Debates of August 24, 2011 (day 17)
QUESTION 194-16(6): FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CUTS TO WATER MONITORING SERVICES
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The recent news has been replete with stories detailing federal plans to cut 776 Environment Canada jobs and slash the department’s budget from $1.1 billion to $883 million by 2014. This was preceded by years of declining support for Environment Canada, and Minister Flaherty assures us this is just the beginning of the cuts. I’d like to ask the Minister of the Environment how these cuts will affect Environment Canada’s operations in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I had opportunity to talk to Minister Kent when he was here a number of weeks ago. These cuts are going to be felt across the land. They’re going to be felt in the Northwest Territories.
Specifically, I sent information out, for example, on the closing of water monitoring sites where we have 23 and they’re closing 21; all 10 in Nunavut, two on the boundaries between Nunavut and Northwest Territories that are important. They’re going to discontinue monitoring through national parks. There’s no monitoring on the Mackenzie River. There’s a whole list of implications for us. We are negotiating devolution based on what was there and is now gone. We have the transboundary agreements that we’re negotiating where water monitoring is essential. There were promises made by the federal government when they released their plan to put a panel in at the oil sands.
Going forward there are also clear obligations in land claims to provide and protect water, keeping it substantially unaltered is very clear in there. In fact, it’s so clear we used that statement in our Water Strategy. The federal government is a signatory of our Water Strategy that speaks to protecting and doing all the good things we’re supposed to do. This is going to have a significant impact.
Thanks for the bad news that the Minister has provided there. It sounds pretty grim. Many of the environmental monitoring functions performed by Environment Canada are referred to as mandated requirements. Meaning if the federal Minister issues a licence or authority with conditions requiring regulatory agencies to monitor compliance, the federal government is legally obligated to provide the resource necessary to carry out the monitoring. This legal compulsion would presumably govern the monitoring requirements arising out of authorities granted for the operation of our mines, the Mackenzie Gas Project, and so forth. When the specifics of the cuts are announced, will this government be doing a cross-check to see whether the cuts cripple the federal ability to meet its mandated monitoring responsibilities?
Yes. As the cuts proceed, as the federal government continues with its deficit reduction plans, we’ll be monitoring, as we are right now, the impact of what we know, what we’ve heard, what the actual final configuration looks like and who’s left after the cuts are concluded.
As we negotiate devolution, we started devolution negotiations at a certain point in time with certain resources available. Clearly, there’s been a change or will have been a change. We’re going to have to adapt as we go on down that road as well. At the same time we are going to see what we can do and how do we adjust so that we can keep moving and make sure the federal government -- which still has, until we sign the Devolution Agreement, legal responsibility for the land and water -- honours its obligations to us.
I appreciate the Minister’s remarks. The recent Hill Times I think was the 8th of August item quotes a federal spokesman as saying that the department will ensure the department is spending its resources on priorities like improving air quality and cleaner water. Those are nice words. Our Minister of Environment, though modest in stature, clearly throws a big shadow. Will the Minister be holding the federal government to task if their gutting of the department doesn’t live up to this dialogue?
I’m sure the Member’s not calling me fat, so I won’t take offence to that comment.
I would suggest this Assembly and, of course, more importantly, the 17th Assembly is going to have to deal with a number of significant issues like this as we move forward with devolution and as we move forward with the deficit reduction impacts that we’re going to feel over the next three or four years coming out of the federal government. There’s going to be some difficult circumstances and money is going to be a priority issue both to us and as we negotiate arrangements with the federal government to honour the mandates and the federal responsibilities that they have, and to ensure that what programs we take over in fact meet the obligation that was initially signed as we laid out the AIP where there were numbers laid out for A-based funding and such and the numbers of positions. So I would say to the Member that we are all collectively going to have a responsibility so that when an MLA or Minister stands up to do his job or her job, that they know that the Legislative Assembly is there and what they’re saying is pushing forward the position of this Assembly.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Minister’s comments again. I certainly hope that the 17th Assembly will be standing firm and be prepared to do that work. However, I understand the Prime Minister will be in town this week to demonstrate his devotion to northern interests and will be meeting with the Premier. Can the Minister assure me that our dismay at any erosion of Environment Canada monitoring programming in the NWT will be brought forcefully to the attention of the Prime Minister?
That is a question best put to the Premier. I would indicate to the Member that, of course, the opportunity will be taken full advantage of and that the Premier will be speaking on issues of great significant importance to the people of the Northwest Territories.
If there are any questions about that particular issue, I would suggest that the Premier would be best suited to respond.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.