Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 1621
Mark Potter
View Mark Potter Profile
Mark Potter
2013-06-18 9:49
We'll be making one 10-minute opening statement.
The Vice-Chair (Mr. Randall Garrison): Please go ahead.
Mr. Mark Potter: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good morning to everyone. It's a great pleasure to appear before this committee again and to speak with you about the economics of policing. As mentioned, I am joined this morning by my colleague, Rachel Huggins.
We've been following your work very closely and are pleased at the engagement of parliamentarians on this important issue and the wide range of impressive witnesses you have heard from during the course of your deliberations. We look forward to your report and believe that it will make a significant contribution to the work under way on the economics of policing and, most importantly, towards the future of policing in Canada.
Since we last met, there have been a number of developments. I'd like to take this opportunity to update you on those developments, as well as talk about the way forward.
First, however, I'd like to provide some brief background. The Minister of Public Safety has been providing strong leadership on the economics of policing. He has been engaged with all of his federal, provincial, and territorial colleagues through recent meetings of FPT ministers of justice and public safety to collectively advance this issue.
The work under way on the economics of policing is based on the following three commitments agreed to by all FPT ministers: first, to convene a summit on the economics of policing; second, to promote information sharing on policies and practices that improve the efficiency and effectiveness of policing; and third, to develop a shared forward agenda or strategy for policing in Canada.
The development of a shared forward agenda is a unique opportunity for governments to continue to demonstrate collective leadership. Such leadership can help contribute to the evolution of policing in Canada at a time of fiscal constraints and heightened public expectations.
As you know, the summit took place in January 2013. The summit was hosted by the Minister of Public Safety on behalf of all FPT justice and public safety ministers. The summit set out to meet three objectives: first, increase awareness of the economics of policing; second, provide practical information on how to improve efficiency and effectiveness; and third, get ahead of the issue so that we can take well-considered actions and avoid the drastic policing cuts being faced in some jurisdictions.
The summit was attended by over 250 participants from across Canada, the U.S., the U.K., and several other countries. Both formal and informal feedback on the summit was very positive. It achieved the objectives of awareness, practical information, and getting ahead of the issue. It also conveyed strong collective government leadership. A report on the summit is available on the Public Safety Canada website.
In fact, the summit and other developments, including the work of this committee, appear to have accelerated interest both in the issue of the economics of policing and, most fundamentally, the pace of police reform. The development of a shared forward agenda is intended to continue that momentum of change.
The closing session of the summit laid out a framework for advancing the issue of the economics of policing that is oriented around the three pillars of transformation. These are: one, efficiencies within police services; two, new models of community safety; and three, efficiencies within the justice system.
These pillars are underpinned by evaluation and validation of best practices, strengthened research, and of course engagement. The goal of the strategy is increasingly efficient and effective policing.
For the strategy to be successful, it must respect jurisdictional responsibilities for policing and it must be inclusive of the entire policing community and other key stakeholders. The goal, put simply, is to identify those areas where it makes sense to cooperate collectively. Engagement and consultation on the shared forward agenda are intended to flesh out this framework with proposed short- and medium-term actions.
The consultation plan is rolling out over spring and summer 2013. This process is being driven by all governments, notably through deputy minister and assistant deputy minister level policing and public safety committees. A core group composed of Public Safety Canada and the three champion provinces—Ontario, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia—will be taking the lead in identifying and developing specific actions for consideration by ministers.
In order to ensure that we get a broad base of input toward the shared forward agenda, we have put together a steering committee comprising this core group of federal and provincial government officials, along with key representatives of the policing community. The heads of the three national policing associations, representing front-line officers, chiefs, and boards, are on this steering committee, as well as an academic expert in policing, Professor Curt Griffiths of Simon Fraser University.
