Evidence of meeting #9 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 north.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Patrick Borbey  Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the ninth meeting of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 25, 2009, in regard to Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act.

Joining us today from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada are Mr. Patrick Borbey, assistant deputy minister, Northern Affairs, and John Kozij, director, strategic policy and integration directorate.

As we discussed earlier, you'll make your presentation, and then we'll certainly have some questions from members around the table.

Patrick, I would ask you to start.

3:30 p.m.

Patrick Borbey Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, it's a pleasure to be here to talk about the northern strategy.

My understanding is that in the context of reviewing the bill there is a desire to understand a little bit more in terms of the broader context of the government's northern strategy. That is the purpose of my presentation, which you have in front of you. I'll try to go through it as quickly as possible to allow time for questions.

I apologize if I'm going a little fast. We can come back to certain points during the round of questions.

If we skip to slide 2 right away, you'll see that this is basically a summary statement about INAC's role in the north. The minister has some fundamental responsibilities under the DIAND Act, and these are significant and far-reaching in terms of the north.

The most important in terms of resources and staff, if I can say that, is to exercise a provincial type of role in water, oil and gas management, and resource management, including the overall responsibility for the regulatory system in the north.

We also have a federal type of role to play in social and economic development, including the recent announcement of the creation of an economic development agency for the north. We've been running economic development programs in the north on behalf of the federal government.

We do have a role to play in terms of overall coordination of the activities of federal departments, boards, and agencies in the territories. That gets into some of the issues around the northern strategy.

We also have a responsibility to encourage scientific research in the Canadian Arctic. I will come back a little later to our role in the field of science. Our department does not play a major role in this area, but it does nevertheless carry out some important activities.

We also have an important role to play in circumpolar international affairs, working with our colleagues from DFAIT. Of course, the Arctic Council is the privileged body that we are a member of and that we work through.

Overall, our minister has the lead for the northern strategy. Our deputy minister chairs a committee of deputy ministers that meets on a regular basis to review the progress of and future priorities for the northern strategy. We also have a governance structure below the deputy minister level, with a number of committees, to ensure that all departments and agencies are working in a coordinated way. We can get into that a little bit later on if that's of interest.

Our minister does co-sign cabinet documents related to northern issues.

On the following page you will find a brief overview of Canada's integrated northern strategy.

On this page, you'll see the quote from the Speech from the Throne and the four pillars that have been established.

First, with respect to Arctic sovereignty, our objective, of course, is to protect our sovereignty. This is becoming an important issue as more international interest in the region is generated.

The second pillar is economic and social development. Here, it's to ensure that the territories do benefit from that kind of development and that the regulatory system is there to help ensure, in a sustainable way, that development takes place for the benefit of northerners.

Under environmental protection, the big driver there is climate change, of course, and the impact it's having on the Arctic. Forty per cent of our land mass in Canada is in the territories. We need to make sure that it's protected for future generations.

Finally, under governance, there are dual objectives, but they're very closely related. One is to help shepherd the northern territorial governments to continue their progression towards province-like status and, at the same time, work to continue to negotiate and implement land claim and self-government agreements to help aboriginal governance also evolve.

Those are the four pillars. We always remind everyone that science and technology underpin all four of these pillars.

The next slides will provide some contextual information about each pillar.

I'll give you a little bit of contextual information.

Under the sovereignty pillar, there's certainly a lot of focus on disputes or on the issue of competition, maybe, with other arctic nations. But at the end of the day, those disputes, those issues, are very well managed. They come down to three categories, if we can say that.

First is the Beaufort Sea. There's a disagreement with the U.S. as to how the demarcation between Canada and the U.S. is determined. So there is what we call a wedge of disagreement in the Beaufort Sea. It's a fairly small area, but it's an important area.

The second area is Denmark. We have a small island, called Hans Island, which you've all heard of. There is a disagreement about who owns that island. Just north of Hans Island, in the Lincoln Sea, the demarcation between Canada and Denmark is another area on which we have to come to an agreement.

