Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue 2 - Evidence - March 26, 2009
OTTAWA, Thursday, March 26, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 10:34 a.m. to study on issues relating to the federal government's new and evolving policy framework for managing Canada's fisheries and oceans.
Senator Bill Rompkey (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. I will dispense with introducing the members of the committee. We usually do that if we are on TV so that people who are watching at four a.m. in the morning will know who we are.
As we are not on TV today, I will dispense with that introduction and simply welcome the senior officials of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, who will talk to us about the northern strategy. The strategy was developed with the goal to strengthen Canada's sovereignty, protect our environmental heritage, promote economic and social development and improve northern governance.
Before us today we have Patrick Borbey, who is Assistant Deputy Minister; Mimi Fortier, Director General, Northern Oil and Gas Branch; and John Kozij, Director, Northern Strategic Policy Branch. Did I say that right, Mr. Kozij? It is the first time you have heard your name pronounced with a Newfoundland accent, I bet.
John Kozij, Director, Northern Strategic Policy Branch, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: The second time.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I understand you have a presentation. If you can limit that presentation to 15 minutes, then we can have questions.
[Translation]
Patrick Borbey, Assistant Deputy Minister, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: Mr. Chair, I would like to thank you for your invitation. It is always a pleasure to appear before you and discuss issues concerning Canada's far North.
I would like to mention that Glen Nakamura, one of our colleagues, is not at the table but is in the room and available to answer questions concerning the implementation and negotiation of northern treaties. If need be, we will ask him to come to the table to assist us.
[English]
As you know, there is a huge amount of interest in the Canadian Arctic and the Arctic generally. There are significant opportunities as well as challenges for Canada in the Arctic.
There is a lot of talk about the potential of natural resources, notwithstanding the current trend. The issue is clear that much of the world's reserves of untapped natural resources are in the Arctic, and of course, a lot of those reserves are in the Canadian Arctic, whether they are mineral, oil and gas.
Unlike the Antarctic and arctic regions in other parts of the world, we have a substantive population in the Arctic. We have at least 110,000 people who make the Canadian Arctic their home, and we have a growing young population. About 50 per cent of that population is Aboriginal, and the population faces significant social challenges in Canada's Arctic.
Climate change is affecting the Arctic significantly. We will come back to that issue a little later. Climate change is affecting the environment, but also the infrastructure and the lifestyles of the people who make the Arctic home.
We have northern governments that are becoming more robust, both territorial and Aboriginal governments. We have a private sector that also has an important role to play in Canada's North.
Moving on to page 3, you will see the basic architecture of Canada's northern strategy. As the chair has pointed out, there are four pillars to the strategy. First is the sovereignty pillar, which involves protecting the Arctic, dealing with Canada's sovereignty and dealing with the international interests in the region.
The second is economic and social development: looking at the potential of the region for development, as well as ensuring that the people of the region participate in that development. A sideline to that pillar is making sure that the regulatory environment in the North is there to ensure sustainable development to the benefit of northerners.
On environmental protection, the next pillar, the Arctic is 40 per cent of Canada's land mass. It contains landscapes of unspoiled natural beauty and fragile ecosystems, and Canada has a unique role to play to ensure that environment is protected.
Under governance, the fourth pillar, is the dual responsibility to ensure that territorial governance continues to grow, and also that Aboriginal governance is fostered in the North.
Regarding the next few pages, I will say only a few words on each point. On sovereignty, a lot of attention has been focussed on the sovereignty issues and a few disputes we have in the Arctic.
