Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 14th, 2012

[William Boor]

It's just a tailings containment area. To go a step further, early testings—and this has to continue—are to try to identify whether there's any hazardous element in the tailings. So far we think it's very manageable. That's what will continued to be investigated during the environmental assessment process, because there are ways to manage these things.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

I'll pass on the rest of my time to Mr. Chisholm.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Chisholm, you have about a minute and a half.

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thanks very much.

I'm interested in the presentation. I'm curious, though, why the companies have not been more engaged with the local first nations communities in terms of trying to resolve this issue around the joint environmental assessment panel. These are relationships that are progressing at levels far ahead of what's going on here, from what I can tell, across this country.

This is going to get resolved by the courts, I believe, but since this is a big project that is going to have a huge impact on those communities, would it not be better if the parties agreed to a joint panel and got at it? It's not just crown land; it's land that has been influenced by treaties.

[Ronald Coombes]

Can I answer that question? We've actually got a policy right now in the EA process with the Kaska Dene in British Columbia that I think a lot of people could take advantage of: we actually send all of our draft materials to the first nations long before that stuff actually gets handed in to the government offices. We have a 100% open door policy that we'll answer any questions. If they have a professional who would like some answers, certainly those questions can be asked and answered.

I would have to agree with you that there's an easy way around all of this. Whether you want to call it a joint environmental review or whether or not participation is an important thing.... I think participation is very important. Our feeling as a group of companies is that we want to keep everybody in the know as to what's going on at all times, so I think addressing that may be of help. We could be handing the information to them so they can actually have a proper review of it prior to submission.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Chisholm; your time is up.

We'll go now to Mr. Allen. You have up to five minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have a two-part question and then I think Mr. Anderson will finish the time.

Deputy Grand Chief, in your presentation you mentioned community infrastructure and talked about how BHP and Rio Tinto made some investments in the communities from that standpoint. The first part of my question is this: what process did they go through? How would that compare with a De Beers situation, or does it?

Then to our two company representatives, how active are you in your community projects, and how so?

[Deputy Grand Chief Les Louttit]

I would imagine that the companies I referred to in my presentation undertook those.... There's a corporate social responsibility issue that companies should be engaging in with the aboriginal communities. Those are examples of companies that have shown that engagement and had a desire to improve the lives of people who would be impacted indefinitely.

This is something that's possible, and it's quite possible in the Ring of Fire. In fact, it has to take place; otherwise, communities get left behind. As I indicated, the Government of Canada funding for major capital projects in these communities is declining such that within 10 years we may not have the funding we used to have. It's all now centralized here across the river at the Hull office. The projects that have been put on the major capital plan have now been deferred and delayed years into the future.

We see no alternative. We have to leverage the wealth extraction from our territories to fund our community development and our community facilities. That has to happen. Where else are we going to get money? We can't go to the World Bank, as underdeveloped countries can.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Mr. Boor, Mr. Coombes, how actively are you involved in the communities where you have projects, and how so?

[William Boor]

On the social responsibility side, we're currently investing in social investment programs in some of the most directly affected communities. One example would be the prescription drug program to try to reduce that problem. We recognize that these things are all connected. You need to invest in the social programs to allow people to be ready for the training that will prepare them for the jobs that in turn are going to reverse the trend, which was talked about earlier, of people leaving the communities.

This is all connected, so Cliffs looks at it in a very total way, and we fully expect to continue investing in various programs on the social front in these communities. Making a difference in these communities through our project is part of our definition of success.

[Ronald Coombes]

As a junior group of companies, we only have the one project right now that is of a size to warrant engaging in community support, etc. Certainly, our aspect regarding community benevolence and helping the community is there.

As an example, there was a first nation in northeastern B.C. that had a gas station with a tank that was kaput. They needed a new tank. We graciously gave them the moneys required to be able to put a new tank into that gas station so that they could run a business. It's not a business associated with ours, but we'll certainly use that gas station for fuel purposes for ourselves in the future.

We recognize that camps and all these things are necessary to have a relationship. We're talking about a relationship with the peoples, and you want that relationship to be fostered with kindness and to help them enjoy some of the wealth that will hopefully come from the project eventually. I think we're all on the same page as far as support is concerned.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Anderson, you have up to five minutes. Go ahead, please.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up a little bit on the topic of regulatory reform. I don't know if anyone has had an opportunity this morning to talk about what improvements you might make. When MP Greg Rickford and I had a chance to travel across northern Ontario and northern B.C., we heard consistently that we need to do a better job in terms of regulatory reform.

One lady told us that when it comes to the EA process, they have a stack of documents this high that they need to deal with, and when it comes to the duty to consult, they have a much smaller stack. She thought perhaps we could find a better balance. I'm interested in your suggestions this morning as to how we might improve the regulatory structure and system. We've talked about that aspect at committee here, and I'm sure there will be some recommendations in our report.

Please go ahead.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Coombes, go ahead, please.

[Ronald Coombes]

I don't think the duplication of review helps either party. As far as regulatory purposes go, I think there should be more of a collaboration between the first nations and the companies with regard to the EA process. I see that as being important.

Of course, we're both sourcing individuals for professional guidance, and both sides are basically sourcing the same information. The duplication of cost doesn't seem to make any sense. At the end of the day, we're certainly all concerned about the same thing, and that's the environment. We'd like to see that everything that needs to be mitigated is mitigated prior to start-up, etc.

I don't disagree with the idea of consultation. I think it's very important. I think the first nations should know. It's in their community that we're planning on building these mine sites, and they certainly have the right to know what's happening or what's going to happen and what future ramifications there are.

I think we all fully support that.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Ferris, do you want to go first in case we run out of time, and then we'll go back to Mr. Boor?

[Raymond Ferris]

I've always felt that consultation is a two-way communication between the first nations, companies, and the government or whomever. We feel that it's incumbent upon the government, because they're the ones that have the duty to consult, to accommodate some of the first nations' needs, which would include things in that big stack of binders. For us, it's simply another language that we do not understand. To go through all that, first nations with the expertise to understand that language and put it into terms we can understand need to be hired.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

You're saying that something simplified and streamlined, without skipping the necessary steps, would help you.

[Raymond Ferris]

It's fine to bring a whole bunch of binders to a community, but what good is it going to do if we don't understand what's being said in there?

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay.

Would you like to comment, Mr. Boor?

[William Boor]

First of all, I think that this might be the definition of success: having a smaller and more streamlined procedure.

I look at the consultation as something we actually completely support. That's the “how to”. We're trying to do a full review of the environmental impacts of a development that has both benefits and environmental concerns that need to be addressed. The consultation I don't see as a problem. We have to get into the details of what it looks like to run one of these environmental assessment processes. Very often I find we're talking about such concepts as joint panel review versus a comprehensive one and not sitting down and talking about how we can get it done. We can get it done with an environmental assessment that meets the needs of all the parties involved.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Grand Chief, did you have a comment, or did Mr. Ferris want back in?

[Deputy Grand Chief Les Louttit]

Going back to De Beers, when we were negotiating agreements with De Beers, they provided the environmental assessment documents after the fact, and there was only a very small section within those reports that referred to native aboriginal values, traditional hunting areas, and all of that, and consultations. It was very limited. I believe that was a comprehensive review process that was undertaken by the proponent, which was De Beers, but there was no first nations involvement to any extent during the negotiations themselves, because they were required to talk about the EA process.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay.

Mr. Ferris, did you have a comment?

[Raymond Ferris]

I just wanted to point out that first nations required some resourcing, and the government, on April 19 of last year, approved some funding for individual first nations. To this day, not one of our first nations has received any kind of funding. Maybe one that was approved....