As we discussed, we are in favour of this motion as it's written. We would like one small change and that's just to provide a written report and basically remove the section on reporting it to the House. All in all, we're very supportive of it.
There are a couple of things I wanted to talk about with respect to this motion in the context of our debate in the last couple of meetings. I'll touch on the constitutionality of looking at watersheds. I think we're all aware of the hydrological cycle and how water travels across borders and knows no boundaries, and the importance of ensuring that we are protecting our most vital resource, both in British Columbia and elsewhere.
I'll provide a reflection on Ontario's maintenance of our greatest natural resource, which is fresh water. These are my personal reflections, not necessarily professional ones. I'm not a scientist, but we have had some really great water scientists here at this committee recently and my observation as somebody who spends a lot of time on the water in Ontario is that we're really lucky to have conservation areas. We're really lucky to have conservation authorities doing the work to do the science, collect the data, look at restoration and develop a base of knowledge around endangered and threatened species.
Just recently in the new Parks Canada development at Rouge National Urban Park, we visited an organic farm that was having some problems with their water table. They were finding that every spring they weren't able to start planting until later in the season than some of their neighbours. The conservation authority came by and determined that, if the creek that runs adjacent to the property ran a little bit slower for one reason or another, their water table would dry up just a little bit earlier in the spring and they'd be able to plant three to four weeks earlier. They did this restoration project and not only did this provide better drainage for the fields, which are in excess of 30 to 40 acres—they plant tonnes and tonnes of varieties of vegetables—but they also found that there were fish species and turtles and frogs that moved into this little area just adjacent to their farm. Since it's an organic farm, they had no concerns about any sort of contamination or anything like that.
Conservation authorities do fantastic work.
When posed with the question, why British Columbia? Obviously, my colleague is from British Columbia, but the question might arise, why is this more of a priority for British Columbia than for others? I would say that it's also a priority for Ontario, but we have an asset and that asset is our conservation authorities. The science and the work that they do in tree planting and in habitat restoration are really extraordinary.
We're entering into the holiday season and people are starting to put up their Christmas trees. I don't know if anybody else on the committee has had this experience in their local community, but in Halton, Conservation Halton actually asks you to drop off your Christmas tree after the season. Take the tinsel and all the decorations off obviously, but the Christmas trees are really useful for habitat restoration to create berms and to provide a barrier between the different species.
I visited the Royal Botanical Gardens between Hamilton and Burlington recently and found that they were using their Christmas trees to do that work. I actually saw this huge line of discarded Christmas trees that were providing a barrier and habitat restoration. They're just doing extraordinary work.
We're lucky in Ontario that we have these conservation authorities, but it's something I think other provinces could emulate. I do think that we're lucky in Ontario.
Moving on to the constitutionality of looking into pollution and looking into how pollution impacts our communities, but particularly indigenous communities, something that was raised by my colleagues from the Conservative Party.... I was told to consider running, and I think we were all told to consider perhaps running in Albertan politics if we are concerned about Alberta's pollution and the impacts of it on the population of Alberta.
Now, I'm concerned about pollution outside of Halton region, not just because I'm concerned about all Canadians but because I also know that pollution knows no boundaries. It doesn't care about borders. Pollution in Halton, whether it's airborne or water-borne, will enter water systems, and those water systems will then have an impact further down the water cycle on millions of people.
I did spend some time reflecting on the comments with respect to whether or not it was useful for a committee in the federal government to study pollution specific to one particular region, or to call on an energy regulator from one particular province to change its behaviour, modify its practices or reconsider its work a bit. I did look, and I provided my colleague from the Conservative Party with an email regarding the federal subject matters.
They're very explicit. It's very clear to me that our study is with respect to our jurisdiction, and we are well within our rights and our domains to look at how pollution impacts various communities, but specifically indigenous communities. That's because federal matters can include—I'll just read it—as the basis of most federal jurisdiction over environmental issues, public property, which means federally owned public property—