Transport Committee on Nov. 7th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

We'll move on to Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

It was noted in one of our previous sessions on this bill that the government would allow up to 12,500 tonnes of oil products to be transported in the territorial waters, the idea being that this would be used to replenish supplies at the various villages up and down the coast. We were questioned on the size of that limit, and I'm just wondering based on your experience—both the Heiltsuk Nation and the Haida Nation—whether you consider that threshold to be adequate, too much, or too little. What are your thoughts on that?

[Chief Marilyn Slett]

We spoke about the Nathan E. Stewart. The regulation amount or proposed tonnage under this moratorium would be 128 times the size of the Nathan E. Stewart spill. That is too high. That's a big burden on the communities. We feel it's too much, but we also believe we can address this size during the consultation we're proposing.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I gather, then, that it would be preferable that this be set by regulation and not hard-wired into the legislation itself.

Mr. Lantin, how many communities in Haida Gwaii are served by tugs and barges replenishing the oil supplies in communities, and do you have an approximate idea as to how much would be off-loaded at each community, on average?

[Peter Lantin]

I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but basically every community on Haida Gwaii is dependent on the transport of those essential oil products for furnaces and things like that. That's the reality for us. The position we have on the moratorium is not unreasonable, given our needs.

We propose that all these essential oils that we require here on Haida Gwaii be regulated and managed by the local authority here on Haida Gwaii. We have these existing agreements with Canada, specifically down in the Gwaii Haanas area. We also have co-operative management agreements with the Province of British Columbia. We propose that the authorities be brought to Haida Gwaii to regulate the transiting of those essential oils to our communities.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

It's no surprise to you or to anybody that there are other groups, on the mainland particularly, that have a different view of this. They were in support of the Enbridge line and they supported the notion of tanker traffic going to and from the north coast.

Have you had conversations with those other groups to understand their position and to explain yours? Has there been consultation between the groups that are obviously on different sides of this issue?

[Peter Lantin]

We have had very difficult conversations with some of the nations on the mainland, and the harsh reality is it's all about where you come from. For us, it doesn't matter what commodity we're talking about, it's going to transit through our territory. In the event of a catastrophic event, it's our backyards that are going to be impacted. That's just a harsh reality of this conversation, and people have to understand and acknowledge it. The risks and the impact will be felt by us here on Haida Gwaii. That's a tough reality, and it's a tough political environment, but that's the reality. We continue to try to facilitate that conversation, but it's not being done in a very co-operative manner. It's kind of a forced conversation right now.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

We know that oil of all sorts, everything from diluted bitumen to crude oil to some of the lighter oils, is being transported in and out of ports all over the world. Is there something unique there—unique properties of the weather, of the ocean, of the landscape—that makes this idea of transporting heavier oils through your territory more risky than it would be in, say, other parts of Canada, such as the south coast or eastern Canada, or anywhere else in the world? Are there some unique properties up your way that make this a far riskier notion?

We'll start with you, Peter.

[Peter Lantin]

Well, if you've never been to Haida Gwaii, especially at this time of the year.... Right now we're in the midst of a 48-hour storm, with 80- to 100-kilometre winds. Those have been persisting for 48 hours now. There's no ferry traffic. Everything has come to a screeching halt. That's just life on Haida Gwaii. There is a uniqueness here. The Hecate Strait is volatile; the whole waters of Haida Gwaii are.

I think our being on an isolated island make us very attuned to our surrounding environment and to climate change. Things are changing here. We're seeing more adverse weather. It seems to be more stretched out over time now. It used to be isolated to a small window in the winter. We're now seeing it more extended. That was all highlighted in 2014, when that Russian cargo ship almost grounded on Haida Gwaii—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, Mr. Lantin, I have to interrupt you. My apologies.

We now go to Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

Welcome to our friend here and to Marilyn and Peter, so far away.

Marilyn, I'll be in town next week. I hope you're around. We can have a coffee in beautiful Bella Bella.