In addition to the development of the shared forward agenda, as directed by ministers, an index of police initiatives is being finalized as a tool to facilitate information sharing and learning from one another. The index is truly a collaborative effort by governments and police services across the country. We believe it is the first of its kind in Canada. The index brings together over 150 innovative initiatives, activities, and best practices in one database and will make them broadly accessible through a user-friendly search engine and on-line interface. I think many Canadians will be surprised at the many innovative policing reforms that are already under way in Canada and from which we can all learn. A number of the witnesses before this committee have referred to such innovative practices, such as the use of integrated teams to assist in responding to calls that involve individuals with mental health challenges, among many others.
In addition to such information sharing, policing transformation and innovation must be founded upon a solid base of evidence and research if it is to be successful. However, as noted earlier this morning, currently in Canada there is a limited policing-related research capacity, no central repository of accessible research information, and no agreement within the policing community on research priorities. A key aspect of the shared forward agenda will be to address such shortcomings.
In order to begin that process, Public Safety Canada has commissioned certain baseline research projects. Projects under way are reviewing policing research in Canada, use of performance measures, international comparisons of policing strategies, and the costs of police training in Canada.
Moreover, there is a major long-term research project under way on the future of Canadian policing. This project is being led by the Council of Canadian Academies and is assessing how policing is organized and delivered in Canada. The project is being undertaken by a number of eminent Canadian and international researchers. This independent study is expected to be released in late 2014 or early 2015.
In addition to strengthening research, another early focus of the work currently under way is on improving police training. A lot of money, as you know, is spent on police training, and the focus tends to be on costly and time-consuming traditional in-class approaches. Such approaches, as you have heard, are not always well-suited to the technology-based learning styles familiar to most new police recruits. Therefore, another short-term action will be to convene a two-day training summit with the Canadian Police Knowledge Network in September 2013. The workshop will bring together a wide range of participants to explore issues and approaches and help set priorities related to police training going forward.
Building on the index of innovative policing initiatives, Public Safety Canada will continue to advance information sharing through its economics of policing website. The website will act as a key portal to broadly disseminate policing information and research and to provide updates on activities related to the economics of policing.
To recap, in terms of next steps, we will soon finalize the index. There will be a training summit in P.E.I. in September, and based on the ongoing consultations, we will present the shared forward agenda to ministers in fall 2013 for their consideration.
The outcome of this committee's deliberations will, I understand, also be released this fall. Such timing would allow all governments to benefit from and draw upon your findings as we collectively shape the way forward.
That concludes the presentation. Your questions and comments would be most welcome.
Thank you very much.
Leonard Preyra
View Leonard Preyra Profile
Hon. Leonard Preyra
2013-06-17 19:04
I always thank people who ask questions about this legislation. I was talking with Ms. Rempel earlier about how great the questions have been and how non-partisan they've been. The direction of the questions is really all about protecting Sable Island. It's a very heartening process. It's a very encouraging process. I want to thank you and the committee for conducting this meeting and these hearings in that fashion. It really underlines the respect and fondness that we all have for Sable Island.
Being designated as a national park has a number of advantages. It will guarantee a number of important protections and regulations for the island. It will help ensure that the beautiful wild and fragile island will remain as it should be for generations to come. This legislation will protect Sable Island as it deserves to be protected and as how so many people who care for the island want it to be protected.
Designating this national preserve was a truly joint effort. Working collaboratively with our federal partners and other stakeholders, the team first evaluated which protection legislation would work best to legally protect Sable Island for the future. The assumption has always been and continues to be, Mr. Chair, that the status quo is not sustainable, that in a world where the coast guard is changing its role and where lighthouses are not as necessary, the status quo is just not sustainable. In fact, the law as it stands is a bit of an anachronism.
It became abundantly clear that the best choice was to advance Sable Island for designation as part of the national parks system. Through the federal-provincial agreement, we began pursuing this plan. We then worked on the best way forward while considering various interests, including offshore petroleum resources. With that in mind, both the provincial and federal governments agreed to present legislation to prohibit drilling on the surface of Sable and out one nautical mile.
The legislation will provide protection for the island while allowing access to the island for activities such as the emergency evacuation of offshore workers and for low-impact petroleum exploration activities. These activities and any such activities will require adherence to a code of practice for the protection of the island and will be regulated by the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board in consultation with Parks Canada.
