Paddy Torsney

[Migratory Birds Convention Act, May 30th, 2000]

Was that for me too?

[Migratory Birds Convention Act, May 30th, 2000]

Let's talk about the Migratory Birds Convention Act.

[Migratory Birds Convention Act, May 30th, 2000]

She was then Minister of the Environment.

[Migratory Birds Convention Act, May 30th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, amending the migratory birds convention represents the fulfilment of a goal particularly to ensure its conformity with the aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada. The migratory birds convention is North America's oldest international wildlife conservation pact. Together with the sister treaty between the United States and Mexico, it provides the framework for the management and conservation of migratory birds in North America.

The convention was created to preserve species of migratory birds considered beneficial or harmless to people. Since 1916 Canada and the United States have achieved a remarkable story of conservation success. This act enabled us to end an era of severe overexploitation of migratory birds by market hunters and nest collectors. Today together with Mexico our unique tri-national partnership is continuing to respond to the changing conservation needs of these species.

The conservation of habitat is key to the conservation of species. For migratory species like birds, it is essential that our countries work together to conserve breeding areas in the north, staging and stopover sites along flyways and wintering areas in the south. The North American bird conservation initiative ensures we accomplish that goal.

Let me tell all members of the House that I had the great privilege of being at Last Mountain Lake in Saskatchewan where we have the most amazing flyway. I encourage everyone to take the chance to get out there and see the magnificence of our nature and the great conservation system that is in place.

We are relying on sound science. We are identifying bird conservation priorities, expanding traditional partnerships and working on a co-operative basis, particularly with landowners and users, to conserve birds and their habitats. The foundation of this effort is the international migratory bird treaties.

The need to amend the convention has long been recognized, but previous efforts were not successful. The protocol to amend the migratory birds convention is the product of extensive consultations in Canada and the United States that began early in the last decade. The protocol was negotiated and signed in 1995 and was formally ratified by Canada and the United States in 1999. Its entry into force is an important event.

At their core, the convention amendments are migratory bird conservation amendments. They make more explicit the conservation principles underlying the management of these continentally shared species.

The protocol itself represents the first ever amendments to the convention and sends a compelling message that we cherish the richness of our shared migratory bird species and their critical habitats, that we respect the diverse cultural traditions and the subsistence way of life of our aboriginal peoples, and that we understand the imperative to expand and strengthen our partnerships for responsible conservation and stewardship of migratory birds.

Among its amendments the protocol removes inconsistencies between the 1916 migratory birds convention and aboriginal and treaty rights protected under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 by recognizing that aboriginal and treaty rights to harvest migratory birds may exist. It opens year-round hunting privileges to qualified non-aboriginal residents of Canada's northern communities who depend on a subsistence lifestyle where relevant aboriginal agreements permit the activity. It permits an earlier opening date for the fall hunting season in northern Canada, allowing more equitable access for qualified northern residents. It recognizes the traditional harvest of murres in Newfoundland and Labrador, an activity not recognized in the convention which was signed more than three decades before Newfoundland joined Canada in Confederation.

The need to amend the migratory birds convention has existed since the convention was first drafted and was heightened with the Constitution Act, 1982. It must acknowledge the customs, traditions and rights of Canada's aboriginal peoples.

The protocol accommodates traditional and customary hunting patterns that were not part of the 1916 treaty and brings provisions into line with Canada's constitutional obligations to our aboriginal peoples.

The migratory birds convention prohibits hunting migratory game birds from March 10 to September 1 and all other migratory birds year-round. Migratory birds have left large areas of Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut by mid-September and in these areas they generally do not return before March 10. As a consequence, much of the traditional harvest of migratory birds in the territories has taken place, and continues to take place, during the closed season portion of the year, especially in the spring.

Aboriginal and subsistence hunters in Canada want to hunt within the law when they take what is often the first meat that is available in the spring. It is an important part of their food supply. Aboriginal and subsistence hunters want to participate in managing the birds they share in common.

