Environment Committee on Feb. 15th, 2024

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I really liked the figure you used, Ms. Ito, because it illustrates what one of my constituents told me. We cannot have a healthy economy without a healthy environment.

Can you elaborate on this very simple conclusion that one of my constituents told me about? The municipalities in my riding recognize that failing to address climate change comes with a major financial cost.

As I said earlier, water shortages, extreme climate events and harmful insects are raising concerns for farmers and for the resiliency of municipal infrastructures in my riding. All of this is detrimental to farmers' crops and to municipalities. We cannot have a healthy economy if nature is not thriving and the environment is not healthy.

Can you provide more details on that? How can economic health and environmental health be integrated?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is that for Ms. Kavanagh?

It's for Ms. Ito. Is she still there?

[Mumta Ito]

Yes, I'm still here.

Yes, of course. As I was trying explain in the beginning, if we really want to take an integrated approach and we want to resolve our issues, we have to think long term. The problems that our society has created are partly or, I would say, primarily caused by some of the assumptions that are embedded within our legal system that have allowed our economies to develop in the ways that they have. It's allowed us to over-exploit the natural world.

If we are really going to turn the tide on that, I feel that we have to start with a new beginning, and we have to look at our structures of law and re-establish that interrelatedness, this understanding that there can be no human health without ecological health and to see how can we embed that within our legal structures—

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Ito.

That is exactly what I was referring to.

I will now give Ms. Damoff the rest of my speaking time.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here.

My question is for Great Lakes Fishery.

It's nice to see you, and it's been wonderful to work with you over the years to support the good work that you do. I know that my colleague Vance Badawey has made it his mission to support the good work that you do.

In your presentation, you talked about being border blind. A few years ago, I think it was 2019, we advocated for increased funding, and we were able to get it for you. However, you live within the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and, when you talk about borders, being the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I know that there must be challenges for you living in fisheries and then crossing over with the U.S.

I'm wondering if you could talk to the committee and maybe make a recommendation on how your agency should work in that whole border-blind mentality.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Answer briefly, please, if you can, sir.

[Gregory McClinchey]

Sure.

In the United States, we are structured. We have an interface into government, so we interface with the U.S. Department of State. Congress appropriates money to the State Department, the State Department exchanges financial accountability and dollars with us, and then we work with partners across the spectrum to execute our programming. That works very well and has allowed multiple partnerships to spring up over the years that have saved the Government of the United States and the various state governments millions and even hundreds of millions of dollars.

In Canada, it's slightly different. We have an interface where Parliament appropriates money to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and then the discussion goes between us and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The nuance there is that we also contract with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, which has created some challenges and some barriers to those partnerships. In order to remedy that conflict of interest and certainly to allow partnerships to expand more broadly, we've recommended a mirror process to that in the United States, where we would be nested within Global Affairs Canada, interface with them on budget accountability and all of those kinds of things, and still work hand in glove with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the other partnerships that spring out of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll have time for Madame Pauzé and Mr. Boulerice, and then we'll have to stop.

You have the floor, Ms. Pauzé.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Many thanks to all our witnesses for helping us better understand the issues relating to water, an essential resource.

Ms. Ito, I listened to your 2016 TED talk. Your 15-minute talk was clear, concise and inspiring. You did however refer to a complete change in paradigm. In my opinion, it takes a long time to change paradigms, yet I think the climate situation and our relationship with nature are in a state of crisis.

Should we not instead change our collective values relating to nature?

[Mumta Ito]

Yes, exactly. The reason that I've been advocating in the way that I have for a change in the legal system is that it's such a powerful way to shift societal norms. Originally, when corporate rights were brought in, there was a massive outcry. Nobody could even envisage how a being that was not even a being and just existed on paper could even be the subject of rights, but now it's massively empowered, this vehicle called the corporation. It led to a whole different economic structure.

I believe, in the same way, that by embedding the idea that—

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I'm sorry to interrupt you, Ms. Ito. but I do not have much speaking time.

Other witnesses have spoken about the rights of nature. One witness pointed out in fact that we can establish all kinds of rights, but they have to be upheld. As we are seeing right now, fundamental human rights are not being upheld, particularly in the Israel and Hamas war. It might be useful to establish all kinds of rights for nature, but there will have to be limits for the people who do not uphold them.

Isn't that the case?

[Mumta Ito]

Yes, absolutely.

There has to be an enforceability to the rights as well, but how we enforce them.... Whether we do that by using the rights as a tool to evolve our societal structures, our economic system, our agriculture system and our food system, or we use the rights just as a litigation tool would be entirely up to us. I would say the more powerful use is to embed them in society in such a way that industries have to evolve and human rights conflicts have to be resolved in a way that also respects the rights of nature.

Fundamentally, even this conflict we see with Hamas would be against the rights of nature.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

What you say is very interesting. It gives us another perspective on respect for the environment.