These disputes are well managed, by and large, and we know which disputes they are. There is a border issue with the U.S. involving the Beaufort Sea, a difference of opinion. There is Hans Island and the Lincoln Sea in terms of issues with Denmark. Then we have the Northwest Passage and differences of opinion with Canada and others with respect to whether that passage constitutes internal waters that are completely subjected to Canada's jurisdiction or whether that passage would eventually become an international passage with certain rights that nations would have for free access. By and large, these disputes are not out in the open. They are well managed and do not prevent us from exercising our sovereignty. Canada's sovereignty over the Arctic territory is undisputed, except for that tiny little footprint with Hans Island. That does not mean there are not other issues to deal with involving security and concerns associated with increased activity in the Arctic. Other issues we need to focus on include search and rescue; dealing with the potential for spills; ensuring that shipping is undertaken in a safe way that is consistent with Canada's laws; and ensuring that enforcement is available to monitor and manage those conditions.
[Translation]
With regard to economic development, a lot is being said about the natural resources potential and the interest those resources are generating in Canada and abroad. The complex regulatory environment is also an impediment to development. It must be reviewed and streamlined in order to ensure sustainable development.
[English]
We also must realize that previous economic development in the North has not always translated into benefits for all northerners, and particularly for Aboriginal people. We believe that the conditions exist now with the settlement of land claims for Aboriginal people to be much more active participants and beneficiaries of economic development, but more needs to be done, particularly in the area of capacity, education gaps and skills gaps.
[Translation]
We also see gaps in infrastructure. This is an extremely vast area with very little infrastructure to support economic development and northern people's needs.
[English]
On the next slide, we have environmental protection. Of course, impacts from climate change are being felt across the Arctic. We are also seeing impacts from pollution. Pollution is something that has been concerning us for some years in terms of transborder pollutants and their impact on the Arctic, both in terms of wildlife and human health because of the high consumption of traditional foods in the Arctic. Also, unfortunately, there is not enough baseline information about the environment and about ecosystems in the Arctic, and that situation is something that we have to work on improving.
I understand that some of you were in Nunavut last year, so you probably were there at the time, or shortly after, we had problems in Pangnirtung where the melting permafrost and excessive rains washed out the only two bridges that unite the two parts of that community. That community was cut off from its infrastructure. This situation was unpredictable and unheard of in terms of conditions, and an example of how climate change and the instability in the climate are leading to issues for the local population. I understand the new bridge is being installed, but the experience was traumatic for that community. That example is only one that shows how we must take into consideration the changing climate. Climate change also affects economic development, whether we are talking about the possibility of shipping in the North or about pipelines and the conditions under which they can be laid on permafrost.
[Translation]
As for governance, the Arctic needs strong governance regimes. As I indicated earlier, those regimes are being developed. The territorial governments have taken on a greater number of responsibilities in recent years. In 2003, the Yukon assumed full responsibility for the management of lands and resources, and we are currently negotiating with the other two territories in order to transfer those responsibilities to increase the local decision-making of northern peoples over the development of their land and resources.
[English]
We also have made significant progress over the last 30 years in terms of Aboriginal governance. You will recall that when Berger issued his report, one of the recommendations was that a project such as the pipeline down the Mackenzie Valley should wait until progress had been made in terms of settling land claims. That was 30 some years ago. Since then, we have made a lot of progress. Most of the Yukon is now covered by self-governing agreements, except for the southern part, the Kaska area, where three First Nations are still without self-government agreements.
We have ongoing negotiations in the southern part of the Northwest Territories with the Dehcho, the Akaitcho and the southwest Metis. We have settled land claims with the Inuvialuit, the Tlicho, the Saulteaux and the Gwich'in in that area. That step is an important one towards facilitating economic development.
On the next page, we have a few words on science and technology. This part of the strategy is extremely important. As we say at the beginning of the presentation, science supports all four pillars of the strategy.
[Translation]
In recent years, Canada has established an excellent reputation in Arctic science thanks to substantial investments, including $156 million during the International Polar Year that is about to end, amounting to the largest contribution of any Arctic country. There is also the decision to build a permanent research station in the Arctic as well as the $85- million investment announced in the latest budget to retrofit Arctic research infrastructure.