Let's pick up on the Simushir, Peter, if you don't mind. It's been about a year now since the government announced its national oceans protection plan. One of the things that was revealed by this Russian ship that went adrift off Haida Gwaii—just over your right shoulder there—was the lack of capacity to do anything about it...that the coast guard sent out. It's been a year since that plan was announced. Part of that plan was to provide more protection for the coast in general. Where are we a year out since the money and the plan were announced? Has protection increased? Has it been enhanced? Is it the same, or is it less?

[Peter Lantin]

I think the harsh answer is that nothing has changed in terms of what's here on the ground in Haida Gwaii. If another Simushir event happened tomorrow, would we be better situated than we were three years ago? The answer is “no”.

There are some realities of the geographic location of Haida Gwaii. Where the Simushir accident would have happened, it would have taken 12 hours for some of our fishing vessels to get on scene. Having an emergency tug situated on Haida Gwaii would deal with that matter. That seems to be the top priority for us, to have the ability to respond in terms of protecting Haida Gwaii and moving that ship.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thanks for that, Peter.

Marilyn, I want to circle back to something you said earlier. I want to get into the question of ministerial exemption with both of you, but first, you mentioned that in terms of the current vessel limit, if a vessel of that size were to run aground or run into trouble like the Nathan E. Stewart did, did you say it would be 128 times the size of what was experienced with the Nathan E. Stewart?

[Chief Marilyn Slett]

That's right.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

You referenced this a little bit, but can you tell the committee what the impact of the Nathan E. Stewart has been for the Heiltsuk people?

[Chief Marilyn Slett]

The impact on our community has been just devastating. We've felt the impact in terms of economic and cultural losses, the spiritual well-being of our community, and the financial burdens placed on our community. No one is responsible to provide any funding towards an environmental impact assessment. How are we to gauge and measure what the losses are when there are no studies being done on that? That forces us to do it. We've undertaken that task ourselves, as the Heiltsuk Nation. It will cost up to $500,000 to carry that out.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Why is it so important for the feds to come in as a partner on that impact assessment? Why is that so critical? Aside from the immediate costs, why do the assessment? Why is it so critical?

As well, should things like that be included in Bill C-48 if we're amending this bill?

[Chief Marilyn Slett]

Part of it is about how we measure the impacts on the community. Without having data to support that and highlight that for the government, there is a great deal of uncertainty around that. For us, it's around measuring the impact to the environment, the impact to the resources in Gale Pass, the impact to our economy, and the impact to our people. The list goes on.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

If I could return back to you for a moment, Peter, and this may apply to you as well, Marilyn, the Haida have set up joint decision-making tables with the federal government around Gwaii Haanas and some other initiatives. It would be helpful, as an amendment to Bill C-48, to have joint decision-making or joint management over something like the tanker ban because you've talked about exemptions and the power of the minister to deem certain traffic admissible and go through the ban. If we amended this bill to allow for joint decision-making between the north coast nations and the federal government, would it provide any assurance about how such a tanker ban would actually be implemented?

[Peter Lantin]

Yes, absolutely. If you want to talk about what the definition of reconciliation is, for us, it lives in these agreements and it's all about acknowledging each other, both Canada and Haida. We both have the joint responsibility to protect these places and we've been doing it for 25 years. That is our expectation and that's going to be the next horizon for us, for this whole concept of shipping and managing that area. We have the Gwaii Haanas marine protected area. We have the Archipelago Management Board, which is the delegated authority that does that. Expanding the capacity that's been built over 25 years is our expectation in and around shipping.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I have one brief question to my friend Mr. Moody. The Gladstone case established constitutional rights over harvest and sale. How would such joint decision-making over the management of a tanker zone impact Gladstone and if it's not there, is the government potentially infringing on Gladstone?

[Reg Moody-Humchitt]

I think there is the infringement on our right and we feel like section 35 was infringed with the Nathan E. Stewart. As Peter said, I think joint decision-making and oversight would be a comfort.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Fraser.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Thank you very much to everyone for being here.

I'll start with Mr. Lantin.

One of the things that you highlighted was your support for other witnesses that we've heard and their point about limiting the exemption power to situations of emergency. In your view, what does an emergency look like? What exemption power should exist and can you describe what circumstances would justify the exemption in your mind?