Transport Committee on Dec. 5th, 2024

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you so much.

First of all, let me say that there is no immediate safety or environmental problem with the water around the port facility. Nonetheless, the lack of transparency and communication with the Fort Chipewyan nations who use the wharf is unacceptable. That is the problem I want to address.

Right now, the site's environmental assessments are the next stage of updating the 2017 study, and Transport Canada is going to assume the full cost of updating these assessments. This process will be done in consultation with the local nations. That is what I heard from them in our very first conversation, and that is what I stress to my officials sitting with me here today every time we discuss this issue.

These assessments will then inform Transport Canada's next steps in determining, in consultation, how to safely manage or remediate the site. Transport Canada officials are also planning to visit the site, but only with the permission of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, the Mikisew Cree First Nation and the Fort Chipewyan Métis Nation, and on their schedule. Similarly, if I am invited to attend and go, I would do so only at their convenience.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Badawey.

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Barsalou-Duval has the floor now for six minutes.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to the committee, Madam Minister. I am also pleased to see that a number of the first nations representatives who were at the committee on Tuesday are here again today to hear your testimony. I think it is very important to them.

During our meeting on Tuesday, a toxicologist told us that, in her opinion, Transport Canada did not do the right kind of risk analysis of the contamination of the wharf since it was based on commercial use and not on recreational use or on how the local first nations use it. The letter you sent to the communities indicates that there is no risk to human health. It does nonetheless mention some contamination, given that the risk analysis was not based on how the communities actually use it.

Are you still comfortable saying that there is no risk to human health?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

According to the evidence we have, there is no risk to human health. We considered swimming, fishing and boat launching. Those evaluations are typically updated every five to ten years. The reports will be updated in consultation with the nations involved. The most important thing right now is updating the 2017 report, and doing so in consultation with the first nations.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Given the answer you just gave me, would you be comfortable going there personally and swimming there with your children?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Yes. My children swim very well. I would like to visit that community one day, if I receive an invitation.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Quite frankly, if someone told me that the water was the least bit contaminated, I wouldn't dare swim in it. It sounds like you're braver than I am. Personally, even if I was told that there was no danger to human health, I wouldn't dare dip my toe into it.

I'd like to talk about the oil sands tailings ponds located in the same area as the wharf. After the famous leaks from these ponds in 2023, why weren't additional analyses done on site contamination?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

That's a good question, of course.

I spoke with Minister Guilbeault today. He announced a $12‑million investment to support a health study that will be led by communities, including those three nations. The purpose is to study the health effects of the Athabasca oil sands. Minister Guilbeault, Minister Holland and the government as a whole will be looking at this important issue.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Aren't you concerned about the context in which the first nations there have to live? The presence of so many contaminants close to their living environment creates uncertainty about the current state affairs, because no new data has been collected since the 2023 spills.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Yes. In fact, that's why the 2017 study needs to be updated.

That said, it's also necessary to emphasize the responsibility of the provincial government. The responsibility doesn't lie solely with one stakeholder, but with several stakeholders. I'm going to write to my counterpart in Alberta to ask him what he wants to do and what he's going to do, on his end, to resolve the situation.

We have made $12 million available, and we're continuing to work with indigenous communities. That said, we're not the only stakeholder. We also need to discuss the issue with the provinces.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

I'd like to ask you one last question.

On Tuesday, we heard from community representatives. They told us they were disappointed they weren't able to meet with you. However, since their testimony, they've managed to plan a meeting with you.

How did you manage to meet with them?

Also, what was the content of the meeting?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

As soon as I found out they wanted to meet with me, I made myself available. As I said, I gave my phone number to the entire group. We had a good meeting, and we're continuing to discuss the situation. I know there's a lot of work to be done, and I'm going to do it in collaboration with them. That's my responsibility and that of the federal government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Minister Anand.

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

Next we have Mr. Bachrach. You have six minutes, sir.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being back at committee and answering our questions on an issue that I think has, frankly, horrified a lot of members of the committee. I've been hearing from the community their sense of frustration, fear and anxiety that an area where their kids play, swim and collect plants has been contaminated for a long time, and they weren't aware.

I understand that shortly after taking on this new mandate, when you became aware of this issue, you participated in a phone call with indigenous groups in the area, and during that phone call, you apologized for your department's actions. I'd like to give you a chance to apologize publicly here today.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Yes. Thank you for the question.

I apologize for the actions of the Department of Transport over the last number of years.

I have been equally frustrated with the way things have transpired. While there is no risk to human health according to the 2017 study, and reports were shared, more could have been done earlier, especially in sharing information.

That is why I committed, upon hearing about all that had transpired, that things need to change, and that's exactly what I am trying to get done. I know it is a matter of trust, and that's hard to come by, especially when you've faced the situation that these three nations—the Fort Chipewyan Métis Nation, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Mikisew Cree First Nation—have faced.

Trust takes time to rebuild, and I am committed to doing this work.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Minister, have you been briefed on the presence of gamma radiation at this site?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

No, I have not, but I will turn to my deputy minister, who has been in his seat longer than I have been in mine.

[Arun Thangaraj]

I have not been briefed on that either. Our readings of the evidence have not indicated that, but I'm happy to—

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I'm just going to read from the 1997 environmental assessment of the port site. This is the Transport Canada-owned port in Fort Chipewyan.

It says, “Radiation surveys of the government wharf and isolated rocks and boulders used in the construction of the wharf indicated gamma radiation levels.” This is in the executive summary.

If you read on to the next paragraph, it says, “The presence of gamma radiation was noted at the wharf site in the above report” and “Further investigation of the property should be initiated if the future use of the Transport Canada property is changed.”

Do you find this alarming? I'm alarmed that you don't know this is in one of the reports concerning this property.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Actually, the honourable member is raising the 1997 information. I am basing my remarks today on the most recent report, because every report builds on the previous one. He is mentioning the oldest report. I am speaking about the most recent report that we are going to be updating. It is the most updated assessment, and each assessment builds on the others.

I will say that the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo has rigorously tested the water and on August 28 stated that the water was safe. That doesn't mean that the report doesn't need to be updated—it does—but I wanted to mention that I am basing my analysis and my remarks on the 2017 study.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

According to this report, Fort Chipewyan was a major stop along the network used by the Northern Transportation Company Limited to supply the community. This is the northern uranium transportation network.

The last line that I read says further investigation of the property should be initiated if the use of the site is changed. Do you know if any of the subsequent environmental investigations measured radiation levels at the site?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Further reports were done. We need to ensure that we have evidence-based decision-making. Rather than relying on the 1997 report, we are relying on the 2017 report, which stated that there was no human health risk.

That said, we will undertake the update to the study to ensure that issues such as the one you're raising, as well as the ones the nations are raising, are addressed and are addressed in a way that is consultative.

Using the 1997 report is not evidence-based decision-making.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Minister, here's what's infuriating. The investigations you're mentioning specifically scoped their work to avoid certain human impact pathways. This is what we heard from the toxicologist. We had a 1997 report that showed there was radiation on the site, and yet none of the subsequent reports measured radiation. They did that because they limited the scope of the investigation to limit the liability and the responsibility of your department to clean up the site.

If you do an environmental assessment report, I would hope you'd read every previous report concerning the state of the site you're studying.

Are you saying that the environmental consultants didn't actually look at the 1997 report that showed radiation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I'll allow you to respond, Minister, but please give a very short answer.