Transport Committee on March 26th, 2009

[Patrick Borbey]

I don't think there's one single place that would be perfect. It depends on what the purpose is. We do have a harbour that's being built at Pangnirtung to support an emerging fishery sector in Nunavut. That's an important investment. I know there are expectations that there will be more harbours elsewhere in Nunavut. We understand that it's a gap that will need to be looked at in the future.

There's also, from a military and coast guard perspective, the Nanisivik facility that's being brought back into service and will serve important roles there. It's in the middle of the Northwest Passage, so it's very well and strategically located.

Then there are a number of projects related to resource development that different proponents are putting forward. These are not yet at a very advanced stage, except perhaps, as you mentioned, the Bathurst Inlet port, which a number of mining companies or mining interests in that area have been putting forward. There's a consortium there that would like to see a road built to link the diamond belt, as well as some of the gold and other mineral deposits there, to Bathurst Inlet and provide that as an alternative mechanism. It's an alternative to the ice roads, for example, for the diamond sector.

That project has actually been tabled with the Nunavut Impact Review Board for review, but recently the proponents stepped back from it because of the current economic situation. They may come back to that one. That's a good example, but again, it's driven by private sector interests.

The other port possibility is in the southern Baffin area to serve the Baffinland deposit that I mentioned earlier. The deposit is in the middle of the northern Baffin area, close to Pond Inlet. The ore would need to be shipped by railway down to a port in that sound. I can't remember the name of the sound, but it's in the southern Baffin area. Sorry, but I don't have my map in my mind. Again, that is being driven by economic considerations.

Then, at some point in the future, we hope that the Arctic Islands natural gas deposits will be developed. That probably will require an LNG facility in port.

Into the future, those are the projects that we can see developing. There may be more coming out of other possibilities.

In terms of the federal government itself and a port that the federal government would sponsor, it's not really in the cards at this point.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

With the challenges of the warmer winters and the challenges they're having with winter roads to do exploration and mine development, could there be more use of airlift and more airports in the area rather than looking at land transportation? That way, it actually has less impact on the environment. Maybe it would be cheaper in the long run.

Also, as we heard from the transportation ministry, there's a desire to have more air patrols around the Arctic to have a presence and to protect our sovereignty of that area.

[Patrick Borbey]

Certainly, air transportation is going to continue to be vital to the development of the north. It's the only reliable mode of transportation for 12 months of the year and it's very, very heavily used. The airports have been developed fairly well in the north so that higher-capacity planes can land. That's one of the considerations in science, for example, in terms of what kinds of facilities there are in various communities when we're looking at locations for the arctic research station.

It is, however, very expensive, and it's not the most friendly mode of transportation from the perspective of greenhouse gas emissions. Having that ice road to the diamond belt is very important. When it failed, there were some pretty serious consequences for those companies. They had to rely on some airlift for some of their equipment, and of course for fuel. That drove their cost structure way out of whack.

These are very important issues that will determine the pace of development in the future.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

What I was alluding to was this. Do you have an integrated plan for airports or landing strips in the north? Did you work it into your plan for the economic development of those areas?

[Patrick Borbey]

With the distances, you have some 50-some communities that rely heavily on air transportation, that don't have road access. I mean, they all need that service. They all need those facilities. The resource development happens where the resource is and not necessarily where communities are. They also need to develop that capacity to be able to land fairly heavy aircraft. From an air transportation perspective, we need a number of airstrips spread across the north, rather than some hubs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I think everybody is aware that our subcommittee meeting today will not take place. Maybe we'll do one more quick round, if there are any other questions people feel they need to ask, and then I'll clear up the business for the week.

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

You're not sure about the highway situation in the Northwest Territories, yet probably in the last three or four months you've received representation from the Premier of the Northwest Territories about those very things. He's written a letter to the Prime Minister. Has that not come down to your department for some kind of discussion to understand where the authority lies to do that?

[Patrick Borbey]

You asked me a question about who has the lead responsibility for highways. That's what I need to check, because I thought there was more in terms of jurisdiction that you were seeking.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

That's right, and I'm curious because there's been so much representation in the last while to the federal government on highways. I'm kind of wondering why you're not up to speed on this.

[Patrick Borbey]

I came here to talk about an overall strategy.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

You mentioned infrastructure. Infrastructure is very important. As Mr. Mayes pointed out, it's very important how we develop the transportation links in there to deal with arctic sovereignty, to deal with resource development, and to deal with a whole bunch of issues.

To me, right now the most immediate job in the Arctic and in the north is to clarify how we're going to move people, goods, and equipment and how the north is going to develop with a transportation link.

[Patrick Borbey]

Absolutely.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So you agree with me. This is an important subject that directly relates to the north, to any arctic strategy that links into how we transport goods and services there.

[Patrick Borbey]

I commit to you that I will clarify the jurisdictional question. My first answer would be that this is a territorial responsibility in terms of highways, but I will want to clarify that for you.

I also can clarify that the responsibility for infrastructure projects lies with Infrastructure Canada. Now we do work closely with them, and if there is a proposal for a highway, it would be referred to that department for study. Our minister would be interested, yes. Our minister would ask for advice and seek our views, absolutely. We would work with our colleagues from Infrastructure Canada if there were a project that was to be—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I think it's a very important point. If you carry the provincial-like role in certain areas and you're not using that role to do the planning and the kind of development work that has to take place in the north, I'm trying to understand what you do, then, with your provincial-like role. What is it you accomplish?

That's a very serious problem for people throughout the northern territories, and it's been that way for many years. How do we express our interest in the development plans for our region when they're held by your department?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I don't know if you want to go after that or just leave that alone. That's probably more of a statement than a question.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I'm trying to get to where you think your authority lies for the development of the north and where you think the people who live there intrinsically, like other Canadians.... When you live in Alberta, you and other Albertans decide how things happen. I want to get to that point with you. Do you understand that the ultimate goal is that the people who live in the northern territories will make the decisions for themselves? If you're making a decision, it has to represent in many ways what we want. Is that a fair assessment of what your department does?

[Patrick Borbey]

Yes. As I tried to explain at the beginning, we have responsibilities, statutory responsibilities. Our minister, at the end of the day, has to play that role, has to make decisions. Recommendations are made by boards that are created to manage those responsibilities in the north. We have to advise the minister every step of the way, yes.

If a highway project were to go forward, and then go through the environmental assessment and permitting process, INAC certainly would be quite involved in that, as we are with the development of the pipeline, for example. When the pipeline is built, we will be the ones inspecting, all the way up and down that valley, to make sure that the conditions set by the boards and approved by the minister are followed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you very much.

I would like to thank our guests for being here today. We appreciate your input. If there is any information that flows, please have it flow through Maxime and the chair. We'll get it out to the committee.

As previously discussed with members of the subcommittee, due to an illness, we will not have the subcommittee today.

On Tuesday we have three guests joining us, again on this issue: Émilien Pelletier, Chester Reimer, and Robert Huebert. I would ask members of the committee, if they do have any amendments, to start preparing them.

Again, subject to the direction of the subcommittee, we will hold a subcommittee meeting next Thursday.

You're away Tuesday, right? Okay.

So I would like the committee to start thinking about amendments. Perhaps as late as Monday we could have them in to the clerk. On Thursday of next week we will do clause-by-clause and also have a subcommittee meeting to give direction for the next series of meetings.

Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

I know the clerk is trying to get someone from Foreign Affairs. Transport officials had said that Foreign Affairs had written on this act to the other countries, and I think it would be very critical for us to know that. In fact, I only have the one question, so it wouldn't be a very long question.

I would just ask the parliamentary secretary if he could do anything in his power to try to free up an official--we don't need the minister--who could answer that question on the results of that.

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

From Foreign Affairs?

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We have contacted everyone who was actually put on the list. The first question was for the minister, and he is unavailable.

I'll leave it to Mr. Jean, perhaps. We could do the question in a written form.

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

That's what I was going to suggest, that if Mr. Bagnell would like to forward the letter to me, or to you, I'm certain--

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

The Transport officials said that Foreign Affairs officials had dealt with other countries on this act that we're dealing with. We want to know what the results were of those dealings, what the other countries said, if there's feedback, that kind of stuff.