Debates of May 15th, 2012

Environment—Main Estimates, 2012-13

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

That will finish this round. We will move on.

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I want to thank you for allowing me the time to talk about the main estimates. I am actually quite excited about one aspect of the government's plans and priorities for the next year in Environment Canada.

The issue I want to bring to the attention of members in the House is a project that I have been working on, along with a number of other people, which is the establishment of a new national urban park in the Rouge Valley in Toronto. This is a very exciting project.

This project is really an example of citizens coming together to spur the government to action. This is something that was started by the Honourable Pauline Browes, who was a minister in the government of Brian Mulroney in the late 1980s and represented Scarborough in this Parliament. She and people like Glenn De Baeremaeker, a City of Toronto councillor, and other interested stakeholders who served in the City of Toronto, in the town of Markham and in the greater Toronto region have worked for the better part of 20 years to fight to preserve a very important watershed in southern Ontario.

I was asked to sit as the federal government's representative on the Rouge Park Alliance some five years or so ago. Minister Flaherty asked me if I would sit on that group, representing the government. I did so without really knowing a lot about this particular project. When I started to get involved with the alliance, I realized what a gem we had there in the eastern part of the GTA.

What also struck me was that literally thousands of ordinary Canadians had given up their time, effort and money to push the governments, both federally and provincially, to work towards the establishment of this park.

Many people had spent the better part of two decades working on this project. When I joined it, I sought to educate myself about it under the leadership of Alan Wells , who was then and is now the chair of the alliance. He was appointed by the Government of Ontario.

We decided that after 20 years of a very ad hoc governance arrangement, we really needed to come forward with a new governance structure for the park, a new budget, a new vision, so we engaged in a year and a half of consultations with various stakeholders, both governmental and non-governmental, including the federal, provincial and municipal governments and environmental NGOs.

What we ended up with was a report that we came forward with in the early part of 2010. The report called for the creation of a national park in the Rouge Valley. The report was unanimously adopted by all of the various stakeholders—municipal and provincial, environmental and non-environmental—involved with this initiative.

We presented the findings to the federal government in early 2010, and we started to lobby the government and the then Minister of the Environment, Minister Prentice, to seek action, to see if the government would take the report's recommendations and work toward the establishment of this park.

I remember very vividly the day Minister Kent was appointed to the federal cabinet as Minister of the Environment. I was in a hotel room when I managed to get hold of him. We had an hour-long chat over the telephone about this initiative. I think it was in late January or early February of 2011. We had a long and sincere chat about this initiative.

I said to him at the time that this was really the make or break moment for the park. I really felt that if the government did not move forward with this initiative, it was going to fall apart, and all the work that we had done would have been for naught.

I was delighted that Minister Kent took it upon himself to really push this initiative. We had an election about five months later, and it was in the party's election commitment to work towards the establishment of this park. Then, after the election, in the Speech from the Throne in 2011, the government reaffirmed its commitment to establish this park.

Last fall, a mere several months later, Parks Canada, with Alan Latourelle, initiated the consultations that began on the Scarborough campus of the University of Toronto, where we invited a wide range of stakeholders, including, I might add, a member of the New Democratic caucus from Scarborough who joined us for this consultation. She participated for the whole day in those consultations, and that marked the start of the process that we are now in.

I am very excited about this because it is important for two reasons.

The first reason is that it is ecologically important. We have protected large swaths of Canada's north and the boreal forest zone of the High Arctic. I was in Auyuittuq National Park on my own time and my own dime. A couple of years ago I hiked up the Weasel River some 19 kilometres. Never did I think that these moraines would be so difficult to climb. I thought I could do five kilometres an hour, but I think it took me an hour a kilometre to scramble up these moraines. It was a memorable trip.

We have protected the High Arctic. We have protected the rain forest in the Pacific Rim National Park. We have protected marine areas, whether off the Bruce Peninsula in Ontario or off the Pacific or Atlantic coasts. We have protected Gros Morne National Park. We have protected large swaths of Canada's biodiversity, but the most intense biodiversity in Canada that we have not protected on a large scale is the Carolinian forest zone, found only in southern Ontario.

This zone lies to the west of Toronto. If one were to draw a line between Toronto and Stratford, everything south of that is the Carolinian forest zone, and we have not protected a big chunk of it. It is the most dense biosphere in the country. This park would expand the federal protection of that very important biosphere, the eastern deciduous forest zone known as the Carolinian forest zone. That is the first reason this is such an important issue.

The second reason is that many of us will never go to Canada's national parks. The fact of the matter is that most of Canada's national parks are in very remote areas, especially for people who are living in the St. Lawrence lowlands. They are far away and cost thousands and thousands of dollars to get to. To do a canoe trip in Nahanni would cost $,5000 or $6,000 just for a week or two up there. The same goes for many of Canada's national parks, yet in southern Ontario, in the GTA, we have some 8 million Canadians, and in the next 20 years we are going to have a 50% increase in that population, to some 12 million Canadians who would live in what is now called the Golden Horseshoe. Many of these Canadians are new Canadians and have never accessed the great outdoors. Many have never had access to our national park system.

