Evidence of meeting #11 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was arctic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Was there not a polar bear project, which is now over and for which the money remains in place?
3:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Environmental Assessment and Marine Program, Department of the Environment
We have ongoing research projects for the International Polar Year and other research that we do in the north.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thanks to the witnesses for joining us here today in such numbers. It's good to see.
First, I'd like to speak to you, Mr. Allin, in terms of the disposition of more environmental officers to Yellowknife. How would you characterize their duties there? Would they be primarily land-based? Are they actually going to be engaged offshore? Do you have a specific number of officers that are going to be engaged offshore?
3:55 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Planning and Coordination, Enforcement Branch, Department of the Environment
Mr. Chair, no, we don't have officers who will be dedicated solely to the marine environment. They will be based in Yellowknife. The majority of them will be in our environmental enforcement program.
Bear in mind that we have two enforcement programs. One's for wildlife and one's for pollution. It's environmental enforcement. So their duties will revolve primarily around the Fisheries Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. The wildlife officers are generally the ones who usually respond when there's a spill because of the “birds oiled at sea” provisions of the Migratory Birds Convention Act.
So there isn't just one piece of legislation. We don't carve out teams of people based on different pieces of legislation, except for the wildlife and environment split.
4 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
So you wouldn't really have a team that was going to be engaged in extending environmental work in....
In the offshore, I know, we're looking at over a billion dollars' worth of work that has been lined up with a number of leases in pretty sensitive areas. Could you characterize the kind of work you're going to do around that? How many person-years would be involved in assessing work in the Beaufort?
4 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Planning and Coordination, Enforcement Branch, Department of the Environment
That would be very difficult to say. You have to understand that in any given year, between 20% and 40% of our effort in enforcement is reactive. It depends on what happens, such as the occurrences, spills, and so on that we have no control over. The remainder we plan for based on what we perceive to be the greatest threats and risks in the vicinity.
In the Beaufort area, I know that every year we do a program of inspections around, I believe, the big Shell Exploration facility up there to ensure that they're operating within some of their permitting. But it would be very difficult for me to say exactly how many person-years will be directed towards....
Was your question pertaining mostly to the Beaufort area?
4 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Certainly that's the most active area we have off the coast, but we also have barging traffic. We have a number of things happening in the Beaufort that are of concern to all of us in terms of oil spills or any kind of action like that within the 100-mile or 200-mile limit.
4 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Planning and Coordination, Enforcement Branch, Department of the Environment
As an example, in conversations with my colleagues from the region yesterday, they're expecting that a couple of additional disposal at sea permits will be issued this year for dredging around some of the harbour sites, which is related to the increased activity. If that does take place, we will have that built into our work plan for the upcoming season so we can make sure that we're inspecting on those permit provisions.
4 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Thank you.
Captain Donovan, you mentioned something about the ships you're getting for the Arctic. You're in charge of maritime strategy. As the ice conditions change in the Arctic as there's more open water and we see more pack ice moving through the area.... You said that there's not likely as much traffic at times when there's no ice, but we're looking at situations when there will be more ice movement on open water and through open water.
How do you deal with ships that have a capacity for a metre of ice when you have that pack ice movement? It may actually become more of a problem for boats and shipping in the future than it has been with more stabilized conditions.
4 p.m.
Capt(N) Casper Donovan
The simple answer to your question, from a mariner's point of view, and I've not taken ships into the Arctic, is that if your ship is designed for one metre of ice, and if it happens to be pack ice that's two metres thick, you don't go there. But the same effect applies to others who may be operating in the Arctic. If their ships are designed for one metre or less, or perhaps two metres, then they can go where they can go. But if the ice is such that it precludes that, then it makes no sense for those vessels to go there.
It's a very difficult thing to predict. The ice belongs to Mother Nature, and it goes where it goes. It's very difficult, and I think there's no clear prediction of what's going to happen in the Arctic at any given point in time in the future. But it's something that applies to both sides of the coin, so to speak.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
I want to point out that if we were enforcing action in the Arctic in the changing conditions, perhaps we need ships that are capable of handling more than a metre of ice, regardless of the time of year, because of this likely movement that's going to take place.
I'm sure the coast guard is familiar with the movement of ice in the Arctic. Perhaps they want to say something about this as well.
4:05 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Maritimes Services, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
The thickness of the ice is one thing, but it's the pressure. If you have thick ice and you can go around it, it's no problem. It's when you're between the archipelago and navigating through passages that you have to be careful.
On commercial shipping, Transport would be the one that would really answer this. My understanding is that commercial ships need to have an Arctic prevention certificate. They go in different zones and at different times in the Arctic, depending on their ice class. This would normally prevent ships from going places or areas where it's more severe.
The captain receives the ice charts, the ice information. Certainly I don't think any captain I know would willingly send their ship into a dangerous place.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
You have a great increase in cruise ships going into the Arctic now, and a lot of dollars are at stake. Of course that always lead to situations.
You say, then, that the cruise ships coming into the Arctic are fully arctic-equipped.
4:05 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Maritimes Services, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying they have to follow some regulations, and they also have to be cognizant of the environment and the ice.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
It's my understanding that there is no mandatory vessel plan required by the coast guard now.
4:05 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Maritimes Services, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
That's right. It's a voluntary system.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Yes, Mr. Chair.
We had an opportunity to speak before, on the Conservative side of the table, and we thought we would give an opportunity for the opposition to ask as many questions as they can, especially having regard to Mr. Bigras, who is here today. He is the environment critic for the Bloc, and I'm certain he'll have some sort of constructive information for us.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have two quick questions. Am I right in saying that ships are under no obligation to advise Canada when they enter Canadian waters?
4:05 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Maritimes Services, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Under the Marine Transportation Security Act, they must report 96 hours before they arrive at their port of destination. South of the 60th parallel, under ECAREG or WESTREG, they must report 24 hours before, as they enter and during the voyage, depending on where they are. North of the 60 th parallel, except for the 96-hour requirement, they have no obligation. NORDREG is a voluntary system.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
In 2007 and 2008, two ships entered Canadian waters without advising Canada. Is that the case? If so, what kind of ships were they?
4:05 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Maritimes Services, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans
For all Canada, I do not know, but I am sure that all we have to do is check.