Mr. Madani, I read your submission and have a lot of questions for you.

In the part of your submission entitled "Excellence in Water Governance in Service of Foreign Policy", you said that "Canada could be perfectly positioned [...] by continuing to profile Indigenous co-governance successes [...]".

I met with two indigenous groups yesterday. The first is from northern Alberta. Those people do not drink the water because it is contaminated and they are developing very rare cancers. The second group is local. It is opposed to the plan to build a radioactive waste mound, since the waste could find its way into the water.

I am not sure the first nations would agree with what you wrote.

Can you elaborate and give us some more examples?

[Kaveh Madani]

There is no perfect system in the world. There is no country that is perfect when it comes to water management. Every system has deficiencies.

Last year, we published a report that showed the systematic injustice, essentially, and inequity behind the levies of the United States, which is your neighbouring country. It's a wealthy country that's very advanced in its technology. You go to every location in the world and there are deficiencies, but don't forget the size of Canada and the diversity of the problems you're dealing with. It's hard to find another country of this size with so many diverse problems.

Claiming leadership, sharing experiences and learning from others happen if you get more active on the international stage, and I think this is something good for Canada.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you.

You talked a lot about the Canadian Water Agency and said it plays an important role by exerting influence internationally. In its voluntary national review, Canada set 17 sustainable development goals, only five of which are priority goals.

Sustainable development goal 6, which pertains to clean water and sanitation, and goal 15, which pertains to terrestrial ecosystems, are not even among the priority goals.

Are we not putting the horse before the cart?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Answer fairly briefly, if you can, Mr. Madani.

[Kaveh Madani]

There are problems. Of course, you have to do much more to get where you want to be and where you deserve to be, but I don't think this should stop your nation from getting more active on the international stage.

The establishment of a Canada water agency is a historic moment in this country and a step forward to where you deserve to be, but there's a lot of work to be done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

You have the floor, Mr. Boulerice.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Ito, I do of course agree that nature should have rights. According to the French scientist Aurélien Barrau, the crises relating to the climate, the loss of diversity, and plastic and chemical pollution are in fact sub-crises of the broader and more encompassing problem, namely, the relationship that human beings have with other living things and nature in general.

Your movement is inspiring, Ms. Ito. Among those it has inspired are the people of the North Shore and the Innu community of Quebec, who have accorded rights, legal status to the Magpie River. That inspired me as well. I introduced a bill in the House to give legal status to the St. Lawrence Seaway and its tributaries. That would be a first in North America, and I am very proud of it.

Much of this movement comes from South America and is inspired by indigenous cultures.

What do you think governments can do to support this movement in their efforts to protect nature and improve our relationship with living things?

[Mumta Ito]

Whilst I'm aware that in South America and in Canada the cries mostly come from the indigenous peoples who haven't lost that awareness of our deep dependence on nature—without nature none of this exists—so they still have their priorities in that way, what we've done in Europe is seen how those principles are actually applicable everywhere. The whole environmental crisis that we have is a product of the way we have structured our economy. It's legal to have an economy based on infinite growth because nature has no rights. Nature is objects, property and resources in law. This has nothing to do with indigenous peoples. This is applicable in our modern system of law worldwide.

I do believe that the Canadian government, by making a stand for supporting the rights of nature nationally, and then shifting the whole basis of our society towards a regenerative society, would be making a massive leap forward in leadership for the whole world.

Also, I feel that by protecting individual ecosystems in that way, it's a good start. However, it won't really realize its full potential if the national legislation works against it, because everything that happens around these rivers, the very actions that are destroying nature, are in effect legal. They're part of the way that our economy operates. If we can use the rights of nature to help us reorient our economies towards a regenerative society, I feel then it will be much more robust.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you.

Somebody said that anyone who believes that the growth of capitalism is unlimited even though the earth's resources are limited is either crazy or an economist. That is a quip that can mean a lot of things.

Ms. Kavanagh, to what extent is a central database on water quality essential, not only for tracking water quality in Canada, but also in terms of providing important data for international science?

[Kat Kavanagh]

The first step to any action is to understand what your current state is. How can we know what changes we've made if we have no data to say what our current state is?

A lot of times that data might be collected but is not in a format that's easy for us to access to glean those insights, to innovate and to come up with those moments of innovation or creativity. The more we're willing to share that at a community level, at a watershed level and at a country level, and then internationally, it's really powerful.

Over in the U.K., part of this collective that's sharing and looking at ways for communities to be involved in action towards better rivers...if there's that willingness for industry, for government, to look at data and look at possible solutions, that's the pathway forward. It's part of that cycle.

Thank you.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, do I have any time left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have a minute left.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Okay.

Ms. Kavanagh, what can you tell us about the role of conservation, preservation and water quality in our global fight to protect the environment?