Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 25th, 2014

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

I have a final question. You noted in your remarks an extra $6.5 million for the National Energy Board. I know that there have been other questions around this table about pipelines, and the NEB is deeply involved in that. Can you go into more detail about the $6.5 million in the supplementaries here? What's it being spent for and how does it directly impact, affect, and assist Canadians?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Yes. Specifically, the increase of $6.5 million is primarily due to its review of TransCanada's Energy East pipeline and Imperial's deepwater offshore well applications. I think I mentioned at least one or maybe both.

Because safety and environmental protection go to the core of what the National Energy Board's priorities are, this is about providing safety information and, equally important, compliance and enforcement actions, which again is why I may have taken some exception to a previous question that I think may have overlooked the new tools that the National Energy Board has for compliance and enforcement—in some instances, the doubling of fines.

Of course, I will never miss an opportunity to talk about the important work the National Energy Board does in its full-scale review of a given project. Its success is manifested in the fact that there are at least 72,000 kilometres of federally regulated pipeline, for which Canada has a 99.999% safety record.

We believe that in the exercise of building public confidence, our responsibility, whether it's pipeline safety or a pipeline regime legislative framework, should focus on safety, prevention, preparedness, and response. Of course, a world-class—if not world-leading—liability regime is an important part of giving Canadians the confidence that these pipeline projects should proceed. We know, at least here in North America, that a majority of folks appear to understand and support that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Trost.

Thank you to all members for your questions to the minister today.

Thank you very much, Minister, for your presentation, for the answers to the questions, and for taking the time to schedule this so soon after the request came in.

We will suspend the meeting for a couple of minutes as we change witnesses and have departmental officials—in one case the same—come before our committee for about 55 minutes of additional time with them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We resume the meeting with witnesses from the Department of Natural Resources.

We have with us, remaining or staying at the table, Bob Hamilton, deputy minister. Welcome again. As well, with him, assistant deputy minister, chief financial officer, corporate management and services sector, Kami Ramcharan. Welcome again. We've had you before at this committee and look forward to your answers to questions.

I would assume you don't have a presentation to make. You're ready to get started with questions. We will start with the seven-minute round, with Ms. Crockatt followed by Ms. Charlton, and possibly with their time split, and Mr. Regan.

Go ahead please, Ms. Crockatt, up to seven minutes.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you very much to our officials for coming in and answering the questions.

I think a lot of Canadians don't understand that when we have estimates like this we do get a chance to break them down and you do come and appear before us to answer questions so we can have a more detailed understanding. I appreciate that you make yourselves available for that, thank you.

There are several things I thought were quite fascinating in what we heard from the minister's testimony. One is that Natural Resources is the largest employer of aboriginals in the country. I think a lot of people don't understand that. It's one of the areas you're moving forward with in response to the Eyford report.

I want to talk about the safety and environmental protection compliance and enforcement role, and how that's being enhanced here with the estimates we have before us. In my riding of Calgary Centre many people who work in the oil and gas industry also consider themselves environmentalists. They live within sight of the oldest natural Canadian national park: Banff National Park. They spend their weekends out in the mountains and the environment's incredibly important. They want to be assured that our energy products can be transported safely across the country.

In the estimates, can you share with us the government's plan for responsible resource development and inform us what actions we are taking to ensure we have a world-class safety system? I'd like you to talk about marine, rail, and pipeline transportation, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Go ahead, please, Mr. Hamilton.

[Bob Hamilton, Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources]

Okay, thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I should just say in addition to Kami, I do have other officials here with me so that if we get into detailed questions, I'd like to have the ability to call them to the table if they can provide more detailed answers.

On the question of safety, it definitely has been an issue of increased activity for the government. The issue that the minister raised was public confidence: how do we make sure that we can have projects go forward in a way that the public has confidence that they'll be done environmentally, safely with respect to communities?

