Evidence of meeting #119 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was habitat.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, but I would like a clarification.
Will the minister be here on Wednesday?
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Yes, it's confirmed. He will definitely be here, unless he's unable to attend.
I was going to welcome you all after a long summer break, but since we saw each other recently, I've already had the opportunity to do so.
Mr. Godin is here today replacing Mr. Leslie, I assume, and Mr. Martel is replacing Mr. Deltell. Mr. Boulerice, who is participating in the meeting by video conference, is replacing Ms. Collins. Mr. Drouin is replacing Mr. van Koeverden. Finally, Mr. Simard is accompanying Ms. Pauzé.
Obviously, you are aware of the measures put in place to prevent acoustic incidents. For example, when you're not using your earpiece, please place it on the sticker on your desk as indicated.
Today's meeting is a long one, ending at 1:30, with three panels.
First, we have Dr. Justina Ray, who is president and senior scientist of the Wildlife Conservation Society of Canada. We also have Mr. Martin Bouchard, director of the Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers. We also have three representatives from the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, Yvan Duceppe, treasurer of the CSN, as well as political advisor Julien Laflamme and union advisor Isabelle Ménard. Finally, we have two representatives of the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, Mr. Denis Bolduc, who is the general secretary of the FTQ, and Mr. Patrick Rondeau, who is a union advisor, Environment and Just Transition.
You each have five minutes for your opening remarks.
We'll start with you, Ms. Ray. You have five minutes.
Dr. Justina Ray President and Senior Scientist, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, As an Individual
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the committee for the invitation to speak to you today. My name is Justina Ray. I am president and senior scientist of Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, but I'm also an adjunct professor at the University of Toronto and Trent University. I'm a wildlife biologist by training. I've worked on caribou one way or the other for almost 20 years, conducting field research in Ontario; leading evaluations on caribou status for the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, or COSEWIC; and advising both provincial and federal governments on caribou recovery and critical habitat.
My remarks today will directly address the first point of the committee's study—the threats facing caribou and the measures that can be taken to protect them. Here I will outline why this proposed emergency order is not a radical intervention; why the available scientific evidence is sufficient to act; and why this intervention, while necessary for the goals of caribou recovery, is merely a stopgap measure.
The first point is that based on my review of the available evidence, the emergency order is not only justified but could also have been extended even further when looking at the point of view of caribou. It targets three boreal caribou populations in Quebec at exceptionally high risk of extinction, but our evidence shows that the order could have been applied to additional populations in Quebec that are also in poor shape. As well, the scope of the order is conservative, with limited areas of interest within each area or each range, and the prohibitions don't restrict everything. For example, they don't restrict mining activities. Overall, this proposed intervention, from the point of view of caribou recovery, is a restrained response to a well-documented emergency situation.
My second point is that it's a common tactic for those uncomfortable with the outcomes of scientific assessments to call for additional studies to be sure. I would strongly advise not to capitulate to this narrative. Boreal caribou are among the most well-studied wildlife species in Canada. Research consistently shows that habitat disturbance leads to population declines. This relationship has been documented repeatedly across multiple jurisdictions across Canada and acknowledged by governments, including that of Quebec.
For one thing, the population surveys that form the basis of this assessment were diligently conducted by Quebec government biologists to the highest of standards, yielding high-quality data that provide a clear picture of the status of boreal caribou populations in the province. Similarly, habitat loss and degradation in these areas have been thoroughly documented. For these three populations in the proposed emergency order, habitat loss has been continuously increasing to such an extent that more precise estimates of this would not change the overall diagnosis of the situation. There is very little habitat of any kind left in these three ranges, so more sophisticated or detailed habitat analyses are unnecessary. In this vein, delaying intervention under the guise of seeking more data only increases the risk of irreversible losses and makes future recovery efforts more costly and complex if your goal is to recover caribou.
My third point is that the proposed emergency order is fundamentally an emergency stopgap measure designed to address an immediate crisis. This is a critical and urgent step to prevent further declines while more permanent systemic solutions are developed and implemented. It's important to emphasize that neither Canada nor Quebec has stated that preventing extinction alone is sufficient, nor have they said that other factors should justify the loss of these populations. They still maintain that they want to have self-sustaining populations, but there's been no meaningful action beyond the monitoring program initiated in 2017. A lot of experience tells us that these kinds of continued delays reduce the likelihood of success and will lead to higher costs in the long term.