[English]
The next page gives a quick overview of the recent actions in each of the pillars. I will not go through all of them, but you can see there has been a lot of activity over the last couple of years and many decisions. One of the areas that I am particularly concerned about is ensuring that we have strong implementation plans for each of these activities. Some of them are under our direct responsibility in the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, but many of them are the responsibility of other departments. We need to work in partnership with other departments and agencies to ensure that the northern strategy continues to evolve.
[Translation]
But we also have to work with territorial governments, Aboriginal governments, native groups, the private sector and other northern partners in order to carry out these activities and ensure progress.
[English]
The next few slides show a current snapshot on the economic situation. We do not need to go into detail, but it shows that the North is affected by the current downturn. The commodity price decreases except in the area of gold, which still continues to be strong, have affected projects in the Arctic. In fact, unheard of, the price of diamonds has gone down significantly in recent months. The declining price has led to layoffs in the diamond mines in the Northwest Territories, an area where there has been constant growth. Even in those high-priced commodities, we can see the impact of the downturn.
There also has been a reduction in terms of intentions for capital spending. Much of that reduction is in the area of exploration as well in the Arctic, so some of the evidence is anecdotal in terms of companies that have put off plans, whether in oil and gas exploration or slowed down their spending in mining development, but we know that situation is probably temporary in most cases and that exploration and development will bounce back quickly.
The next slide looks at the public sector relative to the private sector. You can see that the public sector still dominates the economy across the North. Therefore, that situation will provide somewhat of a break during the downturn, and will help to compensate. We are also hoping that the measures taken to stimulate the economy will help to deal with some of the adjustments needed at the community level or across the territory.
We looked at unemployment rates before coming into the committee. It is difficult to provide a good snapshot of the North when looking at labour force participation because a lot of the workforce still comes from outside the territory. For example, with the layoffs that have affected the diamond industry, many of those workers have returned to parts of Canada outside the territory. It is difficult to link the impact of those layoffs directly to Yellowknife or other communities.
In fact, the unemployment rate has dropped in the Northwest Territories in recent months. This is also true in Nunavut. It is difficult to provide a snapshot that captures labour force statistics. We need to make improvements in this area.
I have included a snapshot of the oil and gas potential in the Arctic, in the annexes. You will see that the Western Arctic is where a large amount of activity is situated currently. There is the proposed construction of a pipeline, discoveries in the Mackenzie delta and along the Mackenzie Valley, and gas discoveries as well in the central Mackenzie. In the Arctic islands, deposits have been discovered and show tremendous potential. However, it will take time and there are significant challenges to develop those deposits.
[Translation]
The next page shows current mining and oil and gas operations in the North. It is important to keep in mind that there are approximately 25 projects at various stages of development, including five or six that are currently going through environmental assessments. Over the next 10 to 15 years, we have potential to truly transform the northern Arctic's economy, with a number of projects in the Yukon, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut among other places. These projects could generate billions of dollars for the northern economy and create thousands of jobs.
Of course, we want to ensure that northern peoples benefit as much as possible from this development.
[English]
The last slide shows the sea ice. We follow that story closely in the scientific world in terms of what is happening and what may happen over the next decades. Scenarios have been developed that predict that within 10 years, 15 years, 30 years or 40 years, we may see an ice-free Arctic during the summer. The implications for shipping and other development are important.
We still do not know as much as we should. Even if we can see conditions improving in that area, there will continue to be significant challenges related to poor charting and the unpredictable nature of multi-year ice and where it may end up in the Northwest Passage. Therefore, we must be cautious in moving forward with any significant volume of shipping.
A great volume of shipping takes place now. However, shipping is not usually across the passage, from east to west or west to east. It is mostly at the edges of the Arctic, resupplying communities or scientific and military vessels. There is no significant activity in commercial shipping. There is an increase in tourism activity and we have to be concerned about that area as well.