We have the utmost confidence in our partners' ability to serve as regulators for this code of practice. After three decades, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board has developed a great deal of experience in this area, and Parks Canada is well versed in the environmental protection, conservation, and stewardship needed to ensure the island is safe and secure both now and in years to come. Parks Canada has been a committed partner in this process, and the consultation itself was a vote of confidence in Parks Canada and its ability to manage this heavy responsibility.
Once this legislation is enshrined in law, Sable Island's surface will never again be drilled. The petroleum companies strongly support this measure and volunteered to amend their discovery licences to follow this provision. These licences have now been amended and were approved by the federal and provincial ministers.
We strongly support the development of a memorandum of understanding between Parks Canada and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board to develop a protocol for low-impact petroleum activities and the way they may or may not be conducted on Sable Island. We are committed to this process and the public consultation that will help shape and support the memorandum of understanding.
Public consultation is a key part of the shared responsibility. Those of us who have been involved in Sable Island for a number of years now know that the public cares passionately about Sable Island, and any time you have public consultation, you will have a very open, transparent, and vigorous process.
We have been engage along with Parks Canada in consultation with Mi'kmaq representatives on the creation of the national park reserve. We are pleased that there has been progress towards an agreement that would see the Mi'kmaq undertake research on and about Sable to help us and them learn more about their ancestors' possible linkages to the island.
Along with the Mi'kmaq, we are truly working together—the provincial government, the federal government, and business—to ensure that the significant cultural heritage and ecological value of Sable Island are understood and maintained. The amendments to the accord act are another step in the process towards completing the designation of Sable Island as Canada's 43rd national park.
The Nova Scotia House of Assembly passed mirror legislation to this effect. Nova Scotia will continue to carry out this important work on Sable Island, such as scientific research and environmental, climate change, weather, and air monitoring. We have made a continuing commitment to stay involved and engaged.
Nova Scotia will provide advice on the ongoing management of the island through the Canada-Nova Scotia offshore committee. We will continue to provide input on a number of topics.
I would like to thank and commend Parks Canada for their consultative approach to the establishment of Sable Island as a national park reserve and for an ongoing commitment to stakeholder inclusion. We look forward to further discussions with Parks Canada as they move forward with the management planning and in the actual ongoing management of this unique site. Sable Island is part of Nova Scotia's and Canada's history, and as part of the national parks system, it will be a special part of the future.
I would like to thank Minister Kent; Minister MacKay; Minister Parker, the Minister of Energy and Minister of Natural Resources; Harold Carroll; a number of other people who've been involved; and all our hard-working staff who have been involved in this process.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak here. I look forward to the discussion.
Stuart Pinks
View Stuart Pinks Profile
Stuart Pinks
2013-06-17 19:10
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the invitation to appear before the committee this evening. I'll try to jump through my speaking notes which I think all of you have copies of, and try to hit some of the highlights to try to meet the five-minute time commitment.
My name is Stuart Pinks. I'm the chief executive officer for the board. I'm joined by Elizabeth MacDonald, who is an adviser on environmental affairs and a conservation officer with our board. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to communicate our support for Bill S-15.
Sable Island has long been the centre of oil and gas activity in the offshore Nova Scotia area since hydrocarbon exploration began back in the 1960s. To date, all the discoveries and the production that have been made in the Nova Scotia offshore have been within 60 kilometres of Sable Island, and a significant amount of that within 12 kilometres of Sable Island. The coexistence of Sable Island with the oil and gas industry has been going on successfully for quite awhile.
When the board was first advised of the changes in the status of Sable Island in November 2011, the board approached the licence holders in the area who voluntarily agreed to amend the terms and conditions for the five significant discovery licences that encompass or are within one nautical mile of the island. These licences were issued prior to the board being formed and give the rights holders tenure.
These amendments prohibit drilling from the surface of the island or within one nautical mile seaward of the low watermark of the island. We know this prohibition has been ingrained in the proposed legislation that is now before the House.
