Transport Committee on March 31st, 2009

[Chester Reimer]

Maybe you misunderstood me. I'm not an expert in security. What I was aiming at was that with any kind of security system or any kind of surveillance, please involve the Inuit.

Secondly, I think you have to involve.... Again, back to the diplomacy argument, China was mentioned, and the Arctic Council was mentioned. Whether it's security or an environmental bill--and as Mr. Volpe said, it's a transport bill, but it's still an environment bill, in a sense--you need to have Inuit involved, and you need to have other countries involved. Sovereignty, even though it may sound like an oxymoron, involves other countries. You can't do it on your own.

Coming back to surveillance, you need to work with other countries. They are not our enemies. Inuit, for example, have cousins and friends and others living in Greenland. Greenland is becoming more and more sovereign. On June 21 of this year, they will have negotiated what you might say is a sovereignty association with Denmark. It's another step towards home rule. Build upon the Inuit having these ancient ties to the other people, and build on Canada's diplomacy also.

If Canada wants to strengthen the surveillance, stand up at the Arctic Council and make it something that has more teeth. Incidentally, China, as Mr. Huebert said, is becoming more involved. China has applied to be an observer at the Arctic Council, and that could be a place where we could involve them more.

But coming back to your specific question, I'm not an expert in surveillance techniques; I'm talking more about the process and involving Inuit.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Ms. Crowder. Welcome.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you to the witnesses for appearing before the committee today.

I have a couple of points I want to touch on. In some of the background documents prepared for the committee, it says that this extension will give us jurisdiction over an additional half a million square kilometres of our water, which is roughly equivalent to the land mass of one of our prairie provinces. It also cited Senator Rompkey, in terms of the key word being “control”. We can prove that the water is Canada's, but what people care about is control.

There are two points there. One is that simply because we have legislation that extends the boundaries, without adequate resources to actually look at environmental protection, it's a fine statement to the international community about extending our boundaries, but the mechanisms to actually enforce it simply aren't there.

A number of you have touched on surveillance and enforcement. I'm more interested in the environmental aspects, so I'll direct my question to Mr. Adams.

It's very troubling in your statement that you indicated there are very few options for cleanup available. Given that, what do you see that needs to happen immediately in conjunction with this piece of legislation?

[William Adams]

I'd like to answer that.

I just want to mention that this is the last day of the International Polar Year. The funding that flowed into that research activity is winding down, so there's an opportunity there to continue some of that incredibly good work. Some of it involves surveillance, and some of it also involves the potential for enforcement that you're talking about.

In terms of what you can actually do, I agree with my co-witness. There is very little you can do once oil gets into ice-covered waters in massive quantities. You have to treat it like a very major human catastrophe, like a nuclear bomb going off or something. There is very little you can do about that.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

In that light, what we really need to be doing then is preventing those accidents from happening.

[William Adams]

That's exactly right. We have to do everything we can for prevention.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

So surveillance and enforcement are fine, but what do we actually need to put in place to prevent those accidents from happening?

[William Adams]

If you can surveil the environment and see ships coming that you know are not appropriately constructed for the ice conditions, you can prevent them from entering the zones where you feel there's a risk. That's one thing.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Okay, so that goes back to the comment around surveillance and enforcement, then.

[William Adams]

Yes.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

So you need a gatekeeper on either end.

[William Adams]

Basically, you need to try to keep the risks from entering that particular zone.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Are there things besides surveillance and enforcement that would be required in terms of that gatekeeping function?

[William Adams]

For smaller oil spills, it is possible to do some cleanup.

To my knowledge, and from my reading of the literature, it's very interesting that Canada and Norway are the only two countries that have ever conducted real oil spills in ice-covered waters. The Americans don't allow it; they always use simulators for their tests. I believe that's correct.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I come from the west coast of British Columbia. People are probably familiar with the B.C. Ferries vessel that went down at Hartley Bay. Of course, that vessel is still under water, and there is a slow diesel leak from it, which is causing all kinds of problems. We can't even deal with it in a more benign environment, so it's very troubling to hear that we're opening up the Arctic to potential economic and environmental disasters, which is what it would amount to.

I want to turn to Mr. Reimer for a minute. You referenced the importance of Inuit consultations. I happen to be the aboriginal affairs critic for the NDP, and consultation is a constant battle that comes up at the aboriginal affairs committee.Could you comment on what you see as key elements of that consultative process?

I also want to comment on country food. I saw some statistics recently that suggest that in many parts of the north, country food still comprises 70% to 80% of people's diets.

Could you talk about what needs to be included in that consultation?

[Chester Reimer]

Canada has signed on to many international instruments. Unfortunately, it has not yet signed on to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We're very confident it will. Australia just has, and there are only three countries remaining that haven't.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

President Obama has apparently signalled that he intends to, so that will leave two.

[Chester Reimer]

Exactly. Other international protocols that Canada has signed on to include the terms “free, prior, and informed consent”. If you focus on those three words, you can develop a really strong policy around them. As the aboriginal affairs critic, you know that Canada has obligations under the land claims settlements; they're set out very clearly. We have obligations, and it's important to follow them in how we consult on various issues. That's more of a domestic approach that I won't get into detail on.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

The challenge with it is that what we've seen is substantial inaction in land claims implementation. If we're talking about using land claims as the process for setting out consultation, it doesn't necessarily mean it's going to happen. You may know about the McCrank report that came out in 2008, which talked about changing some of the regulatory processes in the north. One of the options is actually to use less of the consultation process that was put in place around the land claims implementation.

You probably can't comment on this, but I think what would be really important is that consultation processes be developed in conjunction with the Inuit so that they reflect what they see as being important in consultation.

[Chester Reimer]

Oh, absolutely, I agree with you. There are woeful inadequacies in the implementation of the land claims. As you know, some of them are before the courts. Of course there has to be political will. Unfortunately, as Mr. Adams said, if there's a major oil spill, you can't do a lot. If you have a government that is not willing to implement the land claims and the consultation procedures properly, what can you do? We have to work, we have to have confidence that our system will change.

The land claims issue is just one element of it. We have to look internationally, under Canada's obligations, and have some political will about it.

You mentioned country food. Yes, it's 70% to 80%, and in some cases more than that. As our study The Sea Ice is Our Highway indicated, despite having to go much further across sea ice and therefore coming in contact more and more with the increased shipping lanes, the Inuit have unequivocally said they will not give up their traditional food and they will go further for it. As you know, there are many nutritional and important dietary components of it. I wanted to respond to your comment about that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be splitting my time with Ms. Hoeppner.

We've heard a lot of information today, and although changes to this act are very insignificant and some would say minimal, it has far-reaching effects: for Natural Resources Canada, Environment Canada, the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Department of Indian Affairs—very significant ramifications indeed.

Although we don't know what's going on behind the scenes involving Canada and other governments, I'm interested to know, Mr. Huebert, whether this is the right first step for Canada.

[Dr. Robert Huebert]

I believe we should have taken this first step back in 1986, to be honest, when we enclosed the Arctic with straight baselines. My view is, better late than never. The Russians are moving toward enclosure; the Americans and Europeans are moving towards openness in the context of this waterway.

I think this is a completely necessary first step at this point, but we absolutely—let me restate what all my colleagues have said—have to get serious with enforcement. The one department no one has mentioned is the Department of National Defence. The reality is that there is going to be a nationally owned vessel—not commercial, since we can probably deal with commercial shipping through the IMO and in other ways, if we are proactive....

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I understand.

[Dr. Robert Huebert]

But we are going to have to deal with countries coming in, and that's going to require DND also.