Transport Committee on June 1st, 2023

[Chief Patrick Michell]

Yes, thank you.

I think what's very important here is that.... Let's use an example: The Lytton weather station recorded a temperature of 49.6°C in June 2021. Most of the regions with what I'll call “non-official weather stations” were showing an excess of 50°C, with the highest at 55°C.

One of my recommendations is to create a new system of weather stations. If we're going to have a climate change adaption strategy, we need site-specific data. We need to know your wind. We need to know your temperature. We need to know your precipitation.

We've forecasted, at Kanaka Bar, a 6°C change in regional temperature by 2050. That's what we're preparing for. Our only concern is that it's happening sooner than we thought. Our three weather stations at Kanaka Bar, 18 kilometres south of Lytton, were recording in excess of 50°C.

If we're going to adapt our infrastructure of rails, bridges, roads, water systems and waste water, we need site-specific data. Give Canadians information—data. It's the old saying of “garbage in; garbage out.” If we're now using data that is out of date, we're not going to come up with a proper plan.

I will consider—

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

Chief, I need to get to the Insurance Bureau people for a couple of questions. I really appreciate that. That's extremely concerning—the numbers you're referencing for temperatures.

For the Insurance Bureau folks—perhaps Mr. Stewart—I had a meeting with some folks in my office on Tuesday morning. We talked at length about the challenges the Insurance Bureau people are facing, as well as insurance companies and so on across the country. There are extreme wildfires happening in Nova Scotia now, with 150 homes destroyed and so on.

I wonder whether you have any suggestions about preventative measures that our government needs to take, along with provincial and municipal governments, in order to prevent future forest fires. Are there forest management practices that can be employed, or things to mitigate floods and that kind of thing?

Give us the benefit of your experience and what you've seen.

[Craig Stewart]

Thank you, MP Rogers, for the question.

Yes, we actually know what to do. The consultations around the national adaptation strategy surfaced. This wasn't just IBC. This was IBC with the FCM, Canadian Red Cross, Salvation Army and a broad group of experts who are on the front lines. We came up with very explicit recommendations about what needs to be done to better protect.

It starts with infrastructure. That's probably the biggest thing. As Mayor Martin mentioned, the investment in resilient infrastructure, or infrastructure that builds resilience for communities, is one of the biggest things that could be done. In addition to that is awareness for Canadians of the risk they face, or the elevated risk, where the government has committed to a flood portal, for instance, and any homeowner can type in their address and say, “What's my risk and what can I do about it?” That is so important. It's something that we as insurers can then also point to. On policy renewal, we can say, “Here's your risk.” We can point to that flood portal.

At a community level, it's implementing FireSmart measures. Yes, forest management practices are part of it, but at the community level, it's essentially making sure that homes are built to FireSmart standards so that you're not using cedar shake shingles, for instance, if you live in a tinder-dry forest and these sorts of things.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

I remember when Fort McMurray had a major fire and we had a gentleman come to our municipal sector and talk about how municipalities, communities and individuals actually invite the fire into their doors because they plant trees around their property closer to homes. In the case of Nova Scotia, a prime example is that there are large subdivisions with huge building lots that are totally treed. Once a fire starts, it has tons of fuel. There's very little chance that you can save a house in those conditions.

Going forward into the future, in terms of the Insurance Bureau of Canada and other groups, we need strong suggestions and measures. I would invite you to do a written presentation to this committee that we could use as part of our suggestions to the federal government to take preventative measures going forward. That's the point I want to get at. It's—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Rogers.

Yes, we invite you to submit that to the clerk. We'd be happy to have it as part of our report.

Thank you, Mr. Rogers, and thank you, Mr. Stewart.

Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, you now have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank all the witnesses who are with us today. This is an important study that affects just about everyone in the territory of Quebec, but also in the territory of Canada. I suppose we could have heard from an infinite number of witnesses. The ones we selected are the cream, if I can put it that way.

I'd like to start with Mr. Chalifoux, the mayor of Saint‑Antoine‑sur‑Richelieu.

Earlier, you told us about the problem posed by the disappearance of the ice bridge over the Richelieu River, between Saint‑Antoine‑sur‑Richelieu and Saint‑Denis‑sur‑Richelieu.

At our last meeting, we received the mayor of Saint‑Ours. This is not the same ice bridge. In fact, several ice bridges along the Richelieu River are no longer practicable.

Mr. Chalifoux, could you tell us more about the impact on your community of the disappearance of the ice bridge in winter? What financial decisions must households make to ensure their future and the vitality of their community?

