Evidence of meeting #59 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was public.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
That's right, it's the implementation contract.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Thank you.
Speaking of participant funding, the committee has heard from the opposition that the legislation does not include the provision for participant funding with regard to the environmental assessment process in Nunavut.
Why is that? Why is there no provision for participant funding in this bill?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Currently, as we mentioned, there is no dedicated program for funding participants in the environmental assessment process in Nunavut, although some funding has been provided through other programs, for example, through the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, to assist some participants.
In addition, for some project reviews, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development has been able to provide funding for some participants, but it has not been on a predictable and sustainable basis.
The bill provides the ability to make a regulation, to establish a funding program, and to facilitate public participation and project reviews. However, such a regulation is not under development at this point, as a sustainable and reliable source of funding to support it has not been identified at this point. Should ongoing funding be secured in the long term, the department could move quickly to establish a program in regulation.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
That's good to know. Thank you.
The committee has been asked to consider amending the Nunavut planning and project assessment act to include a provision mandating a review of operations after five years.
What would be the impediments or disadvantages in doing so?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
The concept of a statutory review of the act's performance after five years was not entertained due to a number of limitations and drawbacks inherent in such a process.
In Nunavut in particular, within the first five years of the act's existence, there may only be a few major projects that are subject to environmental assessment. This would be a very limited sample size from which to draw any meaningful conclusions.
In addition, such reviews often consume more resources, both financial and human, than are saved by any marginal improvements resulting from what can turn out to be a lengthy process.
Conservative
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
It can take quite a long time, yes.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
I think we saw that with the CEAA review. Sometimes it takes that long to get around to it.
Thank you. That's good to know.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Okay.
With regard to the environmental assessment aspect of the legislation, there's been some discussion about the current definition of “project”. Do you think the present definition allows for adequate determination of what constitutes a project, especially for projects with a low impact?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
The term “project” is fully determined in its definition in the bill. The bill offers some clarification on the definition of project under the agreement that Nunavut, Tunngavik, and Canada agreed could be read into the context of planning and assessment. For instance, it specifies that projects under the bill are only those that involve a use of land and water or resources, and that certain municipal activities are excluded. As well, it clarifies that those projects with impacts that are manifestly insignificant are not subject to the bill.
The term “manifestly insignificant” is the term that will exclude low-impact projects. This term is found in, for example, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, so there are some precedents for the use of this kind of term, namely, “manifestly insignificant”.
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Thank you to the witnesses for coming. It's a complicated bill, and I appreciate your taking the time to provide some clarity.
I have to come back to the funding once again. We heard from both NIRB and the Nunavut Planning Commission that they're having difficulty meeting their current obligations, never mind the new obligations that are being added as a result of this bill.
Did the department do an analysis of the funding that would be required not only to meet current obligations but for new obligations in the legislation? Did they actually do an analysis?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
An analysis has not been completed yet. As part of the implementation process, the intention is to do some analysis once the act comes into effect to analyze if there are any incremental costs that would need to be factored into the implementation contract.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
We know there are incremental costs because there is a public registry. There's the requirement to do the translation.
In other words, the department doesn't have a handle on the amount it will cost to implement this piece of legislation.
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
That is not fully determined at this point. That will be determined in discussion with the parties in the implementation contracting process for the funding—
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
It's not fully determined. Does that mean the department has taken a look at what some of the requirements would be with regard to funding costs?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
We have not done a full analysis of the incremental costs at this point.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Have you done any analysis? You're using the words “full” and “partial”. Have you done any analysis?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
We have not started that analysis.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
We have a significant piece of legislation that's going to add a significant burden to regulatory bodies that will now have obligation under the legislation, and the department has not done any analysis of what costs would be incurred.
Senior Counsel, Negotiations, Northern Affairs and Federal Interlocuter, Department of Justice
The concept was largely that after the bill is enacted there's a period of time for implementation prior to its being brought into force by an order, so during that time the concept at the working group level was to discuss with NPC, NIRB and other stakeholders the incremental costs associated with additional responsibilities under this bill and, in that context, develop an implementation plan and some budgeting for the implementation.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Forgive me if there is a great deal of scepticism around that given the fact that my understanding from hearing from the Nunavut Planning Commission and NIRB is although they've had some bumps in their current funding, in fact their current implementation agreement hasn't been renegotiated. Is that correct?
Director General, Natural Resources and Environment Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I believe that's correct.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Why would the participants believe they are going to get the money to do their job if you can't even negotiate this current implementation agreement? What is the good faith measure that they're going to get what they need to do the job? Is it, “Trust me, I'm from the government. I'm here to help you?”
