Evidence of meeting #8 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.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
The 100 nautical miles was a more modern-day issue, coming out...probably after 1948?
4:20 p.m.
Director, Design, Equipment and Boating Safety, Department of Transport
The 100 miles was defined by the original enactment of the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act, which was in 1970. That's where the 100 miles comes in. It was quite forward-looking, in anticipation of the Law of the Sea, which eventually allowed for jurisdiction out to 200 miles. The borders were defined earlier than that.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
The north didn't really didn't make the map of the country in a big way until the time of Mr. Diefenbaker. Frankly, I don't mind.... I'd be critical of many of the policies of Mr. Trudeau, but he certainly did a lot with respect to the north. He established Nahanni National Park, which became the first UNESCO world heritage site. As Minister of the Environment, I was, I think, very close to finalizing the quadrupling of the size of that park. A lot of good work has gone on there. In my two short years as Minister of the Environment, we built on a lot of those environmental legacies and got a lot of things accomplished.
I think too often it was seen exclusively as a military presence, which is very important and has to be expanded, and we can do more there. But it can be more in terms of science and research and development; it can be more in terms of environmental stewardship; it can be more in terms of economic development, so that there are economic opportunities for people from that part of the country. It's very much a work in progress. I think this Prime Minister, though, has put more focus on the Arctic and Canada's north than anyone else in living memory.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Mayes Conservative Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
To follow that up, Mr. Minister, if I have time, we're likely going to have to deal with this in possibly an international court. Do you think that by having a greater presence there we will be able to protect sovereignty over our Arctic waters?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
The Prime Minister has said repeatedly “use it or lose it”, and we're very much doing that. Even the historical claims that Canada can make.... There's a great two-year expedition funded by Parks Canada aboard a coast guard research vessel that's looking for the remains from Franklin's two ships. They were optimistic that they would find it in late August or September. They didn't quite make it, but they are very optimistic for this season. There has been a considerable amount of work done in this regard that demonstrates very clearly the role the crown had in Canada's Arctic and its north, going back the better part of 200 years. They have found a considerable amount of debris, but not the main ships themselves. They did find one more ship up there when they were there, but it wasn't either of the two that were lost.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
A couple of summers ago the government announced that they would allow the navy to dump garbage in the Arctic Ocean on occasion. Of course, that's totally in contravention of the whole spirit of this act, which we agree with.
I have two questions. One, will you commit that the government will no longer allow those exemptions? Second, would you have any problem if we put an amendment into the act that prohibited such dumping?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
I'd be pleased to learn more and I'll take your issue under advisement and get back to you on it.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
I'd be very happy to. If you have any specific information on this that you could forward to me, we'll certainly respond in short order. It's a fair question.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
You said earlier there was no dispute over extending environmental law to the 200 miles, and part of the reason is because of article 234 of UNCLOS, which Canada had put in, that had allowed us to do this, to extend our environmental laws in areas severely jammed and packed with ice. We've had two seasons with much of the area clear of ice, and much of the area will be clear of ice soon, so what then will be our legal argument for the basis of that extension to still remain legal under international law?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
It's the same for ice and water. I will ask Donald to expand.
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Marine Safety, Department of Transport
The actual regime, if you have ice or no ice, is the same. In the extension with this bill, we'll have an extended area that the act will cover.
To get back to article 234 of UNCLOS, at this moment we still have jurisdiction over the economic zone. That's a little bit to get back to some of the answer to Mr. Laframboise at the end of his comment. We still have economic jurisdiction over that area, with or without this act. This act, however, permits us to make regulations regarding pollution prevention and all the other aspects of enforcement under pollution prevention. So that is what this does.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
The biggest complaint, as I started off with, is patrolling and enforcing this act. I think all the parties have brought this up in debate. You also talked in Parliament about the environment act, of course, getting stronger. I believe you mentioned that. So if a submarine were to come up in an ice-covered area—and one was seen last summer by hunters or Inuit or Ranger patrol—and dump garbage, what exact steps would the minister's department take to enforce this act?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
I'm not aware of any commercial submarines that would operate in the Arctic, so it obviously would be a military issue. I don't think Transport Canada employees are going to greet the Red Army or the Red Navy on the high seas.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
—only commercial boats. What would you do in that situation to stop the dumping of garbage?
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
I didn't say which country the submarine was from. I mean any submarine.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
John Baird Conservative Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
If a Soviet or American or British or French nuclear submarine surfaced and started to dump garbage, I don't think it would be perhaps the wisest thing to send a Transport Canada inspector to rap on the hull. I'd probably allow the Minister of National Defence to use his best judgment in consultation with his advisers.
