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
We know that the departments have started to implement actions. The problem for us was an audit problem, in terms of the timing. It wasn't fitting into our audit time when we were there, so in each case we mention, all throughout the report, everywhere that the government had started to implement some actions, but we clearly indicated that we did not audit them. We can't audit their effectiveness, because it's too soon.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
What we can say is that we really didn't see a lot of action prior to those 12 whales being found dead, then there was a little bit of action, but not a lot. The 12 whales were found dead, and all of a sudden things kicked into gear. Remember that things kicked into gear for three marine mammal species, just the three whales, and there are still 37 other marine mammals that we need to take care. We want to make sure that they don't get onto the endangered species list.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Oh, I still have a minute. Okay.
When you're talking about this increase and this change in approach, how does that align with the oceans protection plan?
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
I would say it's completely in line with that. That's what kicked in, but we can't audit that because it's too soon and it was at the end of our audit period.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
However, you've seen a drastic improvement since the OPP came in.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
We have seen actions being taken for three marine mammal species, yes.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Excellent. Thank you.
I'm good. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I also want to thank the departmental representatives for being here with us.
It is always a pleasure to have you here, Madam Commissioner. The information you share with us is always on point and I must say that it is always a bit reassuring. It very much helps us to do our work as parliamentarians.
You are all probably well aware of my opinion on this, but I will take this opportunity to reiterate that the commissioner does extraordinary audit work at different departments.
I used to be a member of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and it was the same thing. The Office of the Commissioner is kind of the watchdog for Canadians by ensuring that our departments do their jobs properly.
This is the fifth audit on toxic products in 20 years and the fact that the Office of the Commissioner is deciding to conduct audits on these products is very good for Canadians. Many other departments are not evaluated.
My first question is for you, Madam Commissioner. What should we as parliamentarians be doing before there ever is an audit to ensure that everything is operating properly and, through an accountability mechanism, make it possible to recalibrate things every year or two or three in every department? How can we ensure that the departments take responsibility for their activities and that they work on achieving an objective in cooperation with parliamentarians and cabinet? The fact that no such mechanism is in place may result in a sense of insecurity. Knowing that the Office of the Commissioner is monitoring them might make the departments react differently.
Madam Commissioner, earlier you said that “the measures recently put in place have been reactive, limited and late.”
That begs the question. Why wait to be the subject of an audit? Why wait for the results of an audit? Madam Commissioner, wear a police officer's hat for a moment and answer this question: why wait for the commissioner's reaction or the findings of an inspection, inquiry, investigation, or audit before reacting?
I would like your thoughts on that, Madam Commissioner.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Given that you were a member of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, I could give you an example related to that committee. It asks each department to come up with an action plan and to report back to the committee regarding that plan.
I would strongly encourage this committee to use the same approach. You could ask each department to develop an action plan every year and to submit an annual report to you, as is done at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
That would be one way to ensure that the departments are accountable to parliamentarians.
You are truly the watchdogs, not me.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
My role is to verify whether your instructions have been shared with the departments and to hold you accountable for that. I also determine whether or not the departments followed your instructions and then report back to you.
You really are the ones who demand accountability.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
I would encourage this committee to look at the current practice at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, which calls on departments to develop an annual action plan in response to the recommendations in all of our reports so that the committee may follow their progress.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
The following question is for the departments.
How do you go about your self-assessment? Do you recalibrate your targets in an effort to help meet them, as needed? In other words, are you reactive only or do you use another approach, such as a measure, process, task, brainstorming type meeting, or some other method?
Philippe Morel Assistant Deputy Minister, Aquatic Ecosystems Sector, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
I might be able to answer that first since the commissioner made comments about the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in her audit.
Yes, we do that all the time. First, in an effort to use public funding wisely, we consider the funding allocation, we assess our priorities, we make annual plans, and we write reports on the results.
As far as marine mammal management is concerned, we have an example where the department had to adapt to the North Atlantic right whale situation.
For decades, when the right whale ended up in Canadian waters it tended to keep to the Bay of Fundy.
We decided to shift the shipping lane to limit disruption to these whales. We know that environmental causes and the shifting location of fish food have caused the whales to move to other areas to look for their prey.
As a result, the whales have been moving more toward the Gulf of St. Lawrence for the past three years. We adapted our measures in order to develop favourable habitats in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Last year was a very critical year and we had to implement some draconian measures.
We adapt our fisheries management plans and species at risk measures every year.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Do other witnesses, the people from Health Canada or Transport Canada, have anything to add?
Executive Director, Chemicals Management Division, Department of the Environment
I can speak with regard to toxic substances.
We assess our results in a number of ways. We have very clear targets for the program. We know that by 2020 we need to have assessed 4,300 priority substances. We report, through a CMP progress report, every six months on how we're doing in getting through those substances. We also report our results through the CEPA annual report. We have those targets.
Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, we have timelines for putting in place risk management instruments for substances that are found to be toxic. We have 24 months to propose a draft instrument and then another 18 months to finalize it, so we have time clocks built into the CEPA legislation.
We do program evaluations. Our audit and evaluation branch will be starting an evaluation of the chemicals management program, looking at how both Health Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada are delivering the program.
Those are ways that we measure overall program results. We also do performance measurement for both our risk management instruments and our substances management. Risk management looks at how a particular—
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
We're beyond our time. Thank you very much. We're going to cut it off there.
Executive Director, Chemicals Management Division, Department of the Environment
Okay. No problem.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
If the Conservatives would like to continue with that, they will have at least two more rounds.
Mr. Stetski, we'll go over to you.
Wayne Stetski Kootenay—Columbia, NDP
Thank you for being here today. As a former public servant, I really appreciate the work that you do.
Commissioner, it's always a pleasure to see you. You always fill the room whenever you're presenting, and you do very important work.
I want to sort of backdrop my questions with this. When you're trying to look after any species, it has to start with science, and then there's regulation and then enforcement.
Commissioner, I'm not sure whether this is a fair question—if not, I'll narrow it down—but how do you think government is doing these days with science? As you know, there were thousands of public servants laid off back in 2012 under the Conservative government, which was shameful, and I'll use the word “shameful”.
How are we doing in science and how are we doing in enforcement? Then I'm going to ask some of the departmental people directly—