[Jonathan Chalifoux]

Economically, it affects jobs. People are no longer applying for a job at a company across the river, for example at Nortera, a food company, and vice versa. There are quality jobs to be had with the upcoming expansion of the Port of Montreal in Contrecœur. There's a pool of interesting workers who aren't applying for jobs on either side of the river because the 50 km detour is too long.

This also affects medical care. There's no health clinic on our side, in Saint‑Antoine‑sur‑Richelieu, but there is one in Saint‑Denis‑sur‑Richelieu. People no longer go to a doctor on the other side knowing that, three months a year, they'll have to travel an extra 50 kilometres. It's difficult for seniors, people who are more vulnerable or have mobility issues.

There are also major repercussions for local services.

I've talked a bit about fire and police service partnerships. We're experiencing climate change, and we need to be increasingly prepared for it. It would be possible to work even more with fire departments on the other side of the river. I'm a trained firefighter myself, and I'm involved. Communities on both sides of the river could help each other out in a major event, and would benefit greatly from it. Both Saint‑Denis‑sur‑Richelieu and Saint‑Antoine‑sur‑Richelieu need firefighters from the other side. Yet, because there's a three-month break, we're not working on collaborative projects.

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

At our last meeting, we received the mayor of Saint‑Ours, who came to talk about the fact that he would have liked to see the infrastructure of the Saint‑Ours locks used or, at least, made available to municipalities. This would have provided a year-round link by extending the locks, making it possible to build a bridge to cross from one side to the other. It would appear that this has been considered in the past, but the project has not been completed.

From your side, in Saint‑Antoine‑sur‑Richelieu, if such a project ever went ahead, would you see it as positive? What impact would it have on your community?

[Jonathan Chalifoux]

Such a project would certainly be positive, because it would reduce our transportation time between Saint-Antoine-sur-Richelieu and Saint-Denis-sur-Richelieu. It would cut the 50-kilometre journey in half. It's not optimal, but on our side, there are solutions we could use year-round. We really are a central hub between the two bridges, both on the Sorel-Tracy side and the Belœil side.

We occupy a central location, but, in reality, we would have to extend the Saint-Ours infrastructure that has been partially put in place.

On our side, I believe there are boats with air bubble systems that would be better suited to provide year-round crossings. As I said earlier, it's really the current owner who doesn't want to embark on the adventure. So we really need to help Saint-Antoine-sur-Richelieu move forward.

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

I have another question for you, which relates more to the issue of water levels. Every spring, the water level in the Richelieu River rises due to spring flooding and snowmelt. We also get the impression that, because of climate change, these level increases are becoming more and more significant.

The federal government exercises some form of water level management through locks, notably at Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Chambly or Saint-Ours. I'd like to know the quality of the communication you have with federal decision-makers regarding decisions that are made on water level management and marine traffic.

[Jonathan Chalifoux]

It's always difficult in this regard. There's very little communication between us.

I'd like to point out that with climate change, the riverbanks are much more prone to erosion. Previously, between the two systems that regulate the level of the Richelieu, there was ice from December to April. Now, we have several freeze-thaw episodes. Instead of one cycle, we're now on four or five. This winter, we even had periods of a month or two without ice. So there are a lot of episodes where the ice goes down the Richelieu and erodes the banks even more.

Wildlife is also affected by all this. However, the main problem is really erosion due to ice and the cycles we now have four or five times a year instead of just one. The situation is more difficult.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor.

I also thank Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

Next we have Ms. Zarrillo.

Ms. Zarrillo, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you so much.

I wanted to focus on water. I've heard a lot about water and around management of water, whether its flood, whether it's drinkable water or whether it's water for agriculture. Even today, as Mayor Martin introduced, how much is there capacity for enough water?

Today is B.C. wild salmon day, so I am going to go ahead and initially ask my questions of Ms. Azeez around the management of water. You mentioned the water resiliency fund, or the water security fund for B.C. The government has brought $100 million to the table, and a matching fund from the federal government would be beneficial.

Can you expand a bit on how that could help in the management and the protection of water?

[Lina Azeez]

Yes, and thank you very much for your question, MP Zarrillo.

The B.C. watershed security fund aims to support local communities to make decisions that make the best sense for them. That way, $100 million really does not go very far, and we definitely need to see more money invested in watershed security of all kinds. That's based on values that communities identify as important.

