Environment Committee on Feb. 27th, 2024

[Jimmy Bouchard]

Thank you for your question, Ms. Pauzé.

The issue of whether it makes sense remains unresolved. Granted, decentralizing jurisdictions and powers from Ottawa to Quebec and the municipalities is a tricky business. The control of navigation on bodies of water is a fairly simple, eloquent and striking example. I know that Ottawa announced last fall that it wanted to make changes. Along with my current job, I'm also a municipal councillor for the city of Saguenay. I have led this fight simply to control boat speeds on the various bodies of water. These are small lakes, not large bodies of water. This remains a federal responsibility.

The Canada water agency is a good thing. However, I'm afraid that it will cause further conflict and issues around the division of jurisdictions among the Quebec government, the Canadian government and the municipalities. I think that the desire is commendable. That said, I'm afraid that it will cause even more issues.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I'm glad that you raised the issue of transportation and the Department of Transport. To prepare for the study, we sent questions to all the departments involved. The Department of Transport responded to each question that this matter didn't apply to them.

I want to quickly address the issue in the La Baie area concerning water contamination by PFAS or PFOS perfluorinated compounds. The source of that contamination is allegedly the Bagotville military base.

There still isn't any way to eliminate substances harmful to health through water filtration. However, there may be technology such as ion exchange, nanofiltration or reverse osmosis that could remove up to 90% of these toxic substances.

Do municipalities the size of Saguenay have the resources to implement this technology to treat fresh water polluted with eternal pollutants?

[Jimmy Bouchard]

Thank you for your question.

This is a major issue at home in Saguenay. We've been working on this matter for a number of months. First, I'll focus on the procedure. There isn't any procedure right now. I understand that various cases in other parts of Canada could potentially fall under the responsibility of the federal government. However, there isn't any established procedure. This forces cities and municipalities to live with a certain amount of uncertainty. It isn't easy financially.

You're asking me whether cities such as Saguenay have the resources to tackle this type of issue. In Saguenay, we're fortunate to have an experienced team of public servants and municipal employees. In terms of human resources capacity, we're doing quite well. However, in terms of financial capacity or resources, it's a different story.

For the sake of transparency, I must say that we've worked well with the government on the first part involving the temporary treatment of water potentially contaminated by the Bagotville military base. One remaining issue is the search for a new source of drinking water and, ultimately, the treatment of this source. This is expected to cost some tens of millions of dollars.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

On that note, I wanted you to talk about funding.

As you already said, contamination falls under federal responsibility. Should the federal government fund the work required to restore the area's drinking water?

[Jimmy Bouchard]

Obviously—

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

That way, the polluter pays principle applies.

[Jimmy Bouchard]

Yes, exactly. It makes sense.

The Government of Canada is currently having some trouble acknowledging its responsibility. I'm not saying that it isn't doing so. However, it's challenging to obtain some form of acknowledgement of responsibility. Once this responsibility has been acknowledged, in my opinion, the Government of Canada must cover the costs.

As I said, the municipality and the Government of Canada have reached a certain level of agreement on part of the matter. However, a number of issues remain. I spoke earlier about some tens of millions of dollars. This estimate seems right. This puts financial strain on the municipality. I said earlier that this creates a certain amount of uncertainty. We have budgets to balance. It's quite challenging for a city such as Saguenay to manage everything and to navigate, no pun intended, these troubled waters.

The Government of Canada must take responsibility. It must first acknowledge its responsibility, and then provide the funding needed to resolve the issue over the long term.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yikes!

In your opening remarks, you said that the government must act on two fronts, and that there wouldn't be any jurisdictional issues. First, it must improve assistance programs for the construction of boat washing stations. Second, it must implement legislation governing the regulations for boats.

Can you quickly describe the potential positive and long‑term impact of these two recommendations?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Please be brief.

[Jimmy Bouchard]

In a strange coincidence, today Quebec announced $6.4 million in funding for washing stations. Ottawa currently doesn't provide any funding.

In the Lac‑Saint‑Jean area, a $1.1 million project is under way to install about 15 washing stations. Quebec is providing $115,000 and Ottawa $0. This type of program must be established. Some regulations can be quickly introduced, such as requiring boat operators to remove drain plugs and to treat and filter ballast water during transport. These are all Transport Canada's responsibilities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Collins, you have the floor.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for being here.

I'll go first to Mr. Miltenberger.

You cut out a bit at the end of your last response, so I want to give you an opportunity to finish your thought.

[J. Michael Miltenberger]

Thank you.

Quickly, I want to make the point that in the Northwest Territories, we figured out a way that recognizes the fact that we have to work collaboratively with indigenous governments. We figured out that we can write public legislation through a co-drafting process, for example. It's a critical piece, because indigenous governments are huge landowners. They're a level of government that often gets left out.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you so much.