That is a snapshot. I hope it has provided you with a general picture of the Arctic. I am open to answering any questions or probing into specific areas.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I want to ask a context question, which might be helpful to the other questions. This question is one of coordination. There is a Northern Strategy, but who is driving, coordinating or leading the Northern Strategy?
As you have pointed out, there is research and involvement from a number of departments — Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Department of National Defence. As I look down the list, there are polar-class icebreakers, off-shore patrol vessels, docking and refuelling at Nanisivik, and the NORDREG reporting system. It is policy — good policy — but it is not moving. Do you have any coordinating role mandate for monitoring and leading in this regard, or does any one else? Should there be a coordinating role mandate?
Mr. Borbey: The overall responsibility for the Northern Strategy rests with our minister, Chuck Strahl, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. That is his mandate; the department has a mandate for overall coordination in the North. The ultimate driver is the Prime Minister who has a strong interest, he has been active and he has helped to advance many of the issues through his leadership.
Committee structures have been set up to ensure coordination. A deputy ministers' committee is chaired by our Deputy Minister, Michael Wernick. The committee includes deputy ministers from all the key departments that have a role to play in the development and implementation of the strategy.
Below that committee, I chair two committees at the assistant deputy minister level. One is an overall coordinating committee where a lot of the support to the deputy ministers' committee is provided. Much of the more detailed work is done at that level.
We also have a committee focused on science in the Arctic because of the important issues related to science. The committee is smaller with representatives from the departments that have a direct role to play in Arctic science.
Below those committees are working groups established, as required, on specific issues. They are tasked to move forward, especially on anything with horizontal implications.
There is a large amount of governance to support the Northern Strategy. Sometimes it may seem that some of those items are not moving quickly. However, below the surface, is a lot of activity and planning is taking place to achieve the ultimate objectives the government has set.
The Chair: There is a committee of deputy ministers. Is there a cabinet committee on the Arctic?
Mr. Borbey: No, there is not a cabinet committee. However, our minister has been before the cabinet's Priorities and Planning Committee on a number of occasions to present and provide updates on the Northern Strategy. The strategy is discussed at the highest levels of cabinet structure.
Senator Cook: It seems like a lot of structure is in place to deal with the people who live in Canada's North. Tell me about the Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable.
My focus this morning is on the people who live in the North. Yesterday, at the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, I listened to First Nations people who were trying to develop a public health formula or prototype that will be inclusive for all parts of the country. The North has the fastest growing population in Canada at the moment. If I remember my figures correctly, 35 per cent of the population is under 15 years of age.
What is the mandate of the Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable? This is the one place I see where the people of the North are linked to the bureaucratic structure of government. Can you help me understand that roundtable?
Mr. Borbey: I have to admit I am not aware of this committee. I have not been involved with this group.
Senator Cook: My notes from the Library of Parliament tell me that in April 2004, the Prime Minister of Canada announced the creation of the Inuit Relations Secretariat at the Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable. It was established in April 2005 and is hosted in the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. The notes also say that there is an Arctic Security Interdepartmental Working Group.
My concern is for the people that live there. They are the fastest growing people and they are faced with enormous challenges from a health perspective. We heard a lot about young women who are having babies at a young age and must leave home for an inordinately long period of time, sometimes up to three months.
The resources are not in the North. There is little, if any human capital in the health sector — we need to be concerned about retention, training and education in health care. We need to be concerned about the people who live there now — and in five or ten years, the number of people who will live there — and the kind of lives they have a right to, as citizens of Canada. That is my angst this morning.
Mr. Borbey: I think you were referring to the Inuit Relations Secretariat, which was established in 2005. It is headed by Chris Duschenes, who reports directly to the deputy minister. We work as closely as we can with him. There are significant interactions between the Northern Affairs organization and the secretariat.
He is tasked with looking at issues affecting the Inuit across the Arctic — not only in the territories where I have responsibility, but also in northern Quebec and in Labrador. A lot of the issues you raised are part of his mandate in terms of looking at pan-Inuit solutions, whether for education, health or social issues. That secretariat exists and it continues to be an important part of the department.