For example, our flood plain coalition, the lower Fraser flood plain coalition, is a hyperlocal group focused in the lower Fraser region, and we need funds to support our work in bringing communities together, having conversations, convening forums and building good relationships and trust. Through that, we will be able to identify important values that will support building resilience in this region. It's an incredibly complex region. The current commitments toward the watershed security fund do not support this kind of work.

Another example in the community that I live in, Port Coquitlam, is a fish-friendly pump station that is looking at a cost of about $14 million to protect upstream industry and homes and to allow salmon to move through. Port Coquitlam has applied numerous times to DMAF, the disaster mitigation adaptation fund, and is not able to access that money. Perhaps through watershed security, which would include the values of fish and fish habitat, they would be able to upgrade this very important infrastructure to protect the communities and ensure salmon are able to move through.

That's from a very fish-focused and flood plain-specific perspective, but watershed security really does apply to communities up and down a watershed and really does allow them to focus on the values that they know need to be addressed within their communities.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you so much.

I think even about the hydro dam that is up in Coquitlam there. When those initial contracts are signed, the hydro dam was allowing only a certain capacity of water to be used amongst the community. I know that a couple of years ago, when there was a drought, there were additional charges to the community because they needed to release more water from the hydro dam, but I also know that those hydro dams affected fish and salmon habitat in terms of their being able to come home.

I wonder if you have any comments about industry and the legacy contracts with industry that are now not keeping pace with the growing density that's happening in our communities.

[Lina Azeez]

With regard to the dam in Coquitlam on the Coquitlam River, Watershed Watch is part of the Coquitlam River watershed round table, in working with industry in our watershed to try to ensure that all values are looked at in an equal way, that the needs are balanced and that the demands on that waterway, on that reservoir, are balanced. I'm sorry, but I don't think I'm fully able to answer your question.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I'm going to move on to Chief Michell.

I wanted to ask about the indigenous knowledge, the indigenous lands and how important it is for the partnerships that we need to build across government and community to have the indigenous knowledge there and even around the water. Do you have comments you'd like to share for that part of the study?

[Chief Patrick Michell]

Thank you.

My first thing could be controversial. The collective conscious knowledge that my community has and my nation has is getting out of date. We're not adapting to these changing extreme weather events. What's important, though, is that you bring to the table 8,000 years of knowing, as a reference, and you complement it with the weather stations, but we've also started gauging. We have water-gauging stations on all seven of the creeks here, because water is necessary for ecosystem health, drinking, irrigation, fire protection, energy production and, most importantly, sharing.

From a water perspective, the issue that's facing my region—and potentially Canada—isn't water quantity. It's water storage with timed release for those six purposes, so I think it's integral that we understand where water is going to be running out. During June 2021, groundwater wells were also depleted. It wasn't just surface streams. It was groundwater as well. It's very important that water, as one of the foundations of life, be truly invested in.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I'm going to close out, in the 20 seconds I have left, with the Insurance Bureau of Canada.

There was a mention of enhancing the CIB to get that $2 billion in, but then to get additional from partners. I'm very interested in exploring partners. What kinds of partnerships do you believe would be beneficial with the CIB?

[Craig Stewart]

Very quickly, the Canadian Climate Institute just released a report in collaboration with Addenda Capital, which is the investment arm of Co-operators insurance. It laid out a number of ways in which you can attract private sector capital in basically resilient infrastructure without increasing debt load on municipalities. There's an active conversation with CIB under way right now. We will send that report to the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thanks very much to you both.

Next we have Mr. Muys.

Mr. Muys, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses here for a great discussion so far. We have been blessed in this study to have quite a number of witnesses with insight.

Before I turn to questions, Mr. Chair, I would like to introduce a motion. It has been provided to the clerk. I understand it's in both official languages. It will be circulated, obviously, for consideration at the next meeting. The motion is as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), the committee undertake a study on the Supplementary Estimates (A) 2023-24; that the Minister of Transport and Transport Canada’s Chief Financial Officer, and the Minister of Infrastructure and Infrastructure Canada’s Chief Financial Officer, each be invited to appear for no fewer than 2 hours; and that these 2 meetings take place as soon as possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Muys. The motion is now tabled.

Please proceed with your line of questioning.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Thank you.

Let me ask questions first of Mr. Stewart and Ms. Rol. I know that Mr. Rogers, who doesn't look a day over 50, by the way—happy birthday to him on the weekend—has given you an invitation to provide a written submission. If you can't answer this question in full in the few minutes here, I would certainly invite you to include it in the written submission.

With regard to the committee you chaired on disaster resiliency plans, did you look at other jurisdictions and what they've done? Are there examples elsewhere that we can learn from?