Evidence of meeting #71 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was council.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
You are calling them “tar ponds” and you're getting it all mixed up. Just call them the oil sands and we'll know what we're talking about.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
There are probably tar ponds in Alberta too, but....
Is it an issue? Is it a big contributor to the carbon emissions?
Senior Advisor, Climate Change, Polar Programme, GRID-Arendal
The production in that region certainly is.
How you measure it is up for debate, I suppose, but I don't see that as being an issue at the Arctic Council per se, because the Arctic Council is actually very good at avoiding controversial issues. Industrial development is not on the table.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
My next question is to you, David. It's good to see a Nova Scotian person out here.
It's on the whole thing about our sea lanes. I think you alluded to the nations' working together on more protocols for the Antarctic, but let's talk about the protocol for our Northwest Passage and how we're going to deal with that. Should we have a separate agreement with the U.S. on that passage, similar to what we have for the St. Lawrence Seaway? Should we be looking at different protocols, with naval vessels coming through there with military...whatever they have on them? Should we be making some sort of deal with the United States on that whole passage?
Professor of Law, Canada Research Chair in Ocean Law and Governance, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
There are a couple of responses to that question. One is that I think we are managing the dispute quite well now. We have a 1988 Arctic accord between the U.S. and Canada under which we agreed to disagree on the status of the passage and agreed that U.S. icebreakers would request permission from Canada to go through the strait. That seems to be working quite well. Obviously it doesn't cover the naval vessels or specifically commercial vessels, should they come in the future. So there is a concern there.
Also, I would say this: that article 234 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, in most academic viewpoints including mine, would apply to the Northwest Passage, which gives you the right to not only legislate but enforce your special measures, such as zero pollution for oil and zero pollution for garbage, which we now put in place.
I think sometimes this dispute is blown out of proportion, but you never know when disputes can come back to bite you. So I guess I would say that in the long run, maybe we should be revisiting that Arctic accord and perhaps extend it to cover commercial vessels.
I think the naval/military question is another one. I'm not party to all the agreements that may be in place on that front or where that should maybe go in the future. That's a whole separate point.
Liberal
Mark Eyking Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
In two days' time we're going to have a budget coming down, and I'm sure the ink is dry on it right now. But if you could have more impact on the budget coming up in dealing with deficiency of infrastructure and maybe science in the north, where would you put your dollars?
Professor of Law, Canada Research Chair in Ocean Law and Governance, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
We have CanNor, and there are processes in place to discuss where the priorities should be.
One thing that I don't think we've given enough attention to in Canada is the need for icebreaker support, even with the melting ice. If you look at what the Russians have been doing.... I just came from the Arctic shipping summit in Montreal last week, which had a number of Russian presentations. As you know, they are developing the northern sea route. We had 46 transits this past year, and they are going to expand that traffic monumentally in the next decade. They have three nuclear icebreakers planned for the Russian Federation.
There is great debate as to whether you should ever have nuclear icebreakers in Canada. I wouldn't want to comment on that in my current presentation, but I think the need for icebreakers.... We have one, the John G. Diefenbaker icebreaker, on the planning books. Is that really going to be enough, along with our patrol vessels, if we are going to be a true Arctic country? I don't think so.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you. That's all the time we have, Mr. Eyking.
We are going to start our second round, of five minutes. We'll start with Ms. Grewal.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to the witnesses for their time and very informative presentations as well.
Many concerns have been brought to the attention of the committee over the course of our study: priorities such as sustainability, shipping activity, and the effects on our northern communities.
Each of you offers a diverse background in education and opinions. In your opinion, what should the Canadian government be most concerned about in the near future? What is your opinion of the “Arctic Climate Impact Assessment” of 2004?
Senior Advisor, Climate Change, Polar Programme, GRID-Arendal
I had the opportunity to be involved in the assessment working for the indigenous peoples' organizations and was involved in the negotiations of the policy document that accompanied it, which I suspect nobody has read and nobody could find if they wanted to look for it.
There are a couple of great successes of that climate impact assessment. One, it incorporated traditional knowledge for the first time in a major global scientific assessment. It was also the first major regional climate assessment. The other thing is that it really launched the Arctic into the public consciousness in a way that we had never seen before. I'd been working in the Arctic for many years before that and the question I got from friends and neighbours when I headed up to work in Nunavut was, why are you going there? What's happening? What's there? Now it's become part of our framework.
I think in terms of where we are now, one of the things that the Arctic Council has not done—and there are lots of political reasons for this that we could get into if you want—is follow-up. I mean there have been some efforts to assemble lists of potential adaptation measures, etc., but there's no impetus at the council right now to deal with adaptation. That's a major issue everywhere in the Arctic, I mean, as you know, in Canada. It is referenced in the current plan for the Arctic Council, but I think that's something that Canada could make a major contribution toward.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
The forecasted level of shipping activity in the Arctic will increase many risks to the safety and environment of the people and the land in the north. In the event of an emergency such as an oil spill, what sort of pre-emptive precautions can Canada put in place to minimize the effects of such emergencies over our vast Arctic?
Senior Advisor, Climate Change, Polar Programme, GRID-Arendal
I'll defer to David on that one.
Professor of Law, Canada Research Chair in Ocean Law and Governance, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
We do have these two agreements now. The one that's in process will be adopted, hopefully in May, on emergency response. That's a part of the way forward.