We understand that the current debate in relation to the proposed legislation has, in part, been centred on the definition of low-impact exploration activity that may be allowed to be carried out within the national park reserve. Our commitment is that once this legislation goes into effect, the board in partnership with Parks Canada intends to develop and publish guidance and interpretation notes addressing this matter.
The development of guidance and interpretation notes is contemplated under the accord acts and they form an important part of our regulatory regime. Public consultation will be a key component of this process.
Experience has shown that when conducted using appropriate equipment, work practices, and mitigation, the type of activities contemplated on the island can be carried out with little or no lasting impact on the environment. These include things like geochemical studies and seismic-type work.
I think the committee is aware that in 1999 a four month low-impact seismic program was carried out successfully on Sable Island by what was then Mobil Oil Canada. The program and the code of practice were carefully observed by Zoe Lucas who lives on the island. Upon completion she concluded that in general the program had only limited and short-term impact on Sable Island.
Upon or prior to receiving an application by an operator to carry out any proposed exploration program for possible authorization, regardless of whether it is on the ocean or on Sable Island, the board would require an environmental assessment up front. In conducting this assessment, public comment periods are provided for. In order for the board to consider the issuance of an authorization, the environmental assessment would have to demonstrate that there would be a low likelihood of significant adverse environmental effects following the implementation of the project-specific mitigation from carrying out the proposed program.
Should work be proposed within the national park reserve, the board will solicit input and advice from Parks Canada among others. The requirement for low-impact exploration would drive consideration of, and potential implementation of, additional mitigation to further minimize or remove any potential environmental effects on all surrounding ecosystem components, including landscape, vegetation, wildlife, and marine life. Each operator would be required to develop and submit for board review and acceptance a code of practice specific to the work to be done on or around the island.
I wanted to speak very briefly to the fact that our board underwent an extensive audit by the federal Auditor General's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. They looked at some 10,000 records generated between our board and the Newfoundland board and other federal parties. The report that was published in February 2003 concluded that the board exercises due diligence when assessing and approving offshore projects and activities; the board takes adequate steps to ensure that operators comply with environmental requirements; and overall, the board manages the current environmental impacts associated with natural gas activities in the Nova Scotia offshore area in a manner consistent with the size and scale of current operations.
Having those types of comments made by the federal Auditor General after an almost two-year review of the activities that our board undertakes was, to me, a huge vote of confidence.
In closing, the board supports the amendments to the Canada National Parks Act designating Sable Island as a national park reserve and the resulting amendments to the accord acts. The amendments to the accord acts reflect board policy that has been in place for many years for exploration licences. The establishment of this reserve is an example of government, industry, and the regulator cooperating to achieve a common goal, the protection of Sable Island.
In summary, I would ask that you consider the following points as you move forward.
One, the board commits to, in partnership with Parks Canada, develop guidance and interpretation notes to give definition to the term “low-impact exploration activities”.
Two, low-impact seismic activity occurred on Sable Island in 1999 and also previously in 1996. There were no significant adverse environmental effects from this program, according to the report that was prepared by Zoe Lucas, who I think is joining us as well.
Three, under the proposed bill, Parks Canada will have to be consulted and their views considered before any low-impact activities occur on Sable Island, which is not the case now. We could authorize those activities today without having to consult with Parks Canada.
Four, an environmental assessment, including a public component, will be required before any low-impact activity can take place on Sable Island.
Five, the federal Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development recently expressed confidence in the board's execution of its environmental protection mandate.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide the board's perspective on this matter. I look forward to some of the upcoming questions.
Mark Butler
View Mark Butler Profile
Mark Butler
2013-06-17 19:29
Thank you for this opportunity. My presentation will be under five minutes.
The Ecology Action Centre has been actively involved in protecting Sable Island for over a decade. We've been a member of the government-led Sable Island stakeholder advisory committee for many years. We held our first event in 2004, in association with Zoe Lucas and the Sable Island Green Horse Society. Every year since we have held an annual update that attracts over 300 people, a testament to the ongoing interest in the island and its protection.
