Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 18th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Ms. McEwen, you're going to have to do it very quickly, because we're a bit over time here.

[Beth McEwen]

Okay.

When trees are under stress, they become less resilient to pests. We can expect more stressed trees and less resilience.

[Kent Hehr]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you.

Mr. Eglinski.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all our witnesses today.

I'll start again with Ms. McEwen.

You stated that your program was very successful. On one aspect of it, I know you said you spent $70 million. However, in listening to your presentation, it sounds as though you spent hundreds of millions of dollars in the Toronto area to combat the various species that came in.

Do you feel that your work was effective in stopping some of them, eradicating some of them, or holding some of them at bay? Do you think your work was successful?

[Beth McEwen]

We have been successful with the Asian long-horned beetle, working with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Canadian Forest Service and the other partners. To date, we are very close to eradication, which was the objective.

With emerald ash borer, the money has been spent largely on mopping up, removing the dead trees. We are currently protecting about 9,000 ash trees that remain in our landscape, and there are a few that remain out there still that were not protected.

With respect to other diseases, we are keeping gypsy moth at bay, but we are having to do spraying more frequently. We have concerns that if we have to spray every year, that has a cost and other impacts.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you.

As you mentioned earlier, we are seeing species coming up from the United States. Do you think it's solely your responsibility, as the City of Toronto, to combat these species, or should it be a coordinated effort between the municipality, the province, and the federal government?

[Beth McEwen]

I absolutely think it should be a coordinated effort. We help each other.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Have you received any financial assistance from the federal government in combatting your species situations in the last decade?

[Beth McEwen]

We've been compensated for all the cost associated with eradication of Asian long-horned beetle. We were not compensated for many of the costs, or very minimally, for the emerald ash borer, and nothing for the gypsy moth.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Okay, thank you.

I'll direct my next question to the Department of Public Safety.

You mentioned that you coordinate and set up emergency management plans. Are you responsible for Parks Canada?

[Patrick Tanguy]

No, we're not responsible for Parks Canada.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Is Parks Canada a separate entity that looks after its own identities and its own land masses?

[Patrick Tanguy]

Just quickly, when I say “planning”, at the national level we work internally with all the federal partners to really think about what is going to be the next fire season and how we can get prepared and pre-position some assets with different partners.

I am not doing the planning for Parks Canada, but I will interact with them just to make sure that collectively the federal family, whether it's at the regional or national level, works together.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

You said something very interesting. When the provinces reach a state where they can't handle a fire or emergency situation, your agency will step in and give assistance in many ways such as military, scientific, financial, equipment and so on.

We're seeing a situation in western Canada with the mountain pine beetle that came through Jasper National Park from British Columbia. British Columbia has been devastated from one end of the province to the other in all ways—east, west, north, south—and we're now seeing it emerge in the province of Alberta through the park. The park has done very little to mitigate or eradicate the pine beetle situation. They let it kind of flow through the park, and it has now gone through the entrance and is spreading through the western sectors of Alberta.

The Province of Alberta has spent hundreds of millions of dollars—and I think over just the last year it was $456 million—to eradicate them. Do you believe that the Government of Canada should be assisting? We assisted the Province of British Columbia back in the late 2000s with over $200 million to assist in trying to stop the pine beetle.

Do you feel it's necessary that, when a province can't handle the situation itself anymore and industry is taxed to a high level, the federal government should come into play beyond the research level?

[Patrick Tanguy]

Thank you. That's a great question.

On that front I would say that, when I was referring to the request for assistance, that is in the context of an emergency situation that is life-threatening, like a wildfire situation. You need to quickly put the resources in place to make sure that you're protecting Canadians.

When it comes to forestry pests or the mountain pine beetle, I don't see this as qualifying as the same type of emergency that we see when we're providing assistance. At the same time, although I confess to my ignorance on that front, I know there are other federal players, like the Canadian Forest Service and others, that work closely with provinces.

In my experience, there has never been a request for assistance for the specific situation of dealing with pests, because we're turning our attention to other emergencies that really put Canadians are risk.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I have a quick question about emergencies. As the pine beetle spreads through our province—it's now in Saskatchewan through the northern sector—the communities along the way are being threatened. We need to look at fire smart practices. We need to clean out certain areas. Is there an availability for communities or provinces to then come to the federal government to ask for assistance to help with those programs and protect the public at large?

