Evidence of meeting #16 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 land.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
I would love to give my two minutes to my very handsome friend on my right here, for one of his great questions.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Thank you very much for that, Mr. Fisher. I do not disagree with anything you just said.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
My question is for the Prospectors and Developers Association.
I think there is a lot of merit to a lot of what you said. It would be very foolish of me to suggest that we don't need minerals and we don't need to be properly mining in order to live in a society with the demands that we have today. Hopefully, one day we will get beyond our need to extract finite resources in order to fulfill those desires.
I am curious. I didn't hear you speak much about balance. Where do you see the balance? Is it going to be...? How do you see the balance between the need to extract these resources and the need to take care of the environmental concerns we have?
Senior Program Director, Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada
Thank you for that question. The focus for us is really on the process. The way you find the balance is by bringing the diverse perspectives together. We believe in that landscape-scale dialogue process, which will allow the people who are directly impacted by the landscape to share their different values and balance out where those ecologically sensitive areas are that really shouldn't be touched, along with where, as Dr. Woodley was saying, you can have co-existence with human activity, whether economic or recreational, within a sensitive area.
For us, that is what the focus is really on—the process by which protected areas are selected. There is some phenomenal work in Canada happening in the provinces and territories already. At the federal level, it is going to be important to build on what they are doing, because they are the ones that manage the land use planning processes. These balancing acts are struck at that level, and we want to make sure that those tables involve the right people and incorporate mineral potential. The risk is that in some processes we have seen—
Senior Program Director, Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada
—the potential is not included.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
I am sorry about that.
Mike Bossio, you can pick up that questioning if you want, or you can—
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
It is hilarious that among Wayne, John, and Mark, I just had all my questions taken away.
No, actually, there is one.
Does industry see areas that could or should be protected, areas that are off limits?
Senior Program Director, Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada
I think there is no argument from PDAC that there are going to be areas that have such ecological or cultural significance that they should be withdrawn from the claim-staking system.
For example, in Ontario, Lesley and I have been very involved with the Mining Act reforms, and one of the things there was no argument from industry about was that sites of aboriginal significance should be taken right off the map. Aboriginal people in Ontario, working with the Government of Ontario, identified those sites, and that information was not shared broadly. Those pieces of territory were taken right off the map so that there could be no staking of exploration or mining in those areas.
Like Mr. Gerretsen, I think it would be foolish of me to say that there aren't parts of the country that should be protected. It is the process by which those sites are chosen that we want to focus on.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Thank you.
I would also like to accentuate the point that this whole conversation started the way it does way too many times. I don't blame Robert. It is a societal shift that needs to occur.
Is there anybody here who actually believes we are in an us-against-them scenario anymore? I think we all recognize that we have to get beyond this and that we need to move in a more sustainable viewpoint.
One thing that was pivotal in the whole COP21 process, which most people don't look at, was that it wasn't just about climate change and GHGs; it was about the 17 sustainable development goals, which we all need to start to work towards if we are going to have a sustainable society. Those three main pillars—social, economic, and environmental—need to take equal consideration in every decision we make as a society moving forward.
Is everybody on that page now? John, go ahead, please.
Director, Government and International Relations, Canadian Cattlemen's Association
I think that's a really excellent point. It's not that people are out to get you or anything like that. It's that people who are very well intentioned tend to focus on a single issue or a single aspect of sustainability. I think the example you just gave about climate change.... Climate change is one aspect of sustainability. Biodiversity is another, as are species at risk, clean water....
Director, Government and International Relations, Canadian Cattlemen's Association
It's all of these things. I think that sometimes you get into these adversarial aspects when you have one group that is trying to achieve one of those objectives and one group trying to achieve another one, but sometimes it's a balance between the two.
One of the things we've tried to do to address it is create the Canadian round table on sustainable beef production. I'm glad to say that we have the WWF as a partner in that, along with the Nature Conservancy of Canada, Nature Canada, and a number of other stakeholder groups. By having that sort of dialogue, you can get everybody's perspective and try to find a path forward by working collaboratively.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
That's great. Thank you.
I'd now like to direct this same thing to Stephen and Eric.
Stephen, you've now seen this rolled out successfully in the Czech Republic, in Brazil, and in Botswana. Has that been really the key framework that people have worked from, that three-pillar aspect of sustainability that drives through the process to the success?
Co-Chair, WCPA-SSC Joint Task Force on Biodiversity and Protected Areas, International Union for the Conservation of Nature
I guess I would say that the model of the three-legged stool is a bit of a simplistic model because, while all of those elements are important in a solution, we have to put nature first as a solution. I think that's the key to sustainability. If we don't put nature first, then we lose. We don't support economies and we don't support people.
Somehow in this mix we lose the fact that we're only here because of nature. It's the only thing that's keeping us alive on this planet in space. Unless we learn to do this as a first priority, we won't be successful. Things aren't going well. The global trends are not happy, and we have to change the way we do business. I think this conversation is an entry into really rethinking our priorities there. A lot of countries are doing this. The sustainable development goals in the UN are trying to do that.
Liberal
Manitoba Campaign Director, Western Canada Wilderness Committee
Thank you.
Those are exactly the same points, and I think it's very important. On the three legs of the pillar, one of the things that's important is that nature is more sensitive than the other pillars. Nature is more sensitive than the different ways in which we can develop an economy. Nature needs a lot more care. In this nature-versus-people thing, if a developer or somebody who's working on the land acts in a certain way and we say that isn't good for nature, they're going to have to find other ways to act. We still can do economic development, but we can't affect nature as much.
That's the biggest part of it. Last night in eastern Manitoba I did a presentation on neonicotinoids and pesticides. The last slide in the presentation shows a picture of a bee on a wall and says, “When we go, we're taking you with us”. That very simple point is that when nature goes, we're gone.
Liberal
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank all the presenters today. It was very interesting to hear from all of you. One thing that I get from this committee and that I hope our committee passes on—I think we're getting this message from all groups—is that we need to have a good, strong, national strategy and pull all the diverse groups together to meet our Aichi goals. I think we can do better than that. I think this country can do better than the 17 Aichi goals. It's going to take a little work, but we can do better.
To my friends from Willmore Wilderness Park, thank you for presenting today. Thank you for what your aboriginal group does on the land in making sure that people get back to the land and conserve the land at the same time.
You're in a unique position in that you're right next to a national park, one of Canada's greatest national parks because it's in my riding—
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
I'll throw that in.
You have a lot of overflow from Canada's national park, especially on the trail systems you've developed. Whether it's hiking, cycling, walking, or horseback riding, you people focus on taking youth back to the land.
This question is going to swing over to your partner Stephanie, because she hasn't had a chance to talk. I know that Stephanie has a career in the environment, and she also worked in the industry located within the boundaries of your park.
In the years that you guys have been there, is the ecosystem improving from what you've seen in the past with the number of people utilizing that area? Either way, have you seen a change or a drastic decline, or is it remaining where it was?
Stephanie Brown Environmental Manager, Willmore Wilderness Foundation
It seems to have remained quite stable. Over the years, with improvements in industry, there has been an increase in what people view as valuable and a push towards protecting those areas that are valuable. The areas within the park have been stable and really very good despite the number of people who go back there.
Executive Director, Willmore Wilderness Foundation
Industry has opened up dinosaur tracks. Also, we have some of the greatest wildlife habitat at Cadomin and some of the reclamation at the mine has created more wildlife habitat, so we're seeing increased populations of wildlife as a result of the industry. It's a co-balance, a dance where the two are working together, I think. It's a holistic approach, as the gentleman said earlier.