We first became involved because there was good chance the federal government would close the Sable Island station. The Ecology Action Centre, along with many other groups and citizens, strongly made the case that the island required a year-round human presence. Luckily and eventually the federal government agreed and committed to maintaining a year-round human presence on the island.
The Ecology Action Centre, along with the Green Horse Society and CPAWS, was supportive of Sable Island becoming a national park when first proposed in 2010. We have maintained that support over the last three years.
Despite significant public concern that by making Sable Island a national park Canadians might love it to death through increased visitation and supporting infrastructure, the EAC has seen the designation as the best possible outcome for the island.
We supported park designation for a number of reasons, including the expectation that the designation would result in the exclusion of oil and gas activities from the island.
In the summer of 2011, the EAC participated in Parks Canada's consultation on the island as a national park. We made the following comment regarding oil and gas activity: The EAC opposes oil and gas activities on Sable Island including seismic. We would encourage licence holders to relinquish any existing licences on Sable Island. In addition, oil and gas activities should be kept as far away as possible from Sable Island both to reduce the impacts of pollution on the Island and to protect the integrity of the visitor experience. The federal and provincial government should expand the current 1 nautical mile exclusion zone and put it into law. Parks Canada should not make any arrangement regarding sub-surface petroleum rights for Sable Island which would set a bad precedent for other national parks in Canada.
Consequently, we are disappointed to see that with this legislation, drilling under the island is still permitted, the exclusion zone has not been expanded, and—we hadn't expected this—exploration is allowed on the island.
There are effectively no new protections for Sable Island from oil and gas activity. We appreciate that the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board guidelines around surface drilling and the one nautical mile exclusion zone are now being enshrined in legislation. However, in practice most of us realize that it would be highly unlikely for any oil company to propose drilling on Sable itself, or in the surf and shallow water immediately adjacent to the island, or to do high-impact seismic on the island. Because of the shape of the island, which is long and narrow like a banana, a drill rig one nautical mile from the island will feel like it's on top of the island.
In terms of impacts, our main concerns are flaring, light and noise, produced water, and small spills. If there is a large spill, it probably won't matter whether the rig is one or five nautical miles away. We're happy to elaborate on these concerns.
We are opposed to the proposed amendments in the current form because of the ecological risk to the island and the precedent they set for other national parks, if not in legislation, in the public's mind.
We are also worried that this decision erodes the public's confidence in Nova Scotia's and the federal government's resolve to stand up for Sable Island on other matters, such as tourism. We note that both governments have received considerable praise for their decision to protect the island. At EAC we were happy to add our voices to that praise.
We also like to think that the government is also willing to take tough decisions on behalf of the island. We have followed some of the deliberations in Parliament. We are distressed that MPs and senators are in a position of having to choose between a park that permits oil and gas activities in its boundaries or delaying the establishment of a national park. It is an unfortunate choice, and one which we think could have been avoided.
There is a tremendous amount of goodwill within government and industry when it comes to Sable Island. Of course, the level of public interest and support for the island never ceases to amaze.
Because we weren't part of the discussions, we can only surmise, but we feel that both the federal and provincial governments missed an opportunity to bring all the players together to hammer out a deal that puts the best interests of the island first.
As far as we know, the oil companies were never explicitly asked not to do low-impact seismic on the island, or not to do directional drilling under the island. They agreed to what they were asked to do by the government.
If for whatever reason there is an opportunity to improve on this legislation, we would encourage that there be frank and inclusive discussions about how to meet the interests of the licence holders, while keeping oil and gas activities out of the park.
Thank you for your time and your work to protect Sable Island.
View Michelle Rempel Profile
CPC (AB)
Great.
To continue, clause 3 of this bill, in proposed subsection 41.2(1) says:
Existing leases, easements and licences of occupation in or on Sable Island...are continued under this Act in accordance with their terms and conditions....