We all know the challenge in these last three years with the decline in the global economy and the challenge of making our national park system accessible. That is why this is such an important initiative. It would give access, a gateway, to our national park system to some eight million Canadians, many of whom are new Canadians living in the greater Toronto area. We will make this national park system accessible right on their back doorstep with a quick hop on the rapid transit system.

I want to thank Parks Canada, the minister, Catherine Grenier and Andy Campbell for their continued work on this initiative. I also want to recognize members of the Rouge Park Alliance for their tireless diligence. People have contributed over 20 years of volunteerism and hard work to this project.

I am very excited about the department and agency's plans and priorities for this initiative. I am going out on a limb here, but I think this could become the most visited national park in our national park system once it is created and up and running. This is a tremendous initiative that will create a new opportunity for Canadians to access the great outdoors.

I will finish on this final note of informing members of this committee why this is an interesting project.

We have never created a park in an urban setting. This park will be 10 to 15 times the size of Central Park. It will far outstrip Stanley Park in Vancouver in terms of size, and it is right in the heart of the city of Toronto, in the town of Markham. Because of that, we are going to create a new type of national park with this initiative called a near-urban national park, or an urban national park.

This will allow Parks Canada to develop expertise in this kind of set-up for parks that are near urban areas. This will be a precedent-setting park that may expand its initiatives in the Gatineau, across the river from Ottawa here, and in other large metropolitan regions, whether they be Montreal or Vancouver.

I want to thank the minister for this initiative. I will just ask a quick question.

A lot of services have been reduced in existing areas at Parks Canada. My question for the minister is: Why is Parks Canada working on creating new national parks and national marine conservation areas, while at the same time it is reducing the budget in other areas of Parks Canada?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from Wellington—Halton Hills for carrying the torch in the House with regard to the dream of an urban park, the dream of the Rouge Park Alliance to have this magnificent park within the limits of the greater Toronto area.

I would just like to remind the House that when Parliament passed the Parks Canada Agency Act, it directed Parks Canada to include representative examples of Canada's land and marine natural regions and systems of national parks and national marine conservation areas.

In 2006, Parks Canada's protected areas network was approximately 277,000 square kilometres. Since 2006, this government has taken actions that will protect an additional 150,000 square kilometres. This brings Parks Canada's protected areas network to 427,000 square kilometres, which represents a 54% increase. I would advise the House that we are not stopping here.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Chair, when we did the report for the Rouge Park Alliance that recommended the creation of the national urban park for the Rouge Valley, the alliance's estimate of the costs associated with this park, which some members have been wondering about, was that it would require $40 million to $50 million in capital costs over a 10-year period and about $4 million to $5 million in ongoing annual operating costs. I just put that on the record.

It is not in these main estimates, but the government did reaffirm its commitment to the establishment of this park. Obviously we cannot come up with numbers for the fiscal framework in the main estimates until we have gone through the consultation process, determined the boundaries for the new park, developed an MC to bring to cabinet, got the approvals for the fiscal framework and so on. I just put that out as a point of information.

Perhaps the minister would comment on the Rouge Park Alliance's estimates for both the $40 million to $50 million in capital costs for a 10-year period and the $4 million to $5 million in ongoing operating annual costs.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, my colleague accurately described the current process. At the moment we are in the midst of consolidating land from the various title holders, be they municipal, provincial or federal, and the next process we are about to begin is public consultations. We will work to finalize the eventual boundaries of the Rouge Park.

With regard to capital and operating costs, I can assure my colleague that we will be presenting our initial estimates for the House's consideration in the very near future.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I want to commend the minister for this important initiative. This is really a hidden gem in the city of Toronto and in the town of Markham. Most people do not realize there are working farms in the city of Toronto today. There are conservation areas within the city of Toronto that will be in this park, which people can walk into and think they are in the middle of wilderness.

This is an important initiative that would preserve an important part of Canada's biodiversity.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I can assure my colleague that I share his dream of making the Rouge near urban national park yet another jewel in the string of parks, many of them quite different from our first parks in Banff and Jasper or our newest designated park, Sable Island off Nova Scotia.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like to begin by correcting the record. Gutting environmental protections is not strengthening, as the minister claims. Repealing the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act and weakening the Fisheries Act, the Species at Risk Act and water legislation is gutting.

In reading the Hansard from the first Liberal round, one can only conclude that the minister believes that the Environment Commissioner is wrong.

Does the minister refuse to accept the recent report of the commissioner?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, with regard to my colleague's preamble, she was wrong on each and every count.