In conclusion, the scientific evidence supporting the need for emergency intervention is clear and compelling. Accordingly, the proposed emergency order is not an overreaction but rather a necessary and proportionate response to a crisis that has been brewing for years—if, again, the goal is to recover caribou to self-sustaining populations. The situation is not unique to Quebec. Similar challenges exist across Canada where boreal caribou populations are declining and have reached or are reaching emergency status.
That's it. Thank you so much.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you, Ms. Ray.
We'll go now to Martin Bouchard from the Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers.
Martin Bouchard Director, Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers
Thank you.
Dear committee members, participants, the Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers, or AQEF, thanks you for the opportunity to comment on the emergency order for the protection of boreal caribou.
The AQEF was born out of a desire by the forestry industry to be recognized, consulted and heard, because it is the first link in the supply chain for the sustainable and responsible management of our forests. Founded in June 2021, our association has, if we include 30 or so associate members, more than 150 active entrepreneur members, whereas it is estimated that 500 members now make up this group in Quebec. They are all very hard-working people who are passionate about this beautiful and great resource with its many functions, and whose approach is integrated, open and respectful.
By appearing before you today, we wish to highlight significant concerns related to the proposed emergency order to protect caribou, whose potential implications could have a considerable, even disastrous, impact on our industry and on the dozens of communities that depend on it.
We understand and share the general concern for wildlife conservation and the preservation of our natural environment. Caribou are indeed an iconic species, and taking appropriate measures to protect them is justifiable. However, it is essential that decisions relating to their protection be balanced and take into account the broader economic, social, environmental, and even cultural impacts.
According to available and reported information, the proposed order to create enhanced protection zones for caribou in certain forestry regions of Quebec, Val-d'Or, Charlevoix and Pipmuacan could severely hamper forestry activities, including by suspending operations in key areas designated as critical habitat for caribou.
You've no doubt heard this from other stakeholders in the course of your study, but I repeat that the federal government and Quebec's chief forester both estimate annual losses of allowable cuts, or volumes of wood harvested, at 4%. This amounts to 1.4 million fewer cubic metres per year. These estimated losses are greater than those caused by last year's terrible forest fires.
The results of an impact analysis produced by Environment and Climate Change Canada and Natural Resources Canada last August were widely reported in the media. According to the study, such a decline in allowable cuts would represent a loss of $670 million to $895 million over 10 years for the Quebec economy, would have repercussions in at least 28 communities and would affect 1,400 workers.
As reported by Radio-Canada, in particular, this analysis produced by the federal government lists 35 sawmills that could be directly affected by the emergency order, as well as 10 wood product manufacturers, three pulp and paper mills, two cogeneration and energy product facilities, and three other co‑op-type businesses. That's a total of 53 companies.
However, this seems to exclude a major player that operates from the forest bed right up to the mill, that is to say the forest artisans, the forest contractors. For generations, these true small businesses have partnered with people who are passionate about forest management and who make their living from it in the broadest sense. Depriving them of 1.4 million cubic metres of wood threatens all these businesses with closure and bankruptcy.
In harvesting alone, if you consider that a typical business has an average annual volume of 60,000 cubic metres, has invested $2 million or more in modern equipment consisting of a feller, a transporter, three pickup trucks and a truck, and has a team of five to six employees, including the owner, that's at least 25 harvesting businesses that, if deprived of more than $49 million in revenue per year, will be in grave danger of closure or bankruptcy or will be forced to pivot.
That's not counting all the people who work on the roads or loading and transporting this renewable resource, who will suffer just as much, without a doubt.
By extrapolation, it is easy to estimate double the direct consequences for our forestry entrepreneurs if we maintain the sealed cocoon approach. We are convinced that these restrictions will compromise the viability of many businesses. They will result in the loss of quality jobs, a significant decrease in cash flow between businesses and, inevitably, a form of devitalization of a number of communities that depend heavily on forestry, which will at the same time reduce their quality of life and their ability to support local infrastructure and services.
Above all, we must not forget that forestry contractors live, invest and get involved in their communities. They are a vector for vitality and momentum at the local level. They pay taxes, make purchases, give sponsorships and provide people with quality work, allowing them to support their families and in turn spend money in their own communities and live comfortably in a place of active belonging.
In a nutshell, the point we want to make here is that everything is interconnected, as you no doubt know, and that we must avoid the exodus and impoverishment of Quebec and the regions in their niches of excellence—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Mr. Bouchard, your time is up, unfortunately, but you will have the opportunity to answer questions and raise all the points you wished to emphasize.