On the health challenges, you are absolutely right; there are huge issues. Often, the problem boils down to human capacity because the infrastructures have been put in place. The territorial governments have invested in the infrastructure.
For example, good technology has been put in place to ensure electronic health and education links. However, there continues to be a lack of capacity — technical or professional. The territorial governments all have tried to tackle this problem, including using their college system to accelerate the development of professionals in those areas.
The territorial governments are responsible for health, education and social services. We are there only to play a secondary role.
One thing we have done over the last few years is to foster better research and knowledge on health issues, in particular, those affecting the Inuit people. Through the International Polar Year, we have now completed a survey of Inuit health across the four Inuit regions. That health survey will be a first and it will be helpful in terms of better understanding some of the trends. We know some of the statistics, but we do not have a cross-Inuit picture. We are now analyzing the results from the International Polar Year work.
Senator Cook: That work is commendable but my focus is on community. I think of everything in terms of the community; where people live and work. Are the people who live and work in these communities involved in looking at the problems that they face and, hopefully, in working toward the solutions? I am thinking about their cultural heritage, especially from health perspective.
I know all about telehealth. I live in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, where we started it because of necessity in 1972. These technical things can take care of the more critical issues and help the people who go to the North to work, and feel they have a mission in doing so.
However, there seems to be a gap between the people who live there and those who purport to care for them. I have the feeling that there is not enough dialogue with the people who live there — about what their needs are. Instead of issues coming from the community, from the bottom up, we tend to be coming at them from the top down. I would like your opinion on that point.
Mr. Borbey: I can only comment on what I know and what I have been involved with. I can give you the example again of the Inuit Health Survey, which was developed in full collaboration with the Inuit people and with the full involvement of the local communities. It would not have been possible to conduct that survey without that strong community support.
I think it is a good example of collaboration between local communities and southern-based science. The leader for the project was from McGill University, Dr. Grace Egeland, who is a renowned scientist in her field. She worked directly with community organizations in the Arctic to ensure that survey was a success. That survey is an example of where we try to recognize that solutions must come from the community.
The science and the results must belong to the community as well. Part of our challenge with the International Polar Year was to ensure that those results find their way back into the communities and to the people who can make decisions locally about their future health.
Senator Munson: First, you talked about expanding the Canadian Rangers program. How many Rangers were there before and how many are there now? Are there enough?
Mr. Borbey: I do not have those numbers; I am sure I have had them before. Apparently Mr. Kozij has the numbers, so I will let him answer.
Mr. Kozij: The program will be expanded from about 3,500 to about 5,000. Those numbers are rough. We can provide you with the exact statistics from DND if you wish, senator.
Senator Munson: How much are the Rangers paid?
Mr. Kozij: In general, the service is volunteer-based. However, we provide assets to them to conduct their operations, and per diems when they perform those operations.
Senator Munson: The service is volunteer-based. Has any thought been given to making it a more strategic program — paying the Rangers and making them part of servicing the North under sovereignty?
Mr. Kozij: I invite you to ask officials from DND to come here to speak to their plans on the Rangers, as well as their plans around an expansion of their activities in the North. I think that discussion would be fruitful.
Senator Munson: On the research station, the government committed to building a research station in the Speech from the Throne in 2007. Are we any closer? We know three locations are being considered: Cambridge Bay, Pond Inlet and Resolute. Are we closer to a decision?
Mr. Borbey: Yes, a lot of work has taken place since then. We have spent a lot of time studying what our partners internationally have undertaken, and some of the models that have been adopted elsewhere, both in the Arctic and in the Antarctic. We have learned a lot through that engagement.
We also worked with Canadian scientists as well as international scientists, Aboriginal groups and territorial leaders to try to establish the key priorities for research. This work is a bit of crystal-balling, looking into the future in