Environment Committee on June 9th, 2022

[Catherine Blanchard, Vice-President, Finance Directorate, Parks Canada Agency]

Thank you for your question.

You're right, $4.2 billion is certainly a staggering amount of money. It was used to fund 1,000 projects across the country over the past seven or eight years. Since then, nearly 80% of the projects have been completed. It is true that the funding program will end when the fiscal year ends. We are currently developing a long-term plan to continue investing in the program.

I should point out that the funding allowed us to improve the condition of assets. In the beginning, 50% of our assets were in poor condition, and now, 79% of those assets have been restored.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

You are telling me that you used the funding to take care of assets. Did you consider identifying areas in national parks for tree planting? I'm not talking about improving infrastructure. I'm talking about planting trees.

I'm running out of time. Could you please answer quickly?

[Michael Nadler]

We did plant trees, but we also undertook ecological restoration in some places. For instance, at Fundy National Park, we made improvements to a number of assets. We restored a significant part of the campgrounds for users, but we also made ecological enhancements.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I see.

I want to follow up on something Ms. Taylor Roy mentioned, damage caused by visitors to natural areas.

You talked about visitor outreach to protect natural areas. What I worry about is the damage caused by global warming. Forty years ago, I visited the Athabasca glacier, the largest and most-visited glacier. It's a very popular tourist destination for visitors from all over the world. We took a snow coach, which dropped us off close to the glacier. It recedes more than five metres a year because of the warming climate. That illustrates the damage done by global warming. The glacier is one example, but there must be countless such examples in the parks.

Are you planning for the impacts of the climate crisis?

[Michael Nadler]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask Ms. Upton to answer that, if I may.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Of course.

[Darlene Upton, Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency]

We do a number of different works and studies. Parks Canada is currently developing a carbon atlas series that looks at mapping carbon stores across our places. That will help us in the management moving forward.

We also have a climate adaptation framework. That's been done in collaboration with other partners. With that, we're looking at the data we have in order to predict future impacts of climate. Then we're considering where we need to put ecological corridors, and what types of restoration activities we need to use. In tree planting, for example, we're looking at what types of species we should be planting considering climate change impacts.

We have a national ecological monitoring program with a number of indicators that we can look at to see how climate might be impacting ecological integrity in parks. Of course, it's very complex and sometimes hard to draw direct parallels, but we have a wealth of data we're working with to try to inform our decision-making.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you for that information.

I imagine you allocate funding to that. I don't know whether it's clear in the estimates, but can you give us an idea of how much you spend on education and restoration?

[Darlene Upton]

In terms of restoration, I can share that we're investing over $10 million a year in ecological restoration projects. The priority of those projects is informed by the monitoring program. Where we know ecosystems are under particular stress, that is where we prioritize projects. Those could be habitat restorations. They could be focused on species at risk, prescribed burns to restore habitat, etc.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll go to Ms. Collins now for six minutes.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say thank you to the witnesses, both for being here at our committee today but also for all the work you do with Parks Canada. I really appreciated the questions and comments from my colleagues, especially from Madame Pauzé. When talking about infrastructure, I think we need to think about our forests as green infrastructure and protect them for the long term.

This week the government introduced Bill C-23, the historic places in Canada act, to replace the Historic Sites and Monuments Act. In 2017 the environment committee did a study on protecting Canada's heritage. That included a number of recommendations, some of which are addressed in the new bill. However, some other recommendations, notably ones addressing the need for adequate funding to protect Canada's historic places, were not addressed. The report found that many places of historic significance no longer exist or are in danger of disappearing, often because they have been neglected, and that there is an urgent need to take action to protect and preserve Canada's heritage sites and buildings.

The question is, generally, does Parks Canada currently have adequate funding to ensure the preservation of Canada's existing heritage places?

[Michael Nadler]

Mr. Chair, I'm going to turn the question over to Ms. Loth‑Bown, if I may.

[Christine Loth-Bown, Vice-President, Indigenous Affairs and Cultural Heritage, Parks Canada Agency]

With respect to funding for our heritage assets, as part of the broader funding allocated to the organization for asset maintenance and rehabilitation, we focus on our heritage assets. The legislation that you noted will further seek to protect and conserve. It puts in place the legal requirement for all federally owned assets to follow the standards and guidelines.

