Evidence of meeting #3 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 parks.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I can explain it after this, as I don't want to take up time. Maybe through the clerk, I'll give a point of clarification. I'll—
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
I was listening to your questioning, and I'm thinking that maybe we could save a minute at the very end today and ask for certain reports to be provided to the committee.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We would need to have the committee's agreement to do that. We'll see how everybody feels.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I'm probably going to run out of time soon, but you also talked about the budget. I'm wondering—again, I didn't see it—if you could touch on the breakdown of revenue that Parks Canada generates through user fees and realty fees versus appropriations that come from the tax base.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Is that in here or is that something you have on your...?
12:15 p.m.
Chief Administrative Officer, Parks Canada
Yes, it is. Revenues are on page 11. In a year, Parks Canada makes roughly $120 million in re-spendable revenues. About half of that is from entry fees. The other half is land rents and other lease arrangements from buildings that we rent out or lease out, or from event fees that we charge for the use of a site or a building.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We're down to the very end of your questioning. I wonder if maybe you could quickly put forward what reports you're looking for, and then we can agree to that.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
It's simply if there's a condition assessment report for built heritage to indicate the current condition of the holdings within Parks Canada and whether they are fair or poor. I think the conditions were “fair”, “good”, and “poor”. They're simply ratings. I think there was a figure here about how many assets there are, and I'm just trying to get a sense of where they currently stand.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Okay. If the committee is in agreement, I think I heard two things. One was for an assessment on built heritage and the other one was an assessment of status on where the new parks process is for the ones that are in the hopper. I wonder if we could have those come forward to the committee. There were two issues that you raised.
You understand what the first one was, right?
12:15 p.m.
Chief Administrative Officer, Parks Canada
On the first one, there is a public report that reviews the built asset portfolio of Parks Canada and includes both the heritage side and highways, dams, and waterways. It deals with all 12,000 assets. That is already public, and I can provide it easily.
12:15 p.m.
Chief Administrative Officer, Parks Canada
I guess I'm just trying to figure out if it's more specific than that.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Chief Administrative Officer, Parks Canada
The first one? Okay. No problem.
On the second one, are you asking for a status update on which areas are being considered for new parks establishment?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Yes. In the systems plan, which ones essentially are complete, which ones are under way, and which ones have no negotiations or discussions currently happening for the representative regions? If I could be so bold, I would extend it to not only terrestrial but also marine parks.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Is the committee okay with that? Do we agree to get that information?
Sounds good. Thank you very much.
We'll move on to Mr. Cullen.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you, Chair, and thank you to all our witnesses.
I'll start off with a question for Ms. Smith.
Are the new interim measures announced by the government a few weeks ago in regard to applying climate to the test for new projects also applying to the Pacific NorthWest LNG project in B.C.?
12:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Operations , Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Yes. In the assessment, we had already included the assessment of the direct GHG emissions of the project, and then we asked Environment Canada to produce an analysis of the upstream GHGs that are associated.
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
There's one question we have. It's been said that GHGs are now being taken into consideration, but we don't know how. Is it total volume of GHGs being put out? Is it energy intensity? I just don't understand what tests are being applied.
12:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Operations , Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
We use the volume of GHG emissions as a proxy for determining the magnitude of an adverse effect.
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Right, but the question that proponents want to know about is whether there's some sort of limit. Is it the idea that if you put so many megatonnes in, then it's a green light, and if you go above that, then the CEAA will look at that negatively and not issue a permit?