[Patrick Tanguy]

Yes. To answer that, this is something we're quite aware of at Public Safety, so FireSmart is really supported by.... There have been different pilots in first nations communities and elsewhere. For instance, in the context of the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund, which has been part of the investing in Canada plan, there are ways for communities to consider those measures to be put in place. There are existing programs supporting this.

In the context of our emergency management strategy that I was referring to, we're working with all provinces and territories. Really, there's a lot of support for FireSmart, because we think this is the right approach to take. It really makes a difference.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I agree with you, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Cannings.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you all for being here today.

I'm going to start with Mr. Tanguy and Mr. Christiansen.

First of all, I thank your department. Over the last few years, unfortunately, my riding has been the recipient of your help in probably three different years. In 2015, we had major fires in the south Okanagan and Rock Creek areas that unfortunately burned a lot of homes. We had a break in 2016, and then in 2017, we had floods in the Okanagan and fires in all sorts of places. This year, it's the same. We had a big flood in Grand Forks, which I know your department helped with, and the army came in to help there and that's still going on. There were a lot of fires as well. We are seeing this need for assistance from emergency management groups, and I thank you for that.

The modern version of this started in B.C. in 2003 with the Kelowna fire and fires in Louis Creek and Barriere that destroyed more than 300 houses. We had the Filmon firestorm report in 2003. This picks up on the FireSmart program that the province was supposed to take on. It provided money for municipalities and first nations but it was really just a drop in the bucket. I think the report identified some 13,000 square kilometres that needed to be treated and thinned to protect communities, and less than 7% has been done over the last 13 years or so.

Is this a place where the federal government can really play a role? You mentioned the disaster adaptation and mitigation fund, which I'm dealing with now with Grand Forks, because we need big money. With that fund, as I recall, you need to have a project of over $20 million and.... Is that something that municipalities can tap into for prevention of these emergencies? I thought it was a response type of fund. Just answer that question and I might expand on it later.

[Patrick Tanguy]

Very quickly, Infrastructure Canada is leading on that project—the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund—but overall, I would say the government is trying. Of course, we need to be in a position where we can support response and recovery, but also, we need to shift. We need to be focusing on adaptation and mitigation. If you look at floods, for instance, we have a program in place that is really providing funding so you can put mitigation projects in place—not necessarily for structural projects—that will help to actually limit the costs of recovery.

The other thing I would point out is in the context of our emergency management strategy. I was alluding to this earlier. Federal and provincial ministers sat down together to say we need to have a public-facing emergency management strategy. Then once this is done—we're expecting in January, because we've been working really hard—you need to put some programs in place. In my view—on your questions about FireSmart—this is something that all levels of government, including indigenous communities, need to focus on collectively: how we're moving forward to actually support FireSmart and make sure that we are putting this in place beyond the pilot projects. If you go on the website of FireSmart, you can see that there are some communities that are actually FireSmart-approved across Canada, but you can do a lot more.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

I see this as a win-win-win situation, because the forest industry is really hurting in British Columbia. They had a good time while the beetle epidemic was there and they harvested a lot more than they normally do. Now that's all gone and we've had the fires. We have companies in my riding whose mills are well equipped to deal with smaller logs, so they would love to get logs from thinning operations. It would put all these people to work in communities that are hurting, especially around British Columbia.

It would seem that the province—at least until now because I think they're starting to step up this program again—is a place the federal government could get involved and not only provide jobs and help for these forestry communities, but also protect them in the future.

[Patrick Tanguy]

I told your group what you said. That's why I'm pointing to the emergency management strategy we've been working on. I know this is just a strategy, and people will react by saying this is just words, but when all provinces and territories come together to say they need to have their five pillars, and things like FireSmart or training. When it comes to emergency management training, there are ways we could do a better job as well. There is momentum in that direction.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

When you said building back, better, faster, this is what sprang to my mind. We need billions of dollars invested in this. It's not a small project. I think the federal government could get involved.