Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 21
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Transport committee  Madam Chair, I just want to thank you for the invitation and the opportunity, and for the excellent questions that were raised with me this morning.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Thank you. To add to that, there used to be a Fraser River estuary management plan for the lower Fraser, which brought together all the key authorities in that part of the Fraser. It included the port of Vancouver, the province, the feds, and metro Vancouver, and they were working together to manage the lower Fraser.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  No, I don't know of any specific complaints. I'd agree with you that it is acting as a bit of a catalyst, and if there is a community that has a particular waterway that is not on the list, there is a process in place for them to make the request.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Absolutely. Before I continue with my response, thanks for your comments about our organization. It's very much appreciated. I talked before about the safe tables, but our particular organization, if you look at its board of directors, has federal, provincial, local, first nations, private sector, and civil society all represented.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Absolutely. The part that really strikes me is that we would not have this document if there weren't that one-stop shop. For example, not one of these 43 funding partners could assume this responsibility on their own. It was broader than the provincial government, the federal government, or the first nations.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  A good example is the one I was talking about, if we can come up with some sort of implementation mechanism under the Navigation Protection Act to be able to anticipate where there may be some risks associated with the navigation. For example, if the Fraser River wasn't on the list, obviously because of navigation being so important, it should be on the list, especially if it's going to be affected not only by human intervention but by natural causes such as the one I mentioned this morning.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Again, I'm always worried about setting specific numbers. I think it all depends on the points of consideration, the sensitivity of the waterway you're looking at, the navigation used, a number of different factors that need to be taken into account. That's a much better approach than putting a specific number.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  That would be an excellent recommendation. It also enables me to talk a little about our organization, which we believe is very unique, as I pointed out and there are very few of its kind in Canada, in the sense that we do not take positions. We act as the catalyst, the honest broker, to bring those various players together, and then capitalize on the instruments, whether legal or information that works around the table to reach the solutions that I talked about with some examples earlier.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Yes, absolutely, with one addition before you get into the mediation. With a process such as ours, it's more of a softer form of mediation facilitation, where there is a table for constructive dialogue set up, so people feel that they can put forward their case in a respectful manner, are listened to, and then hopefully move forward.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  I would certainly support that.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  We absolutely do not. We prefer to avoid the courts, if at all possible. That's why I emphasized in an earlier question the importance of bringing people together right from the outset, trying to respect their various interests, looking for the common ground, working together in coming up with practical solutions, and moving forward.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  No, we didn't have to do new legislation. We were able to draw upon existing legislation and find out what attributes of that legislation would help us move forward to get to the decision we wanted to reach.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  No, I would caution against that. I think it depends on the location of the river and the uses of the river. You could have a larger river in a relatively remote location that doesn't have the same sort of risks attached to it from commercial activity. What you need to do is look at the critical importance of the river, its recreational value, its commercial value, and then determine at that point whether and where navigation fits in.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Not specifically at this stage, but that's very much a part of phase two, because we're looking at the key groups. The port is going to be involved in that, as well as the wharf operators, the railways, and the airport. The entire transportation sector will be looking at it. We'll include the navigation component.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall

Transport committee  Absolutely, and I'd like to say it goes beyond those 21 municipalities. We're looking at the entire lower river from Hope to Richmond and from Squamish to White Rock, and that includes 28 separate municipalities. They are all vulnerable. They would all be exposed to significant risk.

October 25th, 2016Committee meeting

David Marshall