Evidence of meeting #80 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was nunavut.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Lawrence MacAulay Liberal Cardigan, PE
You have a good view of what's going on in the fishery, and you've been on this committee.
I would like both of you to address the mining aspect and the potential for problems with mining and the fishing industry itself, and pollution.
Senator, CPC, Senate
If I may, I'm speaking from the Nunavut perspective, Mr. Chair. Again, just like I was talking about the partnership in managing the fishery with Inuit participation, Inuit are also at the table with our environmental review process. There is a co-management approach to environmental review in Nunavut. So when the Baffinland iron ore mine was going to ship iron ore year-round, ice-bound shipping, in a sensitive and delicate marine ecosystem, Inuit were at the table reviewing that project and placing some 200 conditions on the company relating to marine mammals, protection of the fishery, and monitoring the impact of icebreaking vessels on the fragile Arctic environment.
Yes, there's a potential for conflict and concern, but because of the collaborative approach—federal government, territorial government and Inuit—there's one table where these issues are presented and considered. The board has the independent authority to make recommendations basically as to whether a project should go ahead or not, and if so, under what conditions. I cite the Baffinland project because with the railroad on the permafrost and the marine shipping year-round—mind you, it's been scaled back since it was presented in that forum, and it's now going to be a summer shipping operation for the foreseeable future—with the full-blown proposal, the board found a way to establish conditions that would allow it to go ahead.
I think we have an effective way of balancing those sensitivities in Nunavut, and it's worth looking at.
Senator, CPC, Senate
Mr. Chair, I’ll follow up on the comments I made to Mr. Weston earlier, in relation to involving people in the process.
I think Senator Patterson touches on the importance of that, and the success that comes from it. Down east, we know that decisions affecting our fisheries were made for decades in central Canada without the people involved in the fishery being part of those decisions. Some people making decisions have never seen a fish. I won't say that they knew what was going on in the fishery. It's important to ensure that people in the north are part and parcel of decision-making, and I think that will reap success. We've seen success in that already in the north, and I think it will continue.
Liberal
Lawrence MacAulay Liberal Cardigan, PE
I appreciate that, Senator Manning, and I’ll remind you that things have not changed. It seems that all the people who make the rules know very little about the industry, and that seems to be an ongoing problem no matter what.
Are coast guard facilities sufficient? I'd like you to comment on that and on search and rescue in areas where they do fish, and in areas that you suspect would become viable fishing areas.
How far do you think the fishery will expand?
Senator, CPC, Senate
The coast guard is a valued service in the Arctic. We are pleased that the government has finally announced spending programs to replace aging coast guard icebreakers and increase vessel coverage in the north through the patrol ships.
What we're most concerned about as Nunavut residents is the coast guard's oil spill response capacity. There are steps being taken to locate resources in communities, in collaboration with local communities. They are early steps, and I think northern residents would want to see more happening as shipping increases with global warming, but the coast guard is making some progress in that connection.
Search and rescue is a very delicate subject. I won't opine at length, but I will say that we're on the wrong end of the geography when it comes to search and rescue by air, because the present DND bases for search and rescue in Canada are in southern Canada—Greenwood, Nova Scotia; Winnipeg, Manitoba; Comox, B.C.—far, far away from the region. There was concern about a rescue in Labrador last year. That's only halfway to the Arctic. We are even more remote. There is concern about the response time, the type of plane. Big slow planes or helicopters with limited range are not doing the job for us. There is strong concern about that.
My personal opinion is that some northern colleagues of mine have recommended that DND consider building on the infrastructure in place in the north already. There's a long-established aviation industry, infrastructure, operators, we believe could collaborate with the in-house assets of DND to get to the scene of a problem quicker.
Your third question has escaped me.
Liberal
Lawrence MacAulay Liberal Cardigan, PE
Yes, Mr. Chair, I would like to move a motion:
That, due to the significant concerns over the sustainability of Canada's search and rescue services raised by the Spring 2013 Report of the Auditor General, the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans immediately undertake a study on the Canadian Coast Guard’s search and rescue capabilities and challenges to be tabled in the House of Commons no later than June 2013, and begin the study by calling Auditor General Michael Ferguson and Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Keith Ashfield as witnesses.
Just to elaborate, it's basically extending from what we just heard from our witnesses, and to make sure that we have the proper capability to handle problems in this country. That's what I want to see happen.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Although we are past our time, I would like to make some comments on this. But first, I would like to move a motion that we go in camera.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rodney Weston
Thank you, Mr. Kamp.
It's been moved by Mr. Kamp that we proceed in camera.
(Motion agreed to)
At this point, I'd like to thank our witnesses for appearing before us today. I certainly do appreciate all the information you've been able to provide to this committee.
Senator Patterson, you mentioned following up with some information. If you could provide that to the clerk, I'd appreciate it.
Thank you, gentlemen, for being here.
We'll take a short break to move in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]