Active participation by aboriginal hunters and co-management councils will help make sure that these important changes to the convention are successful both legally and practically, leading to substantive improvements in the conservation of waterfowl and other migratory birds. The protocol before the House will do this. It provides a platform to involve aboriginal people in the management of these species. It will improve efforts to conserve migratory birds by allowing sound scientific data and traditional and local knowledge to be collected on the spring harvest.

Included in the amendments is the authority for Canada to manage the hunt of murres by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. This issue was in need of being addressed since Newfoundland joined Confederation in 1949.

Amending the convention has heightened the ability of Canada and the United States to manage for sustainable use the migratory bird populations of North America. It contributes to our government's “Gathering Strength” initiative aimed at renewing our relationship with our aboriginal peoples.

May I offer my congratulations and the congratulations I am sure of the entire House to the team members responsible for bringing this important initiative to fruition. It is a crucial step toward protecting wildlife species and their habitats across North America and in acknowledging the customs, traditions and rights of Canada's aboriginal peoples.

[Gary Dacosta, May 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, last week it was an honour for me to attend a wonderful celebration of excellent Canadian teachers.

Gary DaCosta, technology department head at Burlington's Lester B. Pearson High School, was among the teachers presented with a Prime Minister's award for teaching excellence.

On a daily basis Mr. DaCosta gives his students real life employment skills and inspires them to work hard and have fun. His philosophy of respecting students and treating them as mature individuals is working. His students have won awards and found fulfilling careers. Interestingly, 50% of his technology students are young women.

Mr. DaCosta coaches school sports and is involved in school activities. He was the driving force behind the new safety policy in every auto shop in the Halton district school board.

I know all hon. members join Mr. DaCosta's very proud family in congratulating talented Canadian teachers, teachers like Gary DaCosta.

[Species At Risk Act, May 11th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, it is a real honour for me to rise today to speak in favour of the species at risk act, the first specific piece of federal legislation in Canada to ensure protection for all species of birds, fish, mammals, plants and insects at risk. This bill, an important part of a balanced and comprehensive package, will ensure that species and their habitats get the protection they need.

Our top priority in drafting this legislation was to consider the needs of Canada's species. Home to a rich diversity of plants and animals, Canada has over 70,000 known plant and animal species, many of which are only found in this country. Given the vast size of our land and the unique wildlife within our borders, the government believes that we have a moral responsibility to present and future generations to make sure that our precious diversity is protected.

Globally we are losing species at an alarming rate due to human activity. In Canada today we have at least 352 species classified as being at risk. We must all work to turn this around to ensure that species will not become extinct or endangered in Canada because of our human activities. With this bill we are choosing an approach which is already working on the ground where it means the most and where Canadians are already hard at work.

Bill C-33 has been seven years in the making. In 1992 Canada signed the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. In fact Canada was one of the first countries to ratify the convention, as was already mentioned in question period today.

In 1996 governments across Canada supported the accord for the protection of species at risk and agreed to bring in species protection legislation in their own jurisdictions. Many provinces and territories have already fulfilled this obligation and commitment. Now it is time for the federal government to step up to the plate.

Protecting wildlife in Canada is not an academic exercise. This bill will protect species currently endangered and it will prevent other species from becoming endangered. The approach taken in this bill is balanced and practical. It recognizes that we must all work together if we are going to maximize our successes.

Introducing a Canada-wide comprehensive species at risk act was challenging. It required listening to many voices. The Government of Canada engaged in a thorough process of study, consultation and planning. It involved environmental groups, landowners, aboriginal peoples, other levels of government and thousands of individual citizens.

We have examined and benefited from the experiences of other jurisdictions, other provinces and other nations. We have taken what works and avoided what does not. The result for forests today is a strong bill, a bill which balances many important but sometimes conflicting interests.

