Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 26th, 2015

[Adam Chamberlain]

I have two comments. One is that Nunavut is different from NWT and Yukon. There are distinct differences in the remoteness of the communities. Yes, it's a matter of degree, I suppose, but if you were to look at this from a broader point of view, I think that the north and the south have to be viewed differently from the point of view of AMPs in the way that they're applied. So they may appear in legislation and regulation identically, or very close to identically, but they ought to be imposed or applied differently from a regulatory point of view or from a policy point of view down the road. This is one of the reasons we can continue to support this legislation the way it is because it's one thing to have these things on the books, and it's another thing to apply them, and how you do that is going to be significant and should be done differently in the north and the south.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Thank you.

We'll move for the next five minutes to Ms. Ashton.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Thank you.

I guess my question is for any and all witnesses, including those who are joining us by phone, and it's the question of capacity. There are clearly changes that will come into effect with regard to water licensing and extended powers within Nunavut. Is there room for increased support for capacity-building, should the federal government be looking at this area and working to support Nunavut in building the capacity that will be necessary going forward?

Perhaps we could start with Ms. Copland, if you have any thoughts on this, or Mr. Barry.

[Ryan Barry]

I think I'd defer most of it to the Nunavut Water Board, as it's more applicable to them. We could just say that we've supported the Nunavut Water Board's concerns about capacity and the need to ensure that there's adequate resourcing for the boards to do their jobs, as well as to ensure that there are actual board member appointments in place. It has been an ongoing concern for many years to make sure that appointments are made in a timely manner and that vacancies are not permitted to occur, because that has an impact upon the ability to have quorum and to make decisions. That's our primary concern.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Great, so maybe, given that comment, Mr. Barry, I will ask the representatives from the Nunavut Water Board to share their thoughts and perhaps give direction to all of us who are here around the table on how the federal government has a role to play in supporting capacity-building.

[Teresa Meadows]

Absolutely, thank you.

Picking up on what Mr. Barry said, I think one of the key things, not to put too fine a point on it, is that until this fall, the Nunavut Water Board had two outstanding vacancies on the board that exceeded 700 days. That's almost two years of vacancy. Given the staggered terms of board member appointments, every three years or so the board stands a chance of losing quorum completely and being unable to do its business for a period of time if there's a delay in appointments. Board appointments are always an issue.

It used to be as well, until last week, that funding of the board was an issue. I think this committee has probably heard repeatedly and often that the board had been underfunded. A considerable amount of funding has now been secured. Going forward the expectation is that some of that underfunding over the last 10 years will now be addressed. The board is optimistic that the additional funding will certainly support capacity.

When we're talking about capacity in an integrated regulatory process, we're not only talking about the capacity of the board in terms of board member appointments and having sufficient funding capacity. We're also talking about the limits of capacity on the other participants in the integrated regulatory process.

For example, the board is very much reliant on the technical information and inputs provided by agencies like Environment Canada, the Government of Nunavut's Department of Environment, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. In the last year and a bit the board has seen that there are no technical review comments coming in from some of the parties. They've been identifying the fact that they are at capacity and don't have the human resources, or the financial resources in some cases, to travel to public hearings, public meetings, pre-hearing conferences, or technical meetings. The board is starting to see the participants requesting that there not be in-person public meetings and that the meetings be by teleconference.

I think you can understand and appreciate that in a territory that is so vast, and where travel distances are very expensive, as soon as we start to see capacity difficulties with the Inuit organizations and the government participants, the board's evidentiary record becomes lessened and the participation and the presentation before the community that is directly affected by water licensing decisions becomes limited. When that happens it brings the integrity of the whole regulatory process into question.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Thank you very much.

I think that concludes our time, but I did want to express my appreciation for the analysis you've shared on how cuts on the Ottawa side of things to departments that help the work you do in Nunavut stand to affect the kind of work you're doing. That's something I think we can take away from what we heard today.

Thank you to all of you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

That's the end of our questioning for today. I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here, as well as those who have joined us by teleconference.

The meeting is adjourned.