Transport Committee on Dec. 5th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Madam Hébert.

Next we'll go with Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Bachrach, the floor is yours. You have six minutes, sir.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Hébert, you mentioned that the 2017 risk assessment considered fishing, boating and swimming. All of these were taken into account and led to the conclusion that there was no risk to human health, yet my understanding is that no surface water samples were taken as part of that risk assessment.

Was any quantitative surface water data considered when making that conclusion that there was no risk to human health from any of those exposure pathways?

[Ross Ezzeddin, Director General, Air, Marine and Environmental Programs, Department of Transport]

Mr. Chair, I can try to answer that.

No surface water sampling was taken. The purpose of the risk assessment was to determine whether or not the contamination at the Transport Canada local port was posing a risk in the surface water, but the question about whether there were broader risks around the surface water was outside the range of that, so the—

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

I'm just trying to understand. The sediments were sampled. The soil was sampled on the land. The sediments were sampled, but the water itself wasn't sampled, yet there was a conclusion made, based on modelling how those contaminants would migrate from the sediment into the water column or from the groundwater into the lake. It just seems like such a simple thing to collect some water samples and see if it's contaminated. Why wasn't that done?

[Ross Ezzeddin]

I'm not sure. I can read you what the report says about that, but it is along the lines the member has described.

[Stephanie Hébert]

When we get to update the risk assessment—we regularly update the risk assessments—this is one of the areas that we can possibly look at. We would want the province to participate with us in that assessment, but when the risk assessment looked at sediment contact with surface water—and again, it's a risk assessment—fundamentally what it concluded was that because our port is quite small when you think about the broader lake, the risk of exposure and the contamination risk was deemed to be quite small. That was the frame that was used.

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

The concern that was expressed by the toxicologist who appeared before committee was that many of the companies the government hired and the companies that typically work in this space are hired to assess away the risk, to scope their studies in such a way that the outcome of the study would show minimal risk, because minimal risk comes with minimal obligation to clean it up. Do you see what I mean?

This seems like one of the central problems with this approach of hiring certain consultants and scoping studies in certain ways and having this hands-off approach of “Do your thing and tell us if there's a risk to human health.” I'm just trying to characterize what we've heard from the independent toxicologist.

More concerning is that the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation contacted the Prime Minister's Office, Indigenous Services Canada, DFO and Emergency Preparedness in over 30 emails and phone calls about dredging. This is the community's sole access point for evacuation, and they're unable to use this transportation infrastructure. They were making all these calls, and they got absolute radio silence in response. It wasn't until they went to the media and rang the alarm bells that all of a sudden the government started scrambling, and it was like, “Oh, crap; we have to manage this situation.”

How is the committee meant to understand that all throughout the summer these first nations are trying to get hold of you to talk about this critical transportation infrastructure, but they get absolutely nothing back? What does that say?

[Stephanie Hébert]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate and I acknowledge the frustration of the nations. The minister was very clear in her testimony that we have some work to do to rebuild trust with the nations. I do wish to acknowledge that.

What I will say is that we did have officials who did engage through the representative on the dredging question. We were assured, when we contacted colleagues in Indigenous Services Canada emergency services, that in the evacuation plans there were alternative contingency plans that didn't rely solely on access to the Transport Canada port and also took into account that perhaps the airport would not be available. We too weren't contacted by the entities responsible for the evacuation. It was on that basis that we said that we wouldn't be able to proceed with the dredging on an emergency basis.

The other reason that we said we couldn't proceed with it on an emergency basis was for the reasons that I previously outlined, Mr. Chair.

It's complex in terms of doing it. Dredging has to be planned really well. The nature of this port and the surface infrastructure make it more complex for us. We would need more than a couple of months to be able to tackle this request.

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

Yes, I understand all that and I think those are important considerations. They still don't excuse the fact that it took them going to the media and threatening to dredge it themselves, to which the department responded that they would throw Chief Adam in jail if he tried to dredge the port. It took all of that for you folks to get back to these nations to say what the issues with dredging are and what the challenges are.

It's such a statement about the state of reconciliation that first nations expressed concerns and they just got radio silence back. I just don't know what to say about that. It's so incredibly frustrating.

I see the red card, Mr. Chair, so I'll cede the balance of my time to the next questioner, but I'm baffled.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bachrach.

Mrs. Goodridge, that means you get an extra seven seconds. Use it wisely, madam.

The floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

I have five minutes and seven seconds. Thank you.

To follow up on the questions, ACFN contacted the Prime Minister's Office, Indigenous Services Canada, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the emergency preparedness ministry asking them to dredge the dock for many years, not just in 2024.

This has been an ongoing issue in this community, and at no point were concerns regarding contamination ever brought up.

Why?

[Stephanie Hébert]

I think what's really important is, going forward—

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

No. Let's look backward a little bit. This has happened, so why did you guys choose to not inform the community?

[Stephanie Hébert]

Previously, the way the department would have worked.... We have to remember that this was in 2017. Some of the studies were done in 2013 and 2014. We did notification on three bases. First was that if we knew there was an active treaty claim, then a notification would have been done, because it could affect the exercising of rights.

Second, if we were in divestiture conversations or transfer conversations, it would be disclosed. I'm not going to argue the point about whether or not we sufficiently disclosed through that process, because I don't think that it's productive and I don't think that's what the committee wants to discuss today.

Third, if we had studies in our possession that indicated that there could be a risk to human or environmental health, then there would be an engagement.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

We have very limited time.

We had fire all around us in northern Alberta. There was a threat that the airport was going to be shut down. At that point, the first nation decided that it wasn't going to listen to the federal government anymore. It was going to take matters into its own hands. It was going to hire its own company and do this dredging itself.

The email it got back from Indigenous Services Canada said that there was significant potential liability involved in dredging it. Then they proceeded to say that they were going to charge the chief, both criminally and civilly, if they proceeded to dredge it.

At that point, why didn't you decide to tell them that the concern about dredging it was because there was contamination?

[Stephanie Hébert]

The concern about dredging wasn't just about contamination. There was also concern about the structural integrity. The other—

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Then why wasn't that part shared?

I have the email. There was nothing shared about the structural integrity. Up in northern Alberta, we do a lot of dredging for a lot of different reasons. Dredging happens in the oil sands on a regular basis. Dredging happens at the Snye in downtown Fort McMurray on a regular basis. There is a lot of dredging. There are a lot of engineers in Fort McMurray. We have the capacity to do a lot of dredging. We actually have a lot of equipment up in the oil sands region because of the oil sands. The ability to do this exists.

Why was no information given to the community as to why they couldn't dredge?

[Stephanie Hébert]

My understanding is that all of this was articulated in a letter—

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Including the contamination?

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I'm sorry, Ms. Goodridge. I'll stop you at three minutes and 30 seconds. I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Iacono.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

For the sake of translation and also for the sake of getting a good, coherent response from the witnesses, I think it's important that when we ask a question, we don't interrupt while they're responding. That way we can understand what they are responding to. If it's possible, let's give them time to respond.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Iacono.

I will remind all members to try to allow the witnesses to respond but also, more importantly, to ensure that we're giving the time for our interpreters to properly translate in both official languages what is being asked and what is being responded to by our witnesses.

Ms. Goodridge, I'll start the clock again. You were at three minutes and 30 seconds.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Was the contamination shared when you shared why you couldn't dredge?

[Stephanie Hébert]

It's my understanding that this would have been articulated in the letter in response to the request.

I think the issue before us is how to better engage in these types of studies going forward with the community to rebuild the trust. I think that's where we would really like to focus with the nations.