The species at risk act before us is an effective bill which, when passed, will ensure the job gets done. Bill C-33 will help save species and protect their habitats on all lands in Canada.

To quickly outline what is contained in the bill, the species at risk act provides for independent scientific assessments of wildlife species by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, COSEWIC; an accountable listing process for species based on that scientific assessment; and a comprehensive process for planning and implementing species recovery. The bill also provides for strong prohibitions against the killing or harming of any species at risk and its residence, and the power to protect species' critical habitat on all lands, public and private, in Canada.

Under the act the assessment of wildlife species will be the responsibility of COSEWIC, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. COSEWIC is an independent body of scientists and other experts. It will continue to operate at arm's length from the federal and provincial governments. For the first time, however, COSEWIC is given legal status and will be given the budget to continue its work.

COSEWIC will assess whether a species is threatened or endangered and that COSEWIC assessment and the reasons behind it will be made public. All Canadians will have access to that information. There is nothing politicized about the assessment process. When COSEWIC independently determines that a species is threatened or endangered, that decision is automatically reported.

COSEWIC's scientific assessment will be the basis for the government's list of wildlife species in Canada established under SARA, the species at risk act.

Once a species has been added to the legal list, prohibitions on the killing of individuals of a species designated as threatened or endangered immediately come into force, as does protection for the residences of individuals of the species. A comprehensive process for recovery planning is initiated. The use of land that is part of a species habitat may be affected and a wide variety of other economic, legal and social consequences may come into play.

Decisions taken under the act can have serious economic, social and legal consequences for many Canadians. It is essential that there be political accountability for these decisions. That is why this act gives cabinet the legal responsibility to establish and amend the legal list of wildlife species at risk in Canada.

This bill recognizes that the destruction or the degradation of habitats is the main threat to these species. In the last 200 years, we have completely transformed the environment. Wildlife habitats were not spared, be they wetlands, forests, lakes, rivers or prairies.

Habitat lost threatens more than 75% of the species now classified as being at risk. Obviously, if we want to protect these species, we have to protect their habitat.

This bill on species at risk provides for the necessary authority to prevent the destruction of these habitats. It provides for the necessary authority to prevent the destruction of habitats critical for the survival of species at risk across Canada. This bill allows us to take emergency measures rapidly.

When a species is listed as threatened or endangered, the recovery planning process will identify what needs to be done to recover that species, including the identification of that species' critical habitat needs. As I mentioned earlier, this act provides the Government of Canada the legal authority to ensure that all critical habitat areas are protected whether it be federal, provincial or private land.

Our first line of defence will be to protect habitat by encouraging landowners to undertake voluntary conservation measures often in co-operation with other governments. The Government of Canada will provide incentives to promote habitat conservation because we know this approach works on the ground to effectively protect species.

In the last federal budget this government committed $180 million over five years to implement our strategy to protect species at risk. A sizeable portion of this money will fund habitat stewardship measures.

In many cases the habitat important for species at risk will be in a province or territory, and we respect their authority. We expect these governments to bring in habitat protection measures. This bill will complement existing or improve provincial and territorial legislation, not compete with it.

Make no mistake, where voluntary measures do not work, other governments are unwilling or unable to act, the federal safety net will be invoked. If a province does not have complementary legislation the Government of Canada will act to protect Canada's heritage, to protect our species on provincial and private lands.

Where the federal safety net is used to protect critical habitat on private land there will be provisions to compensate for unexpected losses caused by unforeseen restrictions on the normal use of that land. The compensation provisions, however, will not create perverse incentives to inhibit voluntary habitat protection measures in hopes of receiving future compensation.

It is all a question of balance. To find this balance the Minister of the Environment has asked a distinguished Canadian expert on conservation issues, Dr. Peter Pearse, Professor Emeritus of Resource Economics at the University of British Columbia, to review the issues and to provide him with advice.