I'm not aware of anything in particular in the supplementary estimates that is directly on point to that. There are issues of increasing our consultations on the west coast with aboriginal communities, to get the message across and to make sure we're having those dialogues, but I would say if you look outside of the estimates, there definitely have been a number of changes in all of the areas you suggested: in the area of tanker safety, where the government introduced a number of measures such as mandatory double hulling; and additional research on the property of bitumen in the event of a spill.

There has been some work on enhancing tanker safety, and in all of these areas an effort to prevent what's happening, but also to make sure we are prepared in the event that the unfortunate event happens. So on tanker safety, pipeline safety, again, we will be coming forward with legislation, primarily ensuring an adequate liability regime to make sure that liabilities are established in the event of a spill and that the polluter-pay principle is respected and enshrined in law.

On rail safety, there have been a number of measures put forward in response to events to make sure we have a safe rail system for transport, as more of these products are transported by rail.

Those are initiatives that have taken place, not necessarily in the context of the supplementary estimates but in recent history, and as part of the ongoing efforts we have at the federal and provincial levels to try to ensure that resources can be shipped safely and with the confidence of Canadians.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Maybe I could just turn your attention to the estimates and indicate that there is $0.4 million, a relatively small amount, in vote 5b, capital from National Defence to Natural Resources, and this is to support the Canadian safety and security program. It's my understanding this is providing science and technology funds that are going to support and advance and respond to our public safety and security policy initiatives.

Can you elaborate on what this money is going to be spent for?

[Bob Hamilton]

Yes, this is a transfer of $400,000 from National Defence to us, which delivers science and technology solutions through the Canadian safety and security program, as you pointed out, support and advice to respond to the Government of Canada's public safety and security policy imperatives. So it's a bit different in content from the measures that I outlined earlier but it is there.

This Canadian safety and security program is led by Defence Research and Development Canada's centre for security science, and it has a mandate to fund projects in science and technology that will support Canada's public safety and security policy needs.

We provide mobile radiation sensing and mapping capabilities as part of the Government of Canada's response in the event of a nuclear or radiological emergency.

That is the essence of this program, and you're right, it is part of the estimates, for $400,000.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Now maybe I could just go over to the major projects management office. One of our priorities is to involve aboriginals more in the major projects in terms of jobs and involvement. I wonder if you could talk about the major projects management office and how that will get aboriginals more involved.

[Bob Hamilton]

Yes, the major projects management office, which has been set up and which has additional funding provided here in the supplementary estimates, is really a reflection of the increased activity we have on the west coast with energy projects and the important role that first nations communities play in the development of those projects. The focal point for the activity of the office, as the minister indicated, is to promote engagement and dialogue with aboriginal communities. The other way we are going to do that is in partnership with the B.C. government. So there will actually be a tripartite forum of federal government, provincial government, and first nations to try to talk through some of the implications of these project developments going forward.

One specific thing I would point to, in addition to this general dialogue, is that there is an effort to try to uncover better the cumulative impacts of studies. That's something my colleagues over at Environment Canada are looking at in this context, again together with aboriginal communities and the province: how we sort through the questions of not just looking at projects on a project-by-project basis but at the cumulative impacts of a number of projects. That's an area that, in the environmental assessment regime, countries worldwide are grappling with: how to do this well. We in Canada are also trying to figure out better ways to do it. Part of the MPMO—West activity will be to engage with first nations and the province to try to do this.

In general, I would say that the objective is to try to have a better dialogue with first nations and with the province about these projects and to engage earlier, more often, and better and build trust and dialogue together as the projects go forward. That's the thrust of what we're trying to do with MPMO—West.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you.

And thank you, Ms. Crockatt.

We'll go now to Ms. Charlton for up to seven minutes.

If you'd like to split your time, go ahead; do so at any time throughout your questioning.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'll ask one very quick question and then turn the rest of my time over to Monsieur Genest-Jourdain.

Thank you both for being here and on the hot seats now that the minister has left.

You are probably aware that earlier today there was a news report out of New Brunswick—a CBC article, actually—that reports that the NEB chair and CEO Peter Watson does not think that looking after environmental problems is the board's job. He said that taking care of the environment is up to the provinces and TransCanada Corporation.

