Environment Committee on June 9th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have one minute left.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I think those are particularly important for part 9. As the woman from the Tahltan first nation mentioned, it is very important to ensure that the responsibilities under UN DRIP are also observed.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We appreciate all that important information. We are now going to get into questioning.

I want to welcome Wayne Long, who is joining us today. Thank you for being here.

We will start with Mr. Amos.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

To each of our witnesses, thank you for your great preparation. It's really clear that you are ready for this, and you're giving us amazing information. It's much appreciated.

I almost don't even know where to start because there's so much in here. It's such a rich set of testimonies. I'll try to be brief, and you could help me by being brief in your responses.

Ms. Morin, regarding the AFN code of practice around CEPA, was AFN involved in this process back in 1999 at the time of the earlier review? I'm just trying to get a sense of what recommendations have been made in the past by the AFN, since you refer to it extensively, that have been incorporated successfully, and what aspects are lacking. I've heard your message on traditional knowledge, but is there, in particular, a piece around vulnerable populations that Ms. Scott focuses on? I wonder if that's an area of focus.

[Nalaine Morin]

From my read, the review occurred in the early 2000s, and one of the things that was interesting about that review was their engagement and how they went about undertaking the review and summarizing the questions and concerns that they heard.

An important aspect of being involved in a review such as this one is to ensure that you are certainly reaching out to your constituents. That was one of the reasons why I made a point of stating that this is my individual interpretation for your consideration. But in the future, I think it's really quite important that, when making the efforts to consider indigenous views, a specific consultation process be undertaken for that.

From the review that I noted—especially with respect to one of the other witnesses' comments regarding the need to understand the effects not only on local populations but also those who are somewhat removed—when thinking about risk assessment and those sorts of things, we need to make sure that the factors involved are very specific to the populations that require the risk assessment to be done. That was one of the things that came up in the information I've noted to date.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Would you recommend that CEPA be modified so that free, prior, and informed consent be incorporated into the act, particularly around protection of vulnerable populations, ecosystems, or individuals? Or is that legal principle sufficiently incorporated into the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that it need not be embedded here?

[Nalaine Morin]

I would certainly take it into consideration, and yes, I do recommend that it be considered. I say that because, when you're implementing tools like risk assessment and risk management, quite often factors that are local and site specific or important to local indigenous populations are not taken into consideration in the study. That's where principles like free, prior, and informed consent can help not only the local population but also the consideration and the effect of the study.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

My next question goes to Ms. Scott.

The crux of your submission concerns the application of CEPA to vulnerable populations and individuals at vulnerable moments. In the previous review process, between 2005 and 2007, there were recommendations from both the House and Senate sides. I want to reference in particular recommendations 17 and 18 from the House. There's a document that we can forward to you that outlines each of the specific recommendations, but recommendation 17 spoke to protecting the most vulnerable in society, particularly children, by including language similar to the Pest Control Products Act, directing that consideration of vulnerable groups take place in the risk assessment process, including a 10-times safety factor.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have one minute left.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

The amendment was not made by the previous government, but Health Canada notes that specific vulnerabilities of certain populations are taken into account in the risk assessments. How would you respond to that assertion by the government?

[Dr. Dayna Scott]

To a certain extent, during the risk assessment processes, the government has tried to build in these safety factors to take into account vulnerable populations and people within these windows of vulnerability. The trouble, I think, is that for endocrine-disrupting substances, the whole structure of section 64 is not conducive to being able to do that. Really, within section 64, you need less emphasis on exposure. We can say that we, in the act, generally want to consider vulnerable populations, but unless we actually change the operative provisions in the act that are not now serving those populations, we won't actually have that effect.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Sorry, but I'm going to have to cut you off.

Mr. Eglinski, you're up.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I'm going to direct my first question to Ms. Morin.

I've been very involved with aboriginal groups throughout British Columbia and especially in your region and central Alberta. My three local bands, the Alexis First Nation, the O'Chiese, and the Sunchild, are all very progressive bands. They have their own environment departments, and their own economic development agencies, and they are working very well at progressing and modernizing.

I noticed in some of the research I did on you that you worked quite a bit with the mining association in the past. In fact, I think you were appointed as the first nations environment and engineering specialist to the mining industry regarding tailing ponds in the past. I know that the bands are trying to promote new industry in their areas and that they are very concerned about the environmental impact. With regard to aboriginal communities that are looking at resource development while protecting the environment, can you give me some ideas on how you see those things working together or how they are working together?

[Nalaine Morin]

There are a number of good examples across Canada that demonstrate positive working relationships between industry and indigenous groups. One tool that's quite often used to help support or facilitate those is something like an impact-benefit type of agreement. As someone with a technical background who also practises or represents indigenous law, I look at the impact assessment to make sure that these projects are not having an adverse effect on our indigenous values. Through those types of processes, we are able to influence the planning for how these projects come about.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

All three of you have mentioned a lack of communication. Throughout my working career as a police officer, I policed many small rural aboriginal communities. I dealt a lot with seniors. With all the chemicals and so on that are available to buy off the shelf, how do we educate them? How are we going to get that message or how should government and industry get that message out to those people? I think you know, and I know, that most of them don't realize what they're handling or dealing with, so how do we educate them?

I'd like each one of you to answer.

[Nalaine Morin]

You don't hear a lot of information about or awareness of CEPA, or the importance of that piece of legislation. Issuing warnings and holding workshops and those sorts of things will help us to start creating or bridging that awareness gap.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Ms. Scott.

[Dr. Dayna Scott]

I have difficulty recommending something like a labelling or an information-based approach to this.

As you know, I'm worrying a lot about the disparities and the different capacities people have to spend more to buy the bottle that's labelled BPA-free or the sofa that doesn't have flame retardants in it.

The better approach is for us to decide which substances we think are toxic and to take mandatory regulatory action that's going to reduce exposures for everyone over time, rather than to take this information-based approach.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have a different perspective. I don't think it's a case of government or industry educating the public. It's the reverse. It's time to educate the regulators on the need to finally take action on these toxins and to expedite the banning of the ones we already know about, for example, the fire retardant.

There are more constructive ways to do that. I don't think we can expect the soccer mum, the soccer dad, or the general public to have the time or the expertise.

It's incumbent upon the government to establish advisory committees where people, in the long term, are providing advice, are informed, and are helping constructively to recommend which priority substance to tackle. Give them a voice in regulatory hearings on big industrial projects that are going to emit toxins. There are lots of ways we can do it to give a voice to the community.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have about 15 seconds.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

As a quick note, I see that some cards from high school students were passed around earlier. In this regard, I remember that when I was a police officer, the way we educated the public about seat belts was through the kids. Do you think it could work this way, with more education in the schools? Does anybody want to give a quick answer?

[Dr. Dayna Scott]

Sure, I have a quick answer.

More and more, my students are saying that we need these laws to be fair, not only environmentally effective.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Next up is Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I was looking through some of these cards that were sent to us from high school students, I believe. One of them has informed us that high school students do care and want to protect our earth. They go on. I think it's an interesting frame. I'll keep passing them down.