Evidence of meeting #33 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 parks.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Okay, so it's still not completed, I guess is the thing. This bill will do that. That's for sure.
With regard to the infrastructure and the other types of issues that have been raised here, is it not true that in the parks management agreements, those things are worked out with the municipalities, the provinces, and so forth?
1:25 p.m.
Senior Vice-President, Operations, Parks Canada Agency
No, that is not correct, in fact.
1:25 p.m.
Senior Vice-President, Operations, Parks Canada Agency
The management planning process, first of all, is not a binding process. Management plans are directional documents that we must, for every park and site in the country, have in place on a 10-year rotational basis. Those set out the direction, but they are non-binding. There is nothing binding within management plans.
The other piece is that for all of those, we would actually need agreements. One of the pieces on those agreements is that in many cases, you as parliamentarians will need the agreements in place in order to say you have free and clear title so that you can gazette those lands. Until that is done, you have that issue before you as parliamentarians.
1:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Right, but the parks management agreement, though, actually creates the structure for those discussions. When you have, for example, the City of Windsor, say, the Province of Ontario—
1:25 p.m.
Senior Vice-President, Operations, Parks Canada Agency
I'm sorry. No. That is not correct with management plans. They do not set that up.
1:25 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Okay, so it might be that somehow we can amend that through the bill and work on this if that's the case. We've been told differently, but I'll trust what you're saying here, obviously.
If the municipalities have agreements and the province has an agreement, similar to, for example, the Rouge, isn't it going to be a lot easier when there's agreement? Let's say, for example, that in these situations the City of Windsor is saying that they want to have the federal government assume these lands. The province is going in that direction as well. Doesn't that make all that co-operation a lot easier?
1:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
Yes. That's why we have the partnership table, with those partners at the table, in order to work through some of these issues.
As my colleague has stated, liabilities in these types of things tend to get worked out in the negotiation time ahead of the formal establishment, so that the management plan then becomes about how we're going to collectively operate and manage the park and the goals and the visions for it.
1:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
In the establishment of protected areas, we start normally with the feasibility process, where everybody is invited to the table and given the opportunity to examine whether they're interested in it.
1:25 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
If everybody agrees to that, we move to the planning and the negotiations part. That's where we resolve. There could be licences or title issues, or we may need to do surveys, etc. We set the boundary in that stage. Once we have all agreed to that and we have all the proper agreements in place, the park is established and the management plan is done.
1:30 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Okay. That's great. That's actually good news. The City of Windsor wants to do this, so it's a just a matter of agreeing to those negotiations and those elements.
That's actually good news. I want to make sure that's not going to be a problem with the bill. The City of Windsor has to agree to, for example, transfer property. All those things will then be discussed during that time process.
1:30 p.m.
Senior Vice-President, Operations, Parks Canada Agency
Well, that would be one of the things that you will need to look at, I think, as the committee, and as the committee brings the report forward. It's that process, in fact, around the timing.
If I can just use an example, if today there is any issue around title on the lands that the city holds—we don't know, as nobody has done that title work—as it goes forward, then in fact you would have to amend what is in front of the committee today in order to take those title pieces into effect.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you.
We'll have to end on that point. That's a good point.
We'll go to the second round now. We're starting with Mr. McLean for five minutes.
October 28th, 2022 / 1:30 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, witnesses.
It's informative, in that nothing is simple, it seems, when we're getting things done through the government.
I do note in your brief—and it's the first question that I would like to ask—that the Rouge national park is the only one that has been set up under its own legislation so far. Is that the only national urban park in Canada?
1:30 p.m.
Senior Vice-President, Operations, Parks Canada Agency
It is the only national urban park in Canada administered by Parks Canada, yes.
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
There's no legislation that already exists that says this is how national urban parks will be set up. Each of these is going to have different legislation, a different footprint.
1:30 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
Right now, it's just the Rouge, and that is why we're moving forward with a policy approach. It's in order to determine the way to do this. It's not normal to legislate each park individually, so at some point, if we want to consider legislation.... Again, it's not required to name a national urban park, but if we wanted to do legislation, we would want to be considering how that legislation relates to the other national urban parks we're setting up. Presumably, we would like to have one bill, potentially, and not legislation for each unique park.
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Yes, and that's what I'm asking. There is one piece of legislation right now for one park. You just can't mirror that with every other park that you're going to do here. It should be a fairly simple overlay for a park such as the one proposed in this bill.
1:30 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
I'm sorry. I'm not sure I understand the question.
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
On the principles of a national urban park here that you're looking at setting up—
1:30 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
Yes.