Evidence of meeting #4 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
All right.
The government appointed the panel. The panel said there are a lot of problems, but the owner doesn't agree. Is that correct?
4:30 p.m.
Director General, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
Yes.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
Thank you.
Ms. Crockatt said the Mackenzie pipeline was an 18- to 21-year project. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that project held up for many years by the company itself?
4:30 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
As we indicated previously, I think the exact timelines for that project are debatable. The project itself predated the major projects management office initiatives, so it's not something where we had concrete statistics. There was a separate office established prior to the MPMO specifically to manage the responsibilities for this project.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
All right.
I've only got 30 seconds left.
The Ring of Fire is part of this major project.
4:30 p.m.
Director General, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
Yes, there are two mining projects in Ontario in the Ring of Fire region that are MPMO projects.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
What does this mean in terms of resource assistance from your office?
4:30 p.m.
Director General, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
It means that for those two projects, which is a Cliffs chromite mine and the Eagle's Nest mine, we will develop a project agreement and make sure that there are target timelines, the environmental assessment regulatory permit phases, and we will monitor and track. If there are issues, we will use our monthly deputy minister's committee meeting to resolve them.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
How would the 12 first nations in the Ring of Fire benefit from the MPMO?
4:30 p.m.
Director General, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
It means that for those two projects there will be a coordinated whole-of-government approach to aboriginal consultation. Instead of potentially having multiple federal departments going out and consulting them on the same project, there will be a coordinated approach which leads to more meaningful consultation.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
We go now to Mr. Leef, followed by Mr. Bevington and then Mr. Allen.
Go ahead please, Mr. Leef, for up to five minutes.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Gentlemen, thank you for your information so far.
I didn't see it in the package and I'm not sure if you had mentioned it earlier, but what's the threshold to determine a project that would actually enter the MPMO? Is there a dollar value or is there a size value?
4:30 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
The way we had developed before wasn't based on a dollar value but it was based on the type of environmental study that was required for that project. If it required that it be subject to a review panel assessment, or comprehensive study level assessment, or it required an assessment by multiple levels of government, then it would be subject to the major projects management office initiative.
Going forward now in terms of projects that we're involved in, there's a lot more clarity. It's essentially defined in the project list regulations under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Those major projects that are identified under that regulation are managed through the major projects management office initiative. That regulation essentially identifies types of projects, for example, a metal mine of a certain capacity or a hydro facility of a certain capacity that require a federal assessment.
4:30 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
I would say 90%, yes, are resource based.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
There's an entire regulatory system that looks at a ton of projects. If the focus is on resource-based projects, how would that alleviate pressure on the entire regulatory system as a whole?
4:30 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
Certainly, and it's one thing we didn't talk about too much in this presentation, but the major projects management office is an initiative, it's not just about the office itself.
As part of the initiative, there was an investment in enhancing the scientific and technical capacity of the key regulatory departments and agencies involved in the initiative. Departments like Environment Canada, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Fisheries and Oceans, and Aboriginal Affairs received capacity funding, essentially additional resources to supplement their resource base, to manage these projects in a timely and expeditious manner and to make sure they were done as effectively as possible.
Investment in these departments' and agencies’ resource development related projects certainly increases their capacity on all projects.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
Okay.
We hear talk about where the focus is going to lie with a one project, one timeframe review. If I hear you correctly, you're saying that because of the model and the enhancement with science and regulatory reviews, inspections, and presumably enforcement and capacity development as well, will allow greater focus where the focus is required.
4:35 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
That is correct. That's a fundamental premise under the plan for responsible resource development, in terms of focusing departmental resources on projects of higher risk, really focusing our resources on higher-risk activities.
As well, those projects which in the past hadn't demonstrated a potential for significant environmental effects, we're going to manage through other mechanisms and processes. We are going to focus our resources going forward on the large projects, allocating that investment throughout the life cycle of these projects. We're not so much focused only on the review process, but now we have new compliance and enforcement mechanisms in the back end of the process to ensure that any of those terms and conditions and measures identified through the environmental assessment can be tracked, monitored, enforced and followed up. We have the tools, including new fines, to ensure that those mitigation measures are enforced.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
Perfect.
I think it was detailed. It's easy to understand that when there is a streamlined process under way and projects are either able to move forward or stopped, you can see the direct financial benefit from an economic point in terms of what the industry does or GDP development.
When you centralize these things, and you're making decisions with the enhanced capacity you talked about and somebody is overseeing this and a mandate is understood, there must be a realization of substantial savings to government by doing this as well.
Do we have some sort of percentage value of that? Perhaps you could make a general comment on the realization of savings for government when we streamline these things and make them more effective.
4:35 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
Certainly, where we're looking at opportunities to provide a more efficient and effective process and eliminating duplication and carrying out multiple regulatory review processes and multiple stages of public hearings, there are savings to be made, but we've never characterized or sold what we've done as an efficiency or a cost-savings exercise.
It has been really important for us to ensure that those savings are reinvested, that the effectiveness storyline is there, that we're reinvesting what we save at the front end into the back end of the process, that there is compliance, effective enforcement, and follow-up of—
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
—enhanced capacity, scientific research, technical reports, enhanced inspection, and regulatory review and enforcement.
4:35 p.m.
Director General of Policies, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
That's right, and to do things better in the long run.
As Jim indicated previously, it's hard to have concrete metrics in how effective those follow-up measures have been. We're talking about projects with decade-long life cycles. To fully measure the outcomes of those processes, to have those concrete stats will take us decades. We are taking concrete steps to ensure that we have the mechanisms and processes in place for more effective enforcement and follow up, mechanisms that just weren't in place in the past.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative