Evidence of meeting #25 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was navigation.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Andrew Bartholomew Chaplin
Catherine Higgens  Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport
Nancy Harris  Executive Director, Regulatory Stewardship and Aboriginal Affairs, Department of Transport

10:15 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport

Catherine Higgens

In 2009 the amendments were primarily around the works that were coming forward and how they should be treated, looking very much to streamline the process. Many of the concerns came from the provinces and territories, which were maintaining and building infrastructure and experiencing two- to three-year delays in the approvals under the legislation. Those are some of the origins of the concerns around which works and how they were treated. So a standardized approach to minor works was developed that could treat them as a class; and as long as they complied with basic safety requirements, they could move forward.

The changes in 2012, which were implemented in 2014, were more around the waterways, around which waterways should be protected and which should be subject to different protections—for example, scheduled waters, protected works. It granted approvals, it maintained those streamlined processes, but it also gave greater focus.

There were other provisions of the act. There are essentially three parts. One is to deal with works and protecting safety through regulating those works. The second is obstructions, dealing with obstructions that pose safety to the public, and dealing quickly with them. The third is a series of prohibitions of harmful activities, and those apply in all waters, actually. So there was really a sense in the amendments in 2014 of how to refine and focus efforts on those waterways and situations that most required it. There were various groups that came forward. We receive, primarily, applications from private industry and the public, and about a third is from provinces, if that gives a bit of a breakdown.

10:15 a.m.

Liberal

Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

I have a final question. Essentially, when you look at that legislation being amended in 1906, 1927, 1956—it goes back to 1882, actually—1966, 1994, 1995, 2009, 2012, and then finally in 2014, you see that this is an act that breathes. It's not something that is simply put on the shelf, is there for life, and is not touched. There are interests that come forward.

That is what the previous government did, based on some of the special interests they heard, and it's of course what we're doing based on some of the concerns we're hearing, particularly from the indigenous folks we're dealing with on a daily basis.

That said, I have a simple question. It is appropriate, of course, that from those concerns and the public input we receive, we do come back, we do address these concerns, and that we do at times make amendments based on those concerns.

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport

Catherine Higgens

Madam Chair, I would agree with that. There were very significant transformations made in 2012. The question is, did we get those right? Did we get the schedule of waters right? Did we get the protections right? Those are the questions that would normally be posed with such a significant change to legislation.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

To put the doors open a bit wider to allow more folks to actually participate in the process?

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport

Catherine Higgens

With a broad consultation process, yes.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

Madam Chair, I'm going to give the rest of my time to Mr. Sikand.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Mr. Sikand, please.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Thank you. I'll be quick.

Thank you again for making yourself available today.

I'm really glad that my colleague had that line of questioning. I'd like to contrast that a little with a climate change approach. I'd like to know if we could get information on bodies of water that have been created and have disappeared, and on some that have become navigable or not because of perhaps the levels of the water, not necessarily from the perspective of safety but of their actual existence.

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport

Catherine Higgens

Madam Chair, if I'm understanding the question, it's a request for information about the condition of navigability in Canada—

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Yes.

10:20 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport

Catherine Higgens

—and where changes are happening. We could see what information we might have on that.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON

Thank you.

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much.

Mr. Berthold.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

To thank him for his generosity of allowing me some time just now, I will give Mr. Sikand the following answer.

The three oceans, the Arctic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean are already waterways protected under the current act. So you don't have to worry about activities in your region, Mr. Sikand.

I will ask two questions quickly, because many things have been said. The first one is for the parliamentary secretary.

Can you tell us when the Department of Transport will be holding consultations with the public on reviewing the Navigation Protection Act?

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

I'm sorry. That got cut out at the end. I think your question is about when the—

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

When will the Department of Transport hold its own consultations with the public on the amendments to the Navigation Protection Act?

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

I think what the minister was stating earlier is that he speaks with indigenous groups on a continuous basis and that navigable waters would be a part of that discussion.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Thank you, Ms. Young.

Here is my second question.

Could you forward to the committee the address of the website where the consultations between the four departments will be accessible to the public?

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Yes, we can make that information available as soon as we have it.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Is the site already accessible?

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Yes, it is.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Okay.

So, to sum up, here is my understanding of the issue. I will then be sharing my time with Mr. Miller.

Ms. Young, you have just confirmed that, in the letter that the minister sent to the committee, he misled the members of the committee by stating the following:

In addition to the proposed review to be undertaken by the Committees, our Departments will also undertake consultations with the public, Indigenous peoples, stakeholders, and provinces and territories to complement the work of the Committees.

You mentioned the indigenous peoples only. So the minister misled the committee when we made the decision to study the review of the Navigation Protection Act.

I will be sharing the rest of my time with my colleague Mr. Miller.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

Thank you.

Ms. Higgens, you mentioned a few minutes ago that some municipalities were getting back to you and complaining that it was taking two to three years to get approval for a project. I had one that was a joint one in my riding, on the town line between Bruce and Grey counties. A bridge there took exactly 10 and a half years to finally get approval.

The point I want to make about this is that these were some of the reasons why the act was changed in 2009. Are you saying that in 2012 you were still getting complaints from municipalities that these projects were taking two to three years?

10:25 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs, Department of Transport

Catherine Higgens

Yes. Following the 2009 amendments, there were improvements in the timeliness of the NPA approvals. There was a significant reduction in applications, but then they began to increase again, so the demand for navigation protection approvals as a result of infrastructure projects and expansion in infrastructure works led to increased pressure, so there was continued pressure after the 2009 amendments.

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

I'm not sure that I'm clear. The changes were put in to speed it up. It sounds like they did speed up the approval process, but all of a sudden the time started to lengthen again, so my assumption from that is somewhere in the bureaucracy all of a sudden they decided to start delaying these projects again. Is that true, or is there a further explanation?