The last area, which is the one that probably writes the most articles and that academics really focus on is who controls or owns the Northwest Passage--the famous Northwest Passage. Of course, Canada claims sovereignty over the Northwest Passage, including full jurisdiction to enact laws and regulations to govern its use. Other countries feel the need to express disagreement, mostly motivated by their wanting to ensure that in the future they can benefit from free right of passage through the Northwest Passage.

That doesn't mean that there are not other security or safety issues in the north. We know, of course, with the increased activity and increased use in the Arctic, that there are other risks. We have cruise ships increasingly going into our waters, so there are all kinds of issues that need to be considered, such as search and rescue and shipping safety. I know that's an important consideration for this committee.

In terms of economic development, much has been said about the enormous potential that resource development represents in the North. Clearly, the current economic downturn has curbed people's enthusiasm somewhat.

The opportunities are still there. We still have to think long term. But there has been short-term pain in the territories. Some mining operations have ceased. Others have scaled back. The diamond sector is hurting right now. We have also had reduced levels of exploration and development. Some projects, which we thought were well on the way towards opening a mine at some point in the near future, have been delayed a bit. So there is a certain impact. But the long-term prospects remain positive in terms of commodity prices rebounding and demand continuing to increase.

It was interesting to note recently that the Germans have provided a $1.2 billion loan guarantee to Baffinland, the owners of a very important iron ore deposit on northern Baffin Island. It's a project that, once developed, could be worth approximately $4 billion in development costs. It would bring thousands of jobs to Nunavut. Again, the future market for steel is strong, even with the current situation.

Nevertheless, economic development does present a number of problems.

There are barriers. There are gaps we need to address. Some of them have to do with lack of adequately trained human resources. So there are skill gaps.

There are issues we need to address, particularly when it comes to aboriginal people taking full advantage of the economic opportunities. We've made some progress, but there's still much to be made.

There are also, of course, communities that are preoccupied with and worried about the pace of development and whether the decisions that will come through the regulatory system will be balanced and take into consideration the long-term impact on the environment, the wildlife, and the ability to maintain traditional lifestyles. That's certainly a consideration.

I would also add another consideration, which is infrastructure development and the gaps in the north. Again, when moving from west to east, some of those gaps become even more glaring, whether it's roads, air links, harbours, or ports. What we come to take for granted as southern Canadians is much more difficult in the north. That has an impact both on communities and people and on economic development.

I will now turn to environmental protection.

Again, this is just a reminder of the very delicate nature of the environment in the Arctic and the opportunity we have to ensure a good balance between development and conservation. So through the establishment of new protected areas--the Nahanni National Park or conservation areas; marine conservation areas, as are being planned for the Lancaster Sound area.... Climate change is having an impact not only on the environment and wildlife but also on people and their ability to be able to live as a community.

That was evidenced last year with Pangurtung, a small community on Baffin Island, where unseasonable thaws and excessive rains ended up washing out two bridges and cut the community in half, basically. That community did not have access to basic water and sewer services during the time of that crisis. We can see the impacts of climate change on the infrastructure in the north and on the lives of northerners.

We are also concerned about the presence of trans-border pollutants in the food chain, and at the top of that food chain are the northerners whose diet still relies heavily on traditional foods. Of course, those pollutants come from everywhere in the world.

Our other concern is the lack of baseline information. We don't know enough about the Arctic; hence the need for good science. Baseline information can help ensure that the regulatory system works smoothly, that we can track the impacts of development over a long period of time. Certainly that's an area that we need to continue to invest in more.

Under governance, again, we have made significant progress over the last 30 to 40 years in terms of the transfer of responsibilities from the federal government to the territorial governments. In the Yukon we actually have fully transferred the responsibility for the management of lands and resources and waters so that the federal government is no longer in that business except for some very small residual roles, things such as cleaning up contaminated sites and the minister's overall responsibilities for the acts and for appointments to boards, for example. So there are still some residual responsibilities, but the Yukon is fairly autonomous in managing its own affairs.

We still have to proceed with devolution in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. There are talks progressing at various paces between the federal government and the two other territories.

As I mentioned before, there's also aboriginal land claims settlement and self-government. We have self-government well in place in the Yukon, with 11 out of 14 first nations now self-governing. We have three first nations in the southern part of the Yukon, in the Kaska region, that do not yet have settled land claims or self-government.

In the Northwest Territories, we've also made significant progress. The Inuvialuit are covered by a land claim, as are the Gwich'in, the Sahtu, and the Tlicho, and we have negotiations that have been going for some time with the Decho and the Akaitcho as well as the South Slave Métis.

On the Nunavut side, of course, the Nunavut land claim agreement, which created the territory of Nunavut, is the biggest land claim in the history of, probably, the world. The Inuit are now the owners of significant resources through that land claim agreement. Of course, we have a government that is going to be celebrating its 10th anniversary very soon.

There's still much work to be done, including making sure we keep our eye on the ball in terms of implementation issues.

As far as science and technology are concerned, I would simply remind people that Canada has done some important work in recent years. We have established ourselves as the leader in the field of Arctic science. We invested resources in the International Polar Year,

the International Polar Year, which is concluding in the next couple of weeks.

In terms of the research phase, we still have much work to do on outreach, data management, and making sure that the results of the research translate into program or policy responses. That was the $156 million that was invested by the Canadian government. We also have made the decision to build the arctic research station, and we're making progress in that area.

In the last budget, it was also announced that $85 million would be spent over two years to improve existing scientific infrastructure in the Arctic. There is still a substantial amount of work to be done on the scientific front.

On page 7, this is a bit of a summary, under the four pillars, of the various commitments and actions that have been taken by this government. You see under each of the pillars there is a lot going on. All of these initiatives have important implementation challenges.

Right now, the biggest challenge is ensuring that we continue moving in this direction and collaborating, whether it be with the federal government, aboriginal groups, territorial governments or other partners, to successfully carry out all of these initiatives.

There are probably still gaps in the framework. There are areas where we'd like to be able to do more, and we'll continue to work on those with our colleagues from other federal departments.

I hope that gives a good overview. I think I am pretty well on time.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

We won't even go that way.

Mr. Kennedy, please.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your presentation. I have a question for you and perhaps you can provide me with a few explanations.

I'm most interested to know. These principles are familiar; a previous government articulated them on December 14, 2004. There have been other references to the north. Then we have some program elements. We asked the question last time of the Minister of Transport, but he wasn't able to answer it, but we're hoping maybe it will be answered at the bureaucratic level.

We've been told by the people from transportation it is DIAND that has the lead. What are the goals and outcomes we want here? In other words, we don't want it just to become 2005 to 2009 to some other future date. How do these things integrate, and what are we trying to accomplish? The general words have been there. We know roughly what devolution looks like. There are some ideas about economic development, but have we got to the point that we actually have a plan? In other words, do we know how many northerners are going to be employed? Do we know which businesses and how quickly we hope to get results from them? Do we know we need only one icebreaker and not three, which was originally promised?

How were those kinds of decisions arrived at, if we don't know what our outcomes are? Otherwise, frankly, it has the feeling of a symbolic move forward. For example, we're told that in the arctic waters there is not a lot of activity going on where we're extending our environmental protection, so not a lot needs to happen right away.

Perhaps there is some integrated document, something you could point us to, so that we could be assured that we really are talking here about goals and outcomes. We want to know that the government and the ministry, in its coordinating role, have put everybody on a program that will have tangible results in six months, in a year, in five years, and we will all recognize those, so that these are not just disparate things that are done because it's good for the north.

3:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

Maybe I didn't do as good a job as I should have, but I tried to articulate some of those goals and objectives and outcomes that we'd like to achieve under each of the pillars.

For example, under the environment, we want to be able to better understand what's going on with respect to climate change and what the measures are that we need to take to help deal with the impacts and adaptation to climate change. On some of that, we need to do more research, more science, and we need to analyze the results of the work we did under the International Polar Year, so you can see how science integrates with that objective.