What consultation process would be used should any of that need to be amended in the future? My understanding, based on Parks Canada management and on the process that's been developed for this particular part, is that any time we demand a lease related to this, there would be extensive community consultation. Is that correct?
That question is for either Mr. Pinks or Minister Preyra.
Stuart Pinks
View Stuart Pinks Profile
Stuart Pinks
2013-06-17 19:46
If I understand the question correctly, what we call SDL, significant discovery licences, were voluntarily amended ahead of this legislation in consultation among government, the regulators, and the interest holders like ExxonMobil.
Everybody has agreed that there would be, within those significant discovery licences, no drilling from the island or within one nautical mile. That was done collaboratively.
View Megan Leslie Profile
NDP (NS)
View Megan Leslie Profile
2013-06-17 19:53
We've had a lot of talk about precedent, and my colleague Ms. Duncan put some pointed questions to Parks Canada about the precedent that this may or may not create. One way that I've been thinking about it is it's not that a park is being created with oil and gas just outside the boundaries, it's that we're creating a park in a gas field, which has a lot of challenges, but is ultimately a good thing.
Mr. Barry, let's just say for argument's sake the bill passes and we create a park so that piece is done. I recognize that you don't represent all industry, but do you think that industry would be open to continue discussions about the one nautical mile limit and possible expansion, or about surface exploration? Do you think that conversation could continue?
Andrew Barry
View Andrew Barry Profile
Andrew Barry
2013-06-17 19:54
Yes, I think as you look back at the activities we have had there, the Sable project is a shining example of the cooperation and ability to produce oil and gas effectively in close proximity to the island. We've been doing that for many years very successfully.
The issue we have in front of us at the moment is that clearly, when you talk about removing the opportunity to do directional drilling or do drilling underneath the island, that is removing the opportunity to develop the resource as such.
We firmly believe that—
Andrew Barry
View Andrew Barry Profile
Andrew Barry
2013-06-17 19:54
If you remove the opportunity to drill underneath the island, you remove the opportunity to develop that resource.
Elizabeth MacDonald
View Elizabeth MacDonald Profile
Elizabeth MacDonald
2013-06-17 20:01
Absolutely. The CNSOPB does environmental assessments for seismic programs. We will be doing what we call an accord act environmental assessment for any proposed seismic, and that would include effects on wildlife, and if there's anything in the marine environment, effects on the marine environment, and air quality, commitments for air quality monitoring and such.
Sable Island has been considered in our strategic environmental assessment, which is done at the call for bids stage, as a special area. We completed a strategic environmental assessment in 2012 that included the Sable Island area.
Leonard Preyra
View Leonard Preyra Profile
Hon. Leonard Preyra
2013-06-17 20:02
I know the answers have been couched in “in the present” and “in the past”, but the future process is going to be significantly different. It will be guided by a new player at the table, Parks Canada, and the Offshore Petroleum Board protocol that will result from a series of public consultations. It will be a very different definition of low impact, I suspect.
View Stephen Woodworth Profile
CPC (ON)
Very good. I want to say, by the way, I'm very grateful to hear the comments of the environmental commissioner on the degree of rigour that the board already applies. I was reassured by that.
Mr. Preyra, are you able to tell me when Nova Scotia introduced its bill in the legislature on this? How long did it take to get it through to completion and passage?
Leonard Preyra
View Leonard Preyra Profile
Hon. Leonard Preyra
2013-06-17 20:03
The actual public process started a long time ago, as some of the parties at the table know, but we introduced the bill in this past spring's sitting. There was unanimous consent in the legislature. We had similar types of discussions to what we're having here, but it did go through unanimously.
View Kirsty Duncan Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all the witnesses for your time and effort tonight.
I do have a concern that we are unable to hear first nations testify today. I think their input should be fundamental.
I'll begin by asking you a question, Minister.
Would you say that the Government of Nova Scotia and the Government of Canada have provided ample consultation with first nations in the ramp-up to negotiating, drafting, and tabling this bill?
Results: 1 - 15 of 1621 | Page: 1 of 109

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data