Some people would say that this bill is an infringement on property rights. They are misguided. Their criticisms are based on horror stories about the very different experience of the United States endangered species act. The Canadian species at risk act is fundamentally different. While it certainly gives the government the power to protect species on private lands, we have gone a long way toward meeting the concerns of land owners and land users.

Perhaps what is most important about the bill is that it must be used and accepted by the people on the land who make decisions affecting wildlife every day. The bill recognizes that while we need strong measures for those who would break the law, we need a co-operative approach on the front lines. This in fact is what will protect our species.

For this legislation to be effective all affected stakeholders must be engaged. Reality and experience dictate that to get the job done we need land owners, conservation groups and other levels of government working together.

Aboriginal communities in Canada are especially important in the effort to protect species at risk. Many threatened or endangered species are found on aboriginal lands. Aboriginal people will be involved in the species at risk act recovery efforts at every step. The assessment and recovery processes will incorporate the wisdom of aboriginal traditional knowledge as well as local community knowledge. We will work closely with and respect the role of wildlife management boards established under land claims and first nations agreements to ensure the protection of species on traditional native lands.

We know from experience that all governments and stakeholders working together can help species recover. Already we have made progress on the swift fox, the white pelican and the peregrine falcon. We have learned from these successful efforts and now we must focus our efforts on saving species still in danger, such as the beluga whale, the Vancouver Island marmot—the minister's particular favourite—the burrowing owl and the leatherback turtle. To prevent other species from being added to that list, as a government, as citizens and as stewards our goal must be to protect species on the ground.

The new species at risk act is part of a comprehensive approach to accomplish this goal. Combined with the accord signed with the provinces and territories, and extensive stewardship activities already under way, we are confident that species and their habitats will be protected in Canada.

I invite all hon. members and all Canadians to join with the minister in taking this important step toward protecting wildlife species and their habitats in Canada. After seven years of debate it is time to focus our attention on protecting and recovering wildlife.

Bill C-33 is designed to work not merely in the courtrooms and the classrooms, but where it counts, in the fields, forests, wetlands and open waters of Canada. Effective species protection, not costly litigation, must be our primary goal.

We look forward to the committee process where all concerned citizens will see exactly how effective this bill can be.

We have an opportunity to pass strong legislation, legislation that is needed and is long overdue. I sincerely hope that all members of the House will assist in this monumental responsibility.

[The Environment, May 11th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the Cartagena protocol set the new global framework for the protection of biodiversity from any potential adverse effects of transboundary movement of living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology.

The protocol is very complex and is a demanding instrument. We need to consult with the provinces, with the territories, with Canadians and with industry. We will not waste time but we will do the necessary work to make sure we understand the full implications of the protocol before we sign it.

[Multiple Sclerosis, May 10th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, May is Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month. The MS Society of Canada has led the way for people living with MS. During the month of May, volunteers across Canada participate in fundraising and awareness campaigns to support MS research and to provide services.

This year the MS Society of Canada hopes to build on past successes and raise even more than the $19 million generously gifted by Canadians from coast to coast. These funds enabled the MS society last year to direct an additional $3 million to 13 potentially groundbreaking research projects and 36 research scholarships.

Colleagues, please join me in urging all Canadians to join these dedicated volunteers in achieving their goals. Congratulations to the MS Society of Canada; you make an incredible difference by helping the people living with MS.

[Environment, April 6th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. member opposite and all members of the House that the CEPA legislation passed by the government instituted a whole new policy for dealing with any waste, and it complies with the Basel Convention. It is a strong piece of legislation. We will use the tools in that legislation to make sure we have a strong environmental policy for this country, and we will do the right thing.

[Environment, April 6th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to tell the House that the Minister of the Environment and the officials in both the Pacific and Ontario regions have done a fine job in managing this recent proposed shipment to Canada.

The shipment will not, in fact, come to Canada, and we have instituted a new policy with the department of defence that for shipments below the legal limits of 50 parts per million, or any shipment, we must receive prior notification.