Finance Committee on Nov. 17th, 2014

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here today.

My first questions are for the experts who are here to talk about the north and the Arctic.

As you know, the Canadian north and the Arctic have both been priorities of our government since we came into office in 2006. Indeed, the Prime Minister has appointed a minister responsible for the north. The Prime Minister has also made it a point to visit the north every year that he has been prime minister, and significant investments have also been announced in the north. One of those is the Canadian High Arctic research station, also known as CHARS.

Dr. Scott, how will the merger of the Canadian Polar Commission into the Canadian High Arctic research station enhance the work of the commission and build on its existing mandate?

[Dr. David J. Scott]

To summarize, I think it's really a matter of coordinating the roles of those two organizations and frankly combining the resources, human and financial. This proposed merger very much gives us a new opportunity and additional resources to strengthen the work we do in terms of creating those collaborations and synergies and to leverage in additional resources that exist but aren't necessarily focused or coordinated on the Arctic. It gives us a stronger opportunity to communicate those results to northerners, to Canadians, and in fact internationally.

As I referenced earlier, it very much allows us the opportunity to create that whole that is greater than just the sum of the parts, including the parts that don't belong to the federal government, that are university-based or networks such as the Network of Northern Research Operators. Simply by bringing coordination through enhanced opportunities to communicate, we will be able to create more with the existing resources that are on the table. It's simply by coordinating, better utilizing existing facilities, creating opportunities for students, and being better able and more efficient in returning that information to the northerners, who first and foremost need that information for decision-making.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

So it's greater synergy as a result.

[Dr. David J. Scott]

Absolutely.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

Now, northerners have long stated that research in the north should be driven by northerners and for the benefit of northerners. The headquarters of this new organization will be in Cambridge Bay, Nunavut. The mandate of this organization is to enhance Canada's knowledge of the Arctic in order to improve economic opportunities, environmental stewardship, and the quality of life of northerners and indeed all Canadians.

How do you feel that CHARS, a world-class research station, will be able to increase the direct participation of northerners in Arctic research?

[Dr. David J. Scott]

Based on my previous experience, starting in 1999, for four years, in Iqaluit, Nunavut, where I was the chief geologist of a small start-up organization similar to this, we found that simply being on the ground in a northern community made it much more straightforward to reach out, to students in particular. These are kids who have an interest in rocks and minerals and fossils.

It's an additional resource to stimulate and engage youth to, first of all, take a more profound interest in their natural world, to find value in going to school on a daily basis, to perhaps have a goal to stay in school and maybe end up working at a place such as a small geoscience office. Or, in the case of the High Arctic research station itself, at Cambridge Bay, they could become a person who works in one of the laboratories or goes to the field in the summertime to help to create new knowledge. In fact, they could model their behaviour on those who will initially need to be brought from the south, to then go to graduate school and become a researcher and drive the research agenda. It's very much an opportunity to create role models, as well as an opportunity to participate in the creation of new knowledge, which will leave that lasting legacy of ownership of knowledge creation by northerners.

In the meantime, the existing sharing will take place. Researchers from around the world and across the country will come to the north, create, and hopefully leave that knowledge in the north. But it's really about the hands-on opportunity of operating a facility that is designed to be inclusive of the community and its needs, to create those role-model opportunities, to create the interactive opportunities, to become a part of a community. That will show the way and create role models for the future.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you very much.

My next question is for Dr. Hik.

Do you feel that CHARS will contribute to Canada's northern strategy as set out by Prime Minister Harper, specifically as it relates to Arctic sovereignty?

[Dr. David Hik]

Yes, I do.

I think that one of the strongest expressions of sovereignty is being present and understanding the land, the people, the places, in the north, wherever we are. Canada is a big territory, and because CHARS is not just one facility but a network of all of the existing resources we have in the Arctic, understanding very broadly the changes that are taking place, the opportunities for economic development, and the presence in the Canadian north, will be enhanced. That alone ensures our sovereignty.

In addition, there are specific research projects supported by CHARS—enhancing underwater awareness, and things like that—that will lead in the future to possible benefits that will result in an increase in Canadian presence and awareness of the north.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

To follow up on that, how do you feel that CHARS will help to strengthen Canada's leadership in Arctic science and technology research?