We'll now go to the CSN.
Mr. Duceppe, you have the floor.
Yvan Duceppe Treasurer, Confédération des syndicats nationaux
First of all, thank you very much for having us here today.
As you may know, the CSN represents more than 330,000 members in all sectors across Canada. I'd like to mention that we represent many workers in the forestry sector.
Let's talk about why we're here today.
Of course, let's acknowledge that the Government of Quebec did not react as it should have. We've been waiting for some years now for it to table a plan to protect the caribou. Unfortunately, that keeps being postponed. We're not here to oppose the emergency order, because we think there is a real urgency. That said, ideally, we would still like to see agreements negotiated with the provinces, as far as possible. I understand that did not transpire in this case.
If we are participating in this committee's study today, it's because we're aware that the implementation of this order will have repercussions. To protect the caribou, obviously, you have to cut down fewer trees. That's been proven by scientists. It is essential. Beyond that, what we have before us is above all a clear illustration of the need for a just transition. That is fundamental. The federal government itself signed an agreement at COP27 in favour of a just transition. We understand that it is often related to oil, coal, and so on, but it goes beyond those sectors. It also affects forestry, which we are discussing at the moment, and it can also have an impact on other sectors, such as recreational tourism and fisheries. We believe that a just transition plan is fundamental to maintaining social protection and mitigating consequences for both workers and communities.
We therefore say yes to an emergency order, but we must plan for that sort of thing.
For example, if workers are affected, why not provide them with training so that they can diversify and pivot? We could provide a transitional measure for workers who have difficulty pivoting.
We recognize that this order could lead to a decline in allowable cuts. For example, I heard Quebec's chief forester present data and talk about significant losses. There is some evidence, though, that it might be somewhat less severe. I don't deny that there will be consequences, but perhaps there should be a more neutral space to concretely measure potential losses.
In our opinion, to find solutions, there will have to be interdepartmental and intergovernmental co‑operation, because that will involve a number of projects. We will have to move forward, and that includes the forest industry itself. Could it focus more on value-added products, for example? We have been trying to achieve that for many years, and we must continue along that path.
Ultimately, we are saying that we need measures to support people properly during the transition, whether that be through employment insurance or training programs. We have to find ways to provide targeted assistance to those who will be affected.
For us, a transition is required. Earlier, we talked about forest fires. We are aware of that, but climate change bears some of the blame. So a transition is needed in the short, medium and long term, but we want it to be fair and to take into account both workers and communities.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you, Mr. Duceppe.
I now give the floor to Mr. Bolduc, from the FTQ.
Denis Bolduc General Secretary, Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec
Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for inviting the FTQ to speak on the emergency order to protect boreal caribou under the Species at Risk Act, as well as on the consequences for forestry workers.
For the FTQ, the forestry sector accounts for 15,000 members, mainly with Unifor and the Syndicat des métallos.
We are grateful to the committee for inviting us here today, of course, even though we don't have any praise for the current government's management of the file. Since 2017, the FTQ has been trying to convince the Canadian government that it is urgent to implement a just transition policy, an internationally accepted concept that is endorsed by Canada under the International Labour Organization and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
By limiting the debate on the just transition to only the fossil fuel sector and creating a toxic landscape around the term, the Canadian government has foregone all the tools at its disposal to deal with a crisis such as the one we are experiencing with the caribou and to ensure the survival of the forestry industry.
For years, the FTQ has been urging the various levels of government to look at the challenges of the green transition and to plan it with those who will be affected by it, in the various economic sectors. The current urgent need to protect boreal caribou with no plan other than to identify protected areas exemplifies this situation perfectly.
From the outset, the FTQ has supported the need to protect boreal caribou. The central labour organization attended COP15 on biodiversity, held in Montreal in 2022, and supported the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal agreement, which aims to protect 30% of land and oceans by 2030. It is imperative that these supports be accompanied by just transition measures, and we have reminded the federal government of this on many occasions. The FTQ is consistent about the imperatives of the climate crisis and the collapse of biodiversity, but it is also pragmatic about the needs of its members and their community. One crisis must not lead to another.
The FTQ also welcomed the passing of the Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act, but it criticized the fact that the act did not really include just transition elements. The act looks forward, but it leaves workers behind. It does not help prepare the workforce for a transition and a transformation. The caribou issue is a prime example of that.