The bill that the minister tabled earlier this week—Bill C-23, the historic places act—will apply to federal historic places. It will also make changes to the Historic Sites and Monuments Board and add three additional members.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The committee's recommendation from 2017 recommended that the national cost-sharing program for heritage places be restored to $10 million per year. The current amount available for 2022-23 is $2 million.

What are the implications of the funding gap for Canada's heritage places?

[Christine Loth-Bown]

Yes, the funding right now is $2 million. Over the past five years, we have had $20 million, with 177 projects. With the $2 million now, we had an oversubscribed program. We could have funded 10 times the number of projects than we currently do with the $2 million.

It is a key tool for us to be able to build partnerships with municipal heritage organizations. With federal, provincial and territorial heritage organizations, it is a 50% cost-share program. With increased resources, we would be able to use that tool to build greater partnerships and have greater examples of protected heritage across Canada.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The departmental results report shows that Parks Canada's target for the number of natural and cultural places managed co-operatively with indigenous peoples hasn't been met.

If Bill C-23 is passed, how would it impact how the agency works with indigenous peoples to co-operatively manage culturally or historically significant places?

[Christine Loth-Bown]

Specifically, Bill C-23 responds to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 79(i), adding three distinctions-based indigenous members to the Historic Sites and Monuments Board—one Inuit, one Métis and one first nation. It would prescribe in legislation that when looking at nationally designated historic people, places or events, all indigenous perspectives are brought to bear and indigenous knowledge is brought into consideration with these historic designations.

In addition to that, Parks Canada continues to have cultural practices whereby we look at opportunities to work with first nations communities. For example, recently Parks Canada worked with the Poundmaker family and the Poundmaker first nation to repatriate Poundmaker's staff back to the family.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you.

You mentioned that Bill C-23 would address the piece around representatives for first nations, Inuit and Métis on the Historic Sites and Monuments Board. The committee report actually recommended a number of pieces to put the government in line with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 79.

Can you or anyone else give an update on the progress towards achieving the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 79?

[Christine Loth-Bown]

I can.

There were three components to call to action 79. Section (i) was the legislative changes that are proposed in Bill C-23.

The second component was around working with first nations to tell stories at our sites and places and to ensure that our cultural heritage is reflective of the heritage of all indigenous history, including difficult histories. We have been working closely, since 2018, with budget resources to be able to support over 30 projects across the country to have indigenous voices and perspectives at our sites and places.

The third component is to update our cultural resource management policy, which guides how we maintain our cultural resource assets to ensure that indigenous perspectives are brought throughout that. We are working through that policy framework. We have also established an indigenous cultural heritage advisory committee that works closely with Parks Canada on that.

As part of that cultural policy review and the legislation, we held engagement sessions across the country to get the perspectives of first nations communities on cultural resource management.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We have time for one more round. I'll just have to shave a bit off of each question. We'll do four, four, two and a half, two and a half, four and four.

We'll start with Mr. Carrie.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a lot to talk about today.

First of all, I really appreciate all the work you do at Parks Canada. I really enjoyed my time working with you. I was curious to see if we could get a little update on some of the projects I was working on way back when.

I want to ask you about the Rouge National Urban Park, the first urban national park, and how that's coming along and setting a precedent for future urban national parks; the canal system and the infrastructure deficit, and how things are going with those; the hours of operation; the Trans-Canada Highway upgrades for safe passages and ecological corridors; and, of course, the workforce at Parks Canada. I'm wondering how the seasonal workers and temporary workers are doing and the effects of COVID.

That's kind of where I was going, and let's see how far we get.

Maybe I could ask you a bit about the Rouge National Urban Park. I think some of the friendly faces around worked pretty hard on that. I remember Alan worked hard, and I think, Andrew, you might have worked pretty hard on that one, too.

I know the goal was to move it towards ecological integrity, and that was one of the stumbling blocks with the province. I'm wondering how the investments are going at the Rouge. I know there was a dump in there, some real estate, some roads, hydro lines, pipelines and highways. I was wondering how things are going with the Rouge National Urban Park. Do you have the funds to do what you need to do down there?

[Michael Nadler]

Mr. Chair, I'm going to turn that one to Andrew. He'd probably be the best suited to respond and could probably even touch on some of the other items the member raised.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

All right. We have four minutes, Andrew.

[Andrew Campbell]

Yes, I'm going to have to go very quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It's much less than that, Colin.