With regard to the report by the Environment Commissioner, we endeavoured to assist him in updating his figures with respect to climate change. His report makes it quite clear that his terms and points of reference were a full year out of date.

While we do accept the compliments that were scattered through the Environment Commissioner's report, although they seem to have been overlooked by colleagues on the other side of the House, with regard to the federal contaminated sites program, I understand the commissioner has since agreed that he did not understand or did not have a full grasp of the parameters of the federal program.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, what the minister does not say is that I used to consult to his department and I served on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and was asked by my government to do so.

I would like to know what is in the budget to address the concerns of the commissioner.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have here something with which my colleague should be familiar.

The Environment Commissioner was asked, “Did I hear correctly that inventory data was not reflected in your report that dealt with 2010 emissions?” The Environment Commissioner answered, “Correct. Just to be clear, there is a lag between when the year and when Environment Canada takes to compile all the data and then release it.”

So the Environment Commissioner has been very gracious in his acknowledgement that his report is based on significantly dated data.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, the question was actually: What is in the budget to address the concerns of the commissioner?

In his answer to consultations on Rio, I noticed that the minister said he consulted with first nations. Can the minister provide me with a list of the first nations consulted?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I can. I do not have that list at hand, but I have had any number of meetings in recent months with various first nations, both at the gathering on Sussex Drive, which was held so successfully just a couple of months ago, and with the grand chief most recently. I have met with representatives of various first nations bands in Ottawa, Gatineau and various locations across the country.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would ask that the minister table the first nations, Inuit and Métis with whom he consulted.

The government signed onto the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which calls for free, prior and informed consent on anything to do with their lands. How is this commitment incorporated into the department and the budget?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, as I have explained to colleagues opposite any number of times this evening, under CEAA 2012, the responsible resource development legislation, we are committed to improve, expand and increase assistance funding to ensure that our constitutional obligations to consult with first nations are fully and properly met.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, how many of Environment Canada's climate and impacts adaptation group, many of them Nobel prize winning scientists, will be supported to undertake adaptation work for Canada as the costs of adaptation will be $21 billion to $43 billion by 2050?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like my colleague to ask the last part of that question again, just so I can respond precisely to it.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I asked very clearly how many of Environment Canada's climate and impacts adaptation research group, many of them Nobel prize winning scientists, will be supported to undertake adaptation work for Canada as the costs of climate adaptation will be $21 billion to $43 billion annually by 2050.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, there are a variety of funding instruments in place to address both climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation. Some months ago $150 million was committed, and I can tell my colleague that $252 million is committed to support regulatory activities to address climate change and air quality.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, yet again the minister did not answer my question. How many of the scientists, many of them Nobel prize winning scientists, are going to be funded? Has the adaptation impacts research group closed?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, the adaptation research group is, like climate change, an evolving organization. As we address the challenges of climate change, both in terms of mitigation and also with regard to adaptation, we respond and direct our resources to where they are best applied.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, that is still no answer. We do not know if the impacts group is gone, and climate change is getting worse. The 2°C window associated with dangerous climate change is fast closing.

Ozonesonde measurements in Canada's most populous province, Ontario, have stopped. There are still no ozonesonde measurements in Canada's second most populated province, Quebec. Is this what the minister had in mind when he set to streamlining the ozone program, to stop measuring ozone pollution where people are most affected by it? What other ozone stations have been cut? Can he please answer this time?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

First, Mr. Chair, I would correct my colleague. In the Canadian Arctic, the 2°C increase has already been quite clearly surpassed.

With regard to ozone monitoring, my colleague seems to think I make the decisions and I assign the locations from where the ozonesonde balloons are launched. That is not the case, and she knows full well that Dr. Dodds is the responsible official for that very essential and important service. She has assured the environment committee that the ozone monitoring program will continue effectively, scientifically acceptable, and the service will continue to be provided to clients around the world.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Chair, the minister does not understand. We are concerned about a 2°C average global temperature. That is associated with dangerous climate change.

We believe in evidence and science on this side of the House. It turns out that ozonesonde measurements have not only ceased at the Centre for Atmospheric Research Experiments in Egbert, Ontario; they have also stopped at Environment Canada's research station at Bratt's Lake near Regina, Saskatchewan. This is downwind from the oil sands and, presumably, would have been part of the minister's plan for oil sands monitoring. Where else will ozonesonde launches that monitor ozone pollution be cut?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have reached a point where I cannot resist the temptation to remind my hon. colleague that the previous Liberal government paid mere lip service to environmental considerations, while it signed Kyoto without any thoughtful consideration or costing of the commitment it made. It did nothing about it, and emissions rose 30% under its watch.

Our government has moved forward. We have made a very clear and firm commitment to Copenhagen. We are moving sector by sector to regulate, and I can assure the House that we will meet those 2020 targets.