We fully understand Ottawa's decision to act, since Quebec is not taking this seriously. The situation is urgent, and the biodiversity crisis must be taken seriously. It is not simply a matter of saving a species, but an entire ecosystem, which is an essential ingredient for the survival of life. If the climate crisis were a disease, saving biodiversity would be one of the cures.
We could have supported this order, but the ministers should not have been left with no solutions for workers. For two years now, we have been asking for a joint meeting with Environment and Climate Change Canada and Natural Resources Canada. We appreciate that the Department of the Environment has met with us on this a few times, but we're still waiting for a joint meeting with the two ministers concerned. We have presented a number of potential solutions and received a number of encouraging signals, but no concrete steps have been taken.
We are aware that the federal government's basket of response measures in Quebec is limited. The FTQ has always called for provincial jurisdictions to be respected. We understand that it is up to the provincial government to take action, which it is not doing. The parameters of the just transition are clear and known to the federal government. The idea is to establish a social dialogue that includes all the parties, including the departments and governments concerned, unions, employers and indigenous peoples. It also means providing a social safety net that is tailored to the situation. In the case of the order, it means rethinking employment insurance—for example, creating a dedicated fund and adapting the measures to the current situation.
The caribou situation is not just about determining how many square kilometres are needed to protect it. It also involves rethinking the forest and the forestry industry.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you, Mr. Bolduc.
We will now move on to questions and answers.
We'll start the first round with Mr. Martel.
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to thank the witnesses for making themselves available for this meeting.
My first question is for Ms. Ray.
Last Friday, I met again with the Boisaco forestry workers. If the order comes into force, the lives of these workers and their families will be shattered—that is guaranteed.
Even if we were to prevent the forestry industry from operating in those areas, we would not be able to reach a disturbance rate below 35%.
Ms. Ray, can you assure us that boreal caribou will be self-sustaining under these circumstances?
President and Senior Scientist, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, As an Individual
In a word, no. I cannot, because my role here is to look specifically at.... Given the goal stated by the province and Canada of self-sustaining caribou populations, I'm just giving a scientific opinion about what that might take.
It is useful to have it be by itself, because if it is decided later that other—
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I'm sorry, Ms. Ray, but I have to interrupt you. Thank you.
My next question is for Mr. Bouchard.
I want to begin by telling you that I had young forestry entrepreneurs visit my office last summer after the big forest fires. We're all aware of the situation. The young entrepreneurs were already very worried about the consequences, given the significant investments they had made.
Can you tell me about those entrepreneurs and their investments?
Director, Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers
Yes, of course.
The business environment in which they operate has changed a great deal. They are having to make major investments in their equipment, not to mention operating costs. Every year, we carry out comparative analyses to monitor changes in costs, and we are noting that it is costing them more and more to do business.
As we know, these are people who have been living off the forest from generation to generation, who work in this industry out of passion and who want to take action in their community. These people were hit by the forest fires. They're seeing a decrease in allowable cuts. They're dealing with the spruce budworm epidemic, as you know. In addition, there are blockades on forestry roads and lumber prices are collapsing. In short, they are sort of caught between a rock and a hard place. So they end up suffering just about every possible consequence.
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Bouchard, am I wrong in saying that, if the forestry sector were to collapse, forestry entrepreneurs would not be the only ones affected? I imagine there would also be consequences for merchants who have sold machines, for mechanics who maintain those machines, and so on.
Am I right?
Director, Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers
Yes, absolutely.
When we talk about cash flow among companies, that's what we're referring to. A forestry entrepreneur buys and consumes local products, invests in their community and even supports it. As far as we're concerned, most of them are small businesses with five or six employees. These are family businesses. Children live in their communities and are themselves local consumers who contribute to the vitality of their community. It is certain that forest-dependent regions will be destroyed if this approach is adopted.
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
It is being said that people have to sit down and talk. Were you involved in any consultations?
Director, Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers
Yes, indeed. We also found out—
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I would like to hear your comments on the consultations you took part in.
Director, Association québécoise des entrepreneurs forestiers
There is a difference between being consulted and being heard. Although we are currently in an emergency debate, we sort of feel that the solutions chosen are ultimately coming from elsewhere and that the solutions proposed by the people in the community and the players on the ground are not really being incorporated. We believe it is important to do that. We feel that putting a glass dome on these territories goes somewhat against the objectives of decarbonization and the fight against greenhouse gases. If our forests are properly logged, managed and used, we will still have added value.
Conservative
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I wonder whether human beings are considered in all of this. Where do we fit in this?