[Dr. David Hik]

The best outcome would be for CHARS to coordinate all of the various activities that are taking place in Canada. Within the federal government alone, I think there are over 20 departments and agencies that have some research activity taking place in the north, from the Museum of Nature to Transport Canada, and so on.

I hope that CHARS will be able to, through both its mandate and its operations, identify the synergies across those various activities within the federal government, and more broadly in the country. That would be a more efficient use of resources and would allow us also to capture more of the international opportunities for partnership and collaboration. Most countries in the world that are conducting Arctic research are looking at Canada as an important partner in the future, and I think CHARS will help to facilitate that.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

That was my next question.

How will CHARS help to facilitate discussions and communication with international organizations?

[Dr. David Hik]

The Canadian Polar Commission is the adhering body to the International Arctic Science Committee, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. It supports Canadian participation in a number of other Arctic research fora by strengthening the relationship between the scientists who are representatives of Canada within those organizations and having a strong network across the country. I think we can be even more effective than we already are in providing leadership and developing collaborative opportunities with other countries.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Saxton.

Mr. Scarpaleggia, you have seven minutes, please.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'd like to start with the Airports Council.

Just to make sure that I understand, an amendment has been made through this omnibus bill that gives the transportation minister the authority to prohibit changes to an aerodrome if these changes are “not in the public interest”. It's a one-line amendment, more or less.

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

It's a bit more than one line; it's a couple of paragraphs.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

It doesn't deal with much more than that.

Do we know what's meant by changes? Is it just expansions or would it include refurbishing runways? I don't think it would cover changing flight paths, because that's taken care of by Nav Canada. I doubt it has anything to do with the so-called curfews. Basically, is it changes to the physical airport, including or not including the building of a runway, for example, on land that already belongs to the airport?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

The language is written pretty broadly. I don't have the text right here, but my recollection is that it doesn't actually get into differentiation or any sort of threshold, which I think is part of the concern. As I said, the intent, as we understand it, is to deal with private aerodromes, if, say, somebody wants to start an aerodrome and just starts building one. We understand that to be the intent of the changes to the regulation as they are proposed, but as the text is written currently, it's fairly broad, and that's our concern. It certainly would need to be further defined.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

So without any kind of permit beyond a municipal permit, someone can just start building an aerodrome? Is that it?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

That's not something I've tried to do, but my understanding is that the department, the minister, feels there is an insufficient level of—

[A voice]

Oversight.

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

—exactly, in terms of the ability to have a role or a say in the building of private aerodromes.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I have an airport essentially in my community. I can't remember if I was ever given an answer to this question. If an airport wants to expand or build some new physical structure, it must go through a federal environmental assessment?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

I'm not an expert on the environmental requirements for an airport, so I don't really want to comment on that, but certainly airports comply with all the requirements in various elements of federal law today, in terms of what they need to do.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I'm just wondering, because maybe this is a way of giving the minister power to block a project that could be harmful to the surrounding environment. I'll tell you, the airport authorities are pretty independent-minded. They do create advisory bodies, and they're staffed by good people and so on, but you really get a sense, if you're in an airport community, that you don't have leverage through the federal government. I think that frustrates a lot of people.

I understand you can't allow political considerations to dictate flight paths. It's very complicated. Then again, that's what had been said for many years about train speeds. I remember writing to the minister, asking him or her—I can't remember—to lower train speeds for trains moving through my riding, and the answer was that there was a coordinated system across Canada and it was very technical. Yet after the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, all of a sudden some communities were able to get reductions in train speeds. Anyway, it's a very interesting issue and I thank you for being here.

Ms. McIntyre, just to follow up on what I think was Mr. Cullen's question. I wasn't here when the department came and we were able to question them on this, but where does this come from? I guess it's because the government wants to have some kind of intellectual consistency with regard to its position on medical services to failed refugee claimants. Do you think that might be the reason? It's almost as though it wants to make sure that all the pieces of the puzzle logically fit together, so that if you're going to deny failed refugee claimants medical services, you don't want to be in contradiction with yourself by not allowing social assistance to be reduced. Would you see it that way? It is odd that it doesn't benefit the federal government financially in any way. No one, no province, has asked for this.

[Jenn McIntyre]

I would definitely agree that's probably where it comes from, and a few months ago the Federal Court ruled that it was cruel and unusual treatment.