Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 20th, 2012

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Alan H. Kessel]

Only if it's not single malt.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

If it's not single malt, you can put anything in it. I don't care.

Ms. Johnson, I think you're brilliant. Maybe the answer to establishing sovereignty once and for all in the north is to put Tim Hortons in every corner of the north.

It was rather interesting. I was listening to colleagues opposite. Mr. LeBlanc, I listened with great interest when you talked about the massive perception that we're not in control of the Arctic. There's this massive perception of Canadian people. I think there's a greater perception amongst Canadian people, at least according to my Cape Breton mother, that Cape Breton is its own sovereign territory. I certainly don't believe there's that perception.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Do they have Tim Hortons there?

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Tim Hortons is in Cape Breton too. There you have it.

It's interesting. When I look at what has been done to establish Canada's consistent sovereignty of the north...obviously I think we're all clear that this Prime Minister has shown a very strong commitment to the north. You see that with his regular visits up there, the first prime minister I have seen in my life do that on such a consistent and committed basis.

Mr. Kessel, or perhaps Ms. Stirk, you made reference to our military exercises in the north and our resource development in the north as well. It's very, very strong, and that's why I actually agree with Mr. Bevington. Those who exercise jurisdiction have the influence in that jurisdiction. You're absolutely right, and I think that's where Canada can comfortably lay claim. “Lay claim” sounds like it's tentative; it's not. This is our north, and I think it's very consistent and clear. Anybody who wants to have an argument on that can come see us and I'll be happy to have that discussion with them. I don't think as parliamentarians we should ever be suggesting that's even in doubt at all. We should not ever have that as imaginary, because as soon as you sow a seed of doubt, that gives credence to someone else's argument. I think we have an obligation as Canadians and as parliamentarians to consistently take that position.

I have a question for you, Ms. Johnson. It was interesting to hear some of your testimony about the Arctic Council. I'd like to understand more about it, because I must admit I'm not that familiar with it. I was trying to understand why it's so critical for Canada. I know we talk about the four pillars, but why, from a Canadian perspective, is this Arctic Council so critical?

[Sigrid Anna Johnson]

The Arctic Council is viewed as the primary forum for engagement on circumpolar issues and it has had great success since it was established 16 years ago in 1996, because of the way it works. The combination of the eight states plus the six permanent participants, which are the groups—

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

You see clear measurables coming out of that.

[Sigrid Anna Johnson]

I do see very clear measurables coming out of that.

It has had enormous success in doing a lot of the baseline research, which has led to international instruments, such as the POPs convention in Stockholm. We hope international mercury negotiations will be finalized in January of 2013. That would be as a result of a great deal of research done by the council in its early days as well.

It started out as very much a scientific body. It has evolved into a policy-making body now. You see that with the recent search and rescue agreement. With the increasing attention on the circumpolar region, it's clear that this will be a role the council will rise to, to ensure that there is appropriate governance in the region.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you.

Ms. Stirk, I appreciate the written comments you provided us in which you talked about, “Canada's vision for the Arctic—that of a stable, rules-based region with clearly defined boundaries, dynamic economic growth and trade”.

I sit on the Standing Committee for International Trade and—I'm not sure if we took it from you or you took it from us—but that feels like what we're trying to do in all of our trade deals. When you talk about a rules-based region, surely you're not talking about Canada vis-à-vis the north; you're talking about Canada vis-à-vis other countries. Is that correct?

Can you clarify what you meant by that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

And if you could do that in 30 seconds, that would be great.

[Jillian Stirk]

I will do my best. Thank you.

Yes, exactly. That's really in terms of all of the things that Mr. Kessel has been talking about: basic application of international law across the Arctic region and mutual recognition of boundaries, of regulatory regimes, and so on, so it's very much from the international perspective.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I'm sorry I didn't have time to ask Mr. Kessel questions. I think he's brilliant.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much. It must be because of the Scotch.

Mr. Dewar, go ahead for five minutes, please.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to pursue further the subject of governance of the Arctic within Canada.

Who is in charge of the file? Obviously you have a lot to do with it because you are here today. In terms of the governance, as Mr. Bevington touched on, it is kind of a Venn diagram of sorts. There are our foreign policy interests and then there are our domestic.... I'm just wondering how this file is treated within government.

I think, Ms. Johnson, you—or maybe it was one of your colleagues—talked about a whole-of-government approach.

Could you just elaborate on how you are working with other departments and how that actually works? I think one of the issues that everyone agrees on is that there need to be inputs from people of the north, and from a domestic side, there need to be policy markers and an agenda, so that when we're working with other countries it's clear what our domestic agenda and interests are as well as what our foreign policy interests are.

[Jillian Stirk]

Yes, indeed, I would say this is very much a whole-of-government issue. The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is largely focused on the international dimension, whether that is in the negotiation of various agreements that Mr. Kessel has spoken about or whether it is in the work that we do on the Arctic Council, or even in some of the bilateral cooperation we have with a number of the Arctic states.

Many government departments have an interest in and a role to play on northern issues. Just to name a few, there are certainly Fisheries and Oceans, Industry Canada, Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, Health, Environment. I would say all of these departments and others are actively engaged. There is the coast guard on issues related to shipping, and of course National Defence when it comes to security issues.

I would say there's a very good exchange of information across departments. We do meet regularly to talk about these issues, because we know that no one department will be able to develop all of the answers on these questions and that a whole-of-government approach is really required.

There is also the question of jurisdiction and the very important role of provinces and territories in the north.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Obviously you are the lead on it.

[Jillian Stirk]

We're the lead on the international dimension, but not on northern issues writ large by any means.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I just have a question. Maybe it is not under your purview, but I know that other governments have models that include representation of peoples of the north. I know that Greenland has representation with the Danes, and there is kind of an integrated approach. We have Nunavut, so arguably that is taken care of in a sense, but I think what many people are looking to—and this was touched on in your overview, and Mr. Bevington has mentioned this—is that it is absolutely critical to have representation of the people of the north.

Notwithstanding what we have already heard about providing some funding, having a seat at the table is extremely important. Is there any idea about how to expand representation in the north, particularly of the Arctic Council, so that there's more integration of representation of the people of the north?

[Jillian Stirk]

I've already mentioned, I think, that we have the permanent participants at the table on the Arctic Council. There are six aboriginal or indigenous groups represented there, several of which are based in Canada. Some of them, of course, straddle several international jurisdictions.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I should be clear that I didn't mean for consultation. I meant for participation at the table.

[Jillian Stirk]

They are full participants, yes.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

They're at the table when you're talking about your policy designs, etc.

[Jillian Stirk]

Do you mean at the Arctic Council? Yes.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

And they are there for domestic policy.

[Jillian Stirk]

They participate on other issues. Certainly a lot of the preparatory work we do on Arctic Council issues includes the permanent participants.

As my colleague mentioned, Minister Aglukkaq was recently in all three territories. She met with the territorial governments and also the permanent participants' organizations and other northern stakeholders. They are very much part of the process, I would say.