Under economic development, there are strong links between economic development and our ability to streamline the regulatory process to make it work in the north. The regulatory process in the north is a combination of the creation of all the different land claims and self-government agreements. Now we have to step back and look at it and see whether it is producing results. Is it meeting modern standards with respect to achieving those results? That's another area—

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

I wonder if I could interject, because my time is limited.

I'm looking for some very specific things: industries that have been chosen and then some plans with respect to that.

The north has a particular challenge. I originally come from the near north, not the far north. I had a discussion when I was a visiting scholar at Ryerson University with the finance minister from Nunavut, and they were looking for our help to train their people to work on a deal with India around diamond polishing and so on. There didn't seem to be, frankly, an authority on economics. I would think this strategy would take a position vis-à-vis climate change the way some of the people are advocating.

For example, you have concerns, obviously, about the polar cap, but what needs to happen? What does southern Canada...and what indeed does a climate change strategy need to produce concretely to make a difference in terms of the integrity of the north?

I gather, by and large, things are happening much more quickly, disrupting traditional hunting patterns and so on much more quickly than anybody imagined. Have those things not transmitted down to specific, quantified outcomes that we're looking for on economic development and so on?

I think I understand the general relationships you're alluding to, and I'm sure the chairman wants to move on. Is there a specific document that gets down to the nitty gritty of where this government has put their foot down and said these are the things that will produce these kinds of results?

Discrete actions by themselves are not a plan. It's a question of what the outcomes are that we're trying to generate. Where do I find those outcomes? How do I know that the plan works? I can't judge it if there are no outcomes that we're shooting for.

3:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

Basically what I've presented is, in essence, the summary of the plan. It's the summary of actions that have been taken in a coordinated fashion by departments that all have an interest in the north. They are all interrelated.

On economic development, which businesses will emerge in the future? We don't know which ones in particular, but we do know there are about 25 projects that are at various stages of development in the north. All of them involve mining and oil and gas. We know that's going to be the backbone of the economy in the north in the future.

I talked about a project that's worth $4 billion. There is a private company that is going to have to, through its own financing, see whether that $4 billion is going to be invested. We think that with the resources there, we want to work with that company to ensure that the labour skills are also going to be developed to support that. It is close to a community, Pond Inlet, that's extremely well involved in the project.

We think the work we've done on the settlement of the land claim there and the fact that the Inuit own subsurface and surface rights gives them the possibility, through the land claim, of negotiating impact benefit agreements that are going to lead to the benefit. All these together at some point will lead to a project that, like Ekati, like Diavik, will produce some results.

We can't predict what the economic situation is going to be five or ten years from now, but we do think it is going to continue to be positive. We do continue to hope that there will be a Mackenzie gas pipeline, that the resources we know exist are going to be brought to market, to the benefit of northerners.

We have also invested, through this strategy, in better geoscience. At the end of the day, again, going back to science, better knowledge of what exists up in the 40% of our land that comprises the Arctic will lead to more investment by the private sector, more exploration, and hopefully more finds and more development. You look at each one of the pillars and you can make that kind of integration.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

It sounds likely, I guess, but what I worry about is this. How do you know that they're actually in sync, that you're going to deliver the mapping information in time to understand the impact of some of the undersea drilling, that you're going to have everything you need to know when that Mackenzie pipeline, as a deal, does come together? That's what I would expect, frankly, would be more concrete, more clear, and more available to us. I think we need to see that by 2009 there needs to be this kind of development. It needs to be complete and so on if this is a serious integrated plan. Is there even a budget that brings together all the money spent in the north and that says what their role is in producing these various outcomes?

Personally, as someone who previously served as a minister, I have trouble if I hear about a project here and a project there and there is nothing that brings them together. Is there even a way to tell how much money is being spent in the north? Is there something that DIAND pulls together? We heard you say they have signing authorities and so on. Does that get done? Is there an accountabilities outcome for the north like there is for some departments and ministries?

3:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

We play a small part in terms of our role. It's an important coordination role, but there are a lot of departments active in the north.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

I'm just trying to find the one in charge.

3:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

In terms of overall coordination, the one in charge is our minister.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Monsieur Laframboise.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

On page 4 of your presentation, regarding sovereignty, you note that Canada has some active disputes in the Arctic. Could extending the limit from 100 to 200 nautical miles potentially lead to more disputes? Do you see any other potential sources of conflict or have you already identified all of them?

3:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

As I see it, this is unlikely to happen. I'm not an expert in international law, but I do believe that countries have a right under international law to declare a 200-mile limit around their coastline. All that Canada is doing, in my estimation, is exercising its rights. I do not see this as potentially causing a dispute.

No one economic activity will be directly affected by this decision. It merely sets some parameters in the event that development and shipping increase in the future. This way, the regulatory framework will be in place to ensure compliance with our laws.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Transport Canada informed us that it had a development project in the works at the very edge of the 100-mile zone. I understand that extend the limit gives us the legitimacy to intervene. However, could this operation prove to be a source of conflict?

3:55 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

No. The project in question is being carried out in the Beaufort Sea. Canada wants to respect its differences of opinion with the U.S. I prefer the word “differences“ to “dispute“. A permit was not issued to allow exploration in the zone that is the source of a dispute between the U.S. and Canada. That is the first part of my response. We respect the fact that there is no agreement on this matter.

Regarding the 100 nautical mile limit, the permits that have been issued in the past two years to allow exploration in the Beaufort Sea have resulted in significant investment on the part of Canadian industry. These projects are being carried within this zone, which is not affected in any way.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Amending the Act at this point in time, given what is happening offshore, would put you in a position where you demand that all requests be addressed to you, so that permits could be issued once our sovereignty over the 200 nautical mile zone has been established. In this particular case, could you ask to receive reports on the number of permits issued and so forth, or are you going to let things be, given that it happened in the past?

4 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

It all depends on the nature of the activity. I'm not sure that the same conditions apply to oil and gas development and to shipping. A system is already in place to govern the exploration operations of oil companies, for instance. This system, which is based on other laws, is rather air-tight. Should there be any danger of a spill, for instance, the National Energy Board takes the matter in hand and ensures that steps are taken to correct the problem immediately or to intervene.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Obviously, the aim of Bill C-3 is to prevent pollution in Arctic Waters. What exactly does this mean? Once this bill has been adopted, are you planning on letting world countries like Denmark, the United States and Russia known that they will have to comply with this Act when they navigate in Canadian waters? Will you be issuing notices? What's going to happen?

4 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

I believe they all know that Canada's sovereignty extends to 200 nautical miles offshore and that once they enter Canadian waters, Canadian laws apply. We're simply correcting a problem that stems from the difference between the initial 100 nautical mile limit that was provided for and the proposed extension of our sovereignty to 200 nautical miles. I really don't see this as an issue.

Vessels that wish to enter Canadian waters must also abide by the NordReg regulations, compliance with which is currently voluntary. We are working to make compliance mandatory. As far as I know, 90% or more of vessels comply with the regulations. So then, this amendment should not cause much of a problem. Some may comment or draw a connection between this issue and the matter of the Northwest Passage, but it's really not an issue for us.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

If I understood you correctly, you stated that your department is overseeing all of this.

4 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

Our department is responsible for the Northern Strategy on behalf of the government. Our job is to coordinate efforts to ensure that departments carrying out activities or having responsibilities in the North respect this comprehensive strategy.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Surely some kind of scientific measure is used to establish the 200-mile limit. How does this work? Is it an arbitrary calculation? Are you the ones who decide how this limit will be determined?

4 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Patrick Borbey

This is really not my area of expertise. You would have to put that question to the experts at Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans or Foreign Affairs.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Thank you. I'll do that.

Regarding the environment, you note on page 5 of your presentation that there is a lack of baseline information about Arctic environment. That's surprises me quite a bit. Are you referring to climate research? Exactly what kind of information are you lacking?