I'm wondering whether you agree with the suggestion that protecting the environment should not be a focus of the NEB's work.

[Bob Hamilton]

Without having seen what has been reported to be said—I guess I was a bit too focused on preparing for today's event—what I can say about the NEB is that they look at projects that are put forward, such as the pipelines about which we have talked a little today, and at the implications of those projects for a variety of factors including the environment. I know from my experience at Environment Canada that we would be contributing to an NEB assessment of a project to see what our sense was of the implications for species at risk or what have you.

It is true that there are other regulatory bodies and activities by which to look at environmental impacts in government, but I can say that as part of the NEB assessment of whatever project they're looking at—it could be Energy East or Northern Gateway—they look at the implications of that project for the community and the environment.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

So you look at it a bit differently from the CEO. Thanks very much.

[Bob Hamilton]

Well, without having seen his comments I can tell you what I'm saying.

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

I hope your afternoon is starting out well.

In the minister's presentation, he mentioned that no project would proceed in Canada unless and until a thorough and independent review had demonstrated it to be safe for the public and the environment. He also said that the department had stepped up its efforts to enhance our world-class marine safety systems.

I have a question about aboriginal engagement.

An environmental assessment is under way for the Arnaud mining project near Sept-Îles. My constituents, including the Innu communities of Uashat and Maliotenam, strongly oppose the project. Do you intend to require the developer to prepare a detailed characterization of the bay in Sept-Îles, which will be the receiving environment for thousands of tons of contaminants produced by the mine?

As you know, navigable waters are under federal jurisdiction and must be protected from pollution resulting from extractive activities. The health of our citizens and the survival of our marine ecosystem are at stake.

[Bob Hamilton]

I am not very familiar with that project. One of my colleagues may be able to comment on that. If not, I will try to find out who is in charge of assessing that project and provide the information to the committee. I am not sure of the process that will be followed in the case of that project.

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

Can we get the answer in writing?

[Bob Hamilton]

Yes, that is absolutely no problem.

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you.

I have another quick question for you.

You talked about first nations engagement. What efforts are made to obtain the approval of first nations members? You know as well as I do that band councillors, under the Indian Act, have no authority over the natural resources on their traditional lands.

In 2014, the government has an obligation to engage with first nations members. When it comes to natural resources and extraction activities, what efforts are made to seek the approval of first nations members?

[Bob Hamilton]

There are two parts to that answer.

First of all, the evaluations of the Major Project Management Office - West take into account aboriginal engagement and aboriginal land claims.

The second part of the answer is more general. The departments are very active and have a lot of resources. In the Department of Natural Resources, Environment Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, a lot of people spend a lot of time working with first nations members on certain projects to ensure that everyone clearly understands all the environmental impacts.

All the departments are very active in that regard. The answer to your question lies partly in the office's evaluations, but a more general component is also at play. We take that very seriously because many current projects have implications for first nations communities. The government has to understand those implications and discuss them with the members of first nations and other communities.

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

How much time do I have left?

A minute. I'm going to come back to an important question.

I want to come back to the distinction between consulting band councillors elected under the Indian Act and consulting first nations members. History has shown, and I have learned this from my own experience, that all too often, the government systematically consults the nine or however many band councillors, elected under the Indian Act, and then puts the project forward, claiming that it has consulted with the communities.

Do you realize that this is a problem in 2014? The government has to take steps to engage with and seek the approval of first nations members, not just the nine elected band councillors. The federal government has an obligation to engage all first nations members, not just elected ones.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We'll take that as advice. We have no time for a response.

Mr. Regan, go ahead, up to seven minutes, please.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the witnesses for staying around.

Let me first ask a question about the National Energy Board and the $6.5 million that has been assigned for the assessment of the Energy East pipeline, as well as the proposed Shell deepwater well.

As I understand it, NRCan spends that money in advance and recovers it from the...The minister mentioned that it's recovered from the industry. Why do you have to spend it in advance? How does that work?