Evidence of meeting #38 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 cepa.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Parisa A. Ariya  James McGill Professor, Departments of Chemistry and Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, McGill University, As an Individual
Bill Erasmus  Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations
Jason McLinton  Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada
Channa Perera  Director, Generation and Environment, Canadian Electricity Association
Ahmed Idriss  Senior Advisor, Environmental Policy, Capital Power Corporation, Canadian Electricity Association

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

No, it's okay. If you have a finish to that thought, go ahead.

4:30 p.m.

Director, Generation and Environment, Canadian Electricity Association

Channa Perera

Exactly. Thank you, Madam Chair.

In terms of that investment in carbon capture and storage, it is world-leading, and other countries are looking at Canada to learn from SaskPower's experience. I might say, in terms of Capital Power, quite a few years ago they invested in ultra-supercritical technology as well to bring down emissions from their coal-fired plant.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Thank you very much.

Next up is Ms. Duncan.

4:30 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The panel shouldn't be offended, but immediately after finishing my questions, I have to run. I should be catching a taxi right now. My wonderful colleague from Saskatchewan, Sheri Benson, will then replace me and ask questions on the second round.

My first question is to Chief Erasmus. It's great to see you here. I'm glad to see you're continuing to advise on chemical controls.

You're probably aware that your colleague in Alberta, Melody Lepine, has also testified before us. She has raised very deep concerns for the northern-environment communities about deformed fish; rabbits with extra genitals; large fish kills; elevated metals such selenium, arsenic, and cadmium; PAH levels; and exceedances of CCME guidelines for heavy metals. The Mikisew Cree, the Athabasca Chipewyan, and the Fort McKay First Nation have for three decades been asking for the federal government to initiate a health study of the impacts of the oil sands. I know that the Dene people have also spoken out, because the Mackenzie Basin is impacted as well; all your waterways and airsheds are connected.

I'm wondering if you think it's time for the federal government.... The federal Minister of Health has a mandatory duty to look into health concerns that are brought to her attention. What do you think should happen in the law or practice to finally get the federal government to assert their responsibilities and initiate these health studies?

4:35 p.m.

Regional Chief, Northwest Territories, Assembly of First Nations

Chief Bill Erasmus

That is a very good question.

I was alluding to that earlier. For example, if you look at our original agreements, we have historic treaties, pre-confederation treaties, and modern land claim agreements. In our area up north, we have the Tlicho agreement, for example, that's been in effect for 11 years. They have a huge land mass of 36,000 square kilometres and they own the surface and the sub-surface of that land. They have legislative authority over it, including taxing powers. Part of their agreement, which is a constitutionally protected document, says that the quality and the quantity of water, and the flow of water, has to be protected.

What you're talking about is this. If I'm up north, the water comes from the south, so whatever happens in the south affects us as the water basin goes to the Arctic Ocean. It doesn't only affect us; it goes internationally to the global circumpolar world. Canada has to be very cognizant of that. This is not just a domestic question. If our agreement, for example, says that the quality and the quantity has to be adhered to, then there is a mandatory, legal obligation on the part of Canada to come clean with that.

If you look at that same agreement, there are seven pages that deal with international matters. When Canada is dealing with these issues, they are legally obligated to go to the Tlicho and talk to them about the issues that may affect them. That includes the testing of health. We're being affected up north. The dam, Site C, is being proposed there but there were never hearings up north. All hearings were south of 60°. The waters upstream from us come north so we will be affected. That's not to talk about the project at all. The project is one thing, but the results from that are another. You're quite accurate in the way you're approaching it.

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Thank you very much.

I'd like to put my second question to the Canadian Electricity Association. I've worked with the Canadian Electricity Association since about the year 2000 on coming up with a framework for the electricity sector in Alberta for emissions. Of course, that's a code word for coal power in my province.

The sector has slowly reduced its emissions over time, frankly because of pressure by the population, not because of voluntarily coming forward. Nonetheless, 40% of the sulphur dioxide and NOx in Alberta comes from coal-fired power, which is still emitting 30 kilograms a year of mercury. No amount of mercury is safe. There is a lot of lead, cadmium, hexachlorobenzene, dioxins, furans, PAHs, arsenic, and a very significant source of carbon. There has been a lot of complaints by the coal industry against this sped-up phase-out of coal-fired power. The complaints are about the fact that these are stranded assets and that the owners of the assets should receive compensation.

I have a simple question to the coal sector. For 40 years you've been using the airshed for free, causing unbelievable health impacts that are finally, since 2012, being documented. That is why the former Conservative government finally pushed for a somewhat quicker phase-out of the power. Don't you think that it's more appropriate that maybe the sector would be thinking about compensating the governments for the long-term health impacts and not trying to stop the quicker phase-out of the sector?

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

You have a very short opportunity to give a quick response because we're almost out of time.

4:40 p.m.

Senior Advisor, Environmental Policy, Capital Power Corporation, Canadian Electricity Association

Ahmed Idriss

I'm here representing the Canadian Electricity Association, the CEA. The coal issue, the one that Ms. Duncan talked about, is Alberta-specific. There are negotiations happening with the provincial government, under non-disclosure. I really don't have any access to it. I would be really uncomfortable to try to reply. I don't have enough information to answer your question about the compensation.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

You're out of time.

4:40 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Thank you.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Mr. Gerretsen.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. McLinton, you talked about section 71 and the complications, perhaps the cumbersomeness of searching for 2,000 different chemicals. I'm curious whether you think that section 71 is effective at properly penalizing organizations or individuals for non-compliance.

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

Jason McLinton

As I understand it, section 71 is not the provision that contains penalties. Those are in other sections of the act.

As I said before, CEPA's CMP, chemicals management plan, is recognized as a world leader, so I think it does a really good job at penalizing the bad players.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Are you aware of any that have been penalized?

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

Jason McLinton

Not in the retail sector, no. I'm not aware of any.

The point that I was making with regard to section 71 is that it is highly effective. I think the chemicals management is highly effective when it comes to people who make chemicals and import those big drums and trains full of chemicals.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

But not at the retail level....

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

Jason McLinton

Not on the glassware and the microphones and—

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

You represent the retail level.

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Okay, so maybe I would expect that statement from you.

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

Jason McLinton

It's when you get the lawyers involved. It's the lawyers who say, “It's a legal document and therefore in order to cover your due diligence, write a letter to every single supplier you have because you never know.” Then, it just becomes an exercise in red tape.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Do you think there should be punishment for non-compliance, penalties that are followed through with?

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

Jason McLinton

For people who fail to report, absolutely.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Including retailers?

4:40 p.m.

Senior Director, Retail Council of Canada

Jason McLinton

Absolutely. For people who knowingly withhold information, absolutely yes.