I think what really is needed, of course, is to take the paper down to the ground so to speak where we make sure we have the search and rescue facilities in the north. Right now they tend to be down toward the south and likewise with emergency response.
It's a difficult issue with emergency response because in one way you can wait for the industry to go up with more oil and gas drilling, then you're more prepared. But then there's this question of being prepared also from the governmental perspective. It really is one of the questions of agenda setting as well. To what extent is government going to take a lead and cooperate with industry, and to what extent does industry take the lead?
It probably is going to have to be some kind of shared responsibility, very clearly. In our north, with shipping it's going to be the coast guard that's going to be the first responder besides the industry. With oil and gas it's probably going to be largely the companies that are going to be responsible.
Again, eventually government is going to have to be ready as well. Because if you have a major spill....Look what happened in the Gulf of Mexico. Even the industry couldn't handle that issue and again look at how unprepared even the gulf states and the federal government were in the United States. So again, we have major issues in the Arctic about preparedness that we really haven't yet fully faced.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
There are many committees and organizations such as the Arctic Council and the northern Canada vessel traffic services carefully considering and advocating for the maintenance and the care of the Arctic. In what areas can Canada develop its legal framework in order to ensure Arctic safety, sovereignty, and success?
Professor of Law, Canada Research Chair in Ocean Law and Governance, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
I would say that Canada already has gone on record for their coming council chairship to promote shipping safety in the Arctic.
I've heard of a couple of things. One, they really want to move the polar code forward and, again, I would emphasize that.
The second thing, they want to develop Arctic tourism guidelines. Again, that perhaps is a great need because when you have small communities, how many tourists can they actually accommodate? You go to the Antarctic, they actually have tourism guidelines for the Antarctic from 2011, where they basically agreed to limit the number of persons going ashore in the Antarctic—where they don't have communities except for animal communities—to 100 persons, and even perhaps fewer in some areas.
Again, I think Canada could be a leader on the whole Arctic tourism guidelines and making sure that we have appropriate tourism for our northern communities.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you very much.
You're out of time, Ms. Grewal.
We're going to move over to Mr. Bevington, for five minutes.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Thank you.
Thank you to the witnesses. I've had many dealings with some of you over the years. I appreciate the comments you've made here today.
I would say that I'd be a little careful with Arctic tourism. If we're using international organizations to establish national policy, I think in some ways that will have a definite problem area to it. I think the focus of international agencies like the Arctic Council are the international issues that we've talked about here that cannot be solved by national governments, that have to be put into the international arena.
You've mentioned, Mr. VanderZwaag, quite a number of them that I think are very pertinent, and so have the other people.
I had the opportunity last week to attend the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region in Washington, where we had a presentation from the research people who are putting forward the new Arctic research policies for the U.S. government. They're very concise policies.
Is there anything in Canada? I've been trying for years to identify what our Arctic research policy is. Does anyone have any idea of any forum or any mechanism that we have in Canada to put forward a unified Arctic research policy?
Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, As an Individual
It's a challenge because I think there are more than 20 federal departments and agencies that play some role in aspects of Arctic research. As I indicated earlier, increasingly some of that capacity is now in the north, in the territories and the northern provinces, so we don't have the equivalent of what the United States has, which is an inter-agency Arctic research policy committee that has a mandate to coordinate all of those things. We do have effective mechanisms, sometimes, through various ADM- and DM-level committees, but I'm not sure they've been given the task of developing a policy.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
When I talked to the Arctic research people in the U.S., they indicated that part of their plan going forward was to deal with the intercontinental weather changes that have started to show up from the changes in the Arctic conditions. They're identifying now that they want to continue to explore the weather changes that are occurring in North America and to continue to understand how that is working out because, of course, that takes the Arctic issue from being an Arctic weather issue to being an issue that affects all of us.
Are there any comments on that from any of you, about the necessity to look at this type of research?
Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, As an Individual
It's probably the top priority from a meteorological perspective.
You know, Canada has the presidency at the World Meteorological Organization right now. It is David Grimes, who is the ADM of the meteorological service in Environment Canada. It just had a meeting of its Arctic and polar group in China last week. This issue of polar prediction and how it connects to what's happening at mid-latitudes is a priority for every country involved. It's certainly at the top of the list for the U.S., and it's near the top of our list too, I think.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Okay. Now, the Chinese have said in the last week that their plan is to develop shipping across the Arctic, that some 20% of their shipping needs by 2020 are going to be handled through the Arctic area.
You've talked about the Russians. Do you think it's a good idea to put the Chinese on the Arctic Council with this kind of involvement moving forward?
Senior Advisor, Climate Change, Polar Programme, GRID-Arendal
I would say that one way of looking at the Arctic Council observers is the more the merrier.
Given the interests of China, Brazil, India, and other countries to be active in the Arctic—and, as we heard from Anita, some of these countries do have Arctic programs and Antarctic programs—having them in the room to be part of the discussion, I think, is important.
The bigger question here is how the Arctic Council can evolve in order to create a meaningful role for these observers. Right now it's “sit down and listen and, you know, maybe you get to say something”, so that's part of the discussion as well. Again, that's a role Canada could—I mean, Canada can't do it by itself, but it could continue that discussion about how we bring in outside, non-Arctic voices into the Arctic Council.
Associate Director, Canadian Circumpolar Institute, University of Alberta
Could I just add in a couple of points here?