Can you expand a little and talk a bit more about what you saw when you...? In your role with the Government of Northwest Territories, what did you see as some of the challenges on water governance between the territorial government and the federal government, and in your role with the Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, how does that interact with Métis nations and first nations?

[J. Michael Miltenberger]

Thank you.

First, it's clear that water, in all its forms, is a national issue. It's not a federal issue. It's a national issue.

The things that are happening, such as the Canada water agency, are steps that we think are good ideas.

There is no common table right now to bring respective water jurisdictions to in order to solve big, common water issues. It's not a case of fighting over jurisdiction but rather of bringing your jurisdictions to the table to fix problems that we all acknowledge no one government can do alone.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thanks so much.

We've heard some pretty horrific testimony from first nations and Métis communities in northern Alberta that have been impacted by the devastating tailings ponds leaks. In your opinion, what are some of the ways the federal government can stop events like this from happening in the future?

[J. Michael Miltenberger]

I'd point out, of course, that I live in Fort Smith. We're north of Fort Chip, so we share the problems and concerns that Chief Tuccaro raised.

For the Mackenzie basin, there is the Mackenzie River Basin Transboundary Waters Master Agreement, which was negotiated with the support and direction of the federal government. It is a very good agreement, which has led to bilateral agreements being negotiated between the partners of the Northwest Territories and Alberta, the Northwest Territories and B.C., and the Northwest Territories and Saskatchewan. They have agreed on water monitoring and quality-quantity issues so that everybody has comfort in knowing we can manage those affairs and issues in the Mackenzie basin—the biggest one being that there is enough water for environmental flows.

That's an approach that we think has value in other parts of Canada where such agreements don't exist.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thanks so much for that.

When it comes to the interaction between the federal or territorial governments and corporations that are disregarding nature and the environment, and having these impacts on indigenous communities, do you see any additional role for us, as federal legislators?

[J. Michael Miltenberger]

I think carrying on with the Canada water agency—and taking the advice to make it effective so it has the resources, authorities and capacity to bring all the jurisdictions to a national table—is important.

I think we recognize that our legislation, as a country, is way out of date. The Canada Water Act needs to be looked at to capture a lot of the discussion and concerns raised today. The big thing is to constantly remind everybody—provinces, territories, Canada and indigenous governments—that this is a national issue and the only way we're going to solve it is if people come to the table with their jurisdictional problems.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thanks so much.

You've outlined how, when it comes to climate change and water management, the status quo is not working, and you've said that we need this kind of change.

The B.C. provincial government has noted commitments to working directly in partnership with first nations and Métis communities on water governance and management. They've also established a freshwater security fund and are working with indigenous communities to ensure their needs are met.

Have you heard about this? If so, what are your thoughts, and what kind of lessons do you think the rest of Canada, specifically the federal government, can learn from these kinds of projects?

[J. Michael Miltenberger]

In fact, CIER and the CLI process are currently engaged in the Okanagan, where we are going to be meeting next month with the mayors and chiefs once again. They have told us that this is the first time they've ever been in the same room together to talk collaboratively on a co-governance basis, at the ground level, about these significant problems and challenges that exist in the Okanagan.

If they can get their thinking clear as municipalities and indigenous governments, it's easier to pivot to talk to the province about all the support they're prepared to give that type of process, where solutions can be generated where the problems occur.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We'll go to a second round. I'm going to truncate the second round by shaving 40% off the time, so that means they are basically three minutes.

Mr. Leslie.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Petelle and Ms. Stewart, I appreciate that you mentioned some of the technological advancements our sector has seen, and those that seem to demonize farmers and the associated industries. I don't think I have a full understanding. You mentioned GPS sensors.

Could you expand on some of the tech that has made advancements and that you expect to come down the pipeline—not in terms of gene editing yet, but in terms of the application of crop protection products to more efficiently use water?

[Pierre Petelle]

I think that, certainly, the more data that is available on the farm, in terms of where the product is.... We have no interest in pesticides ending up where they don't have their effect, and neither does the farmer. Some of the precision technology, where the actual nozzles are turning on and off and detecting weeds instead of the crop.... Seeing some of those innovations available now is pretty mind-blowing. All those techniques are designed to apply the product where it's going to have the most effect and potentially lessen the impact of off-field movement. Drones and GPS data are helping the farmer know exactly, almost to the square foot on their field, what that piece of soil needs in terms of nutrients or pest pressures.

All that information and knowledge is making agriculture more and more sustainable every day.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you.

It sounds like a good field trip for this environment committee to go and see some of these technologies in person.

You mentioned data and how that's often, in the case of the farmer or the agronomist, used to help identify nutrient use and things like that. In terms of water monitoring data, though, what's your perspective on how we can ensure that we are correctly collecting data that is going to be accurate and that our decisions regarding crop protection products are scientifically based, not following ideology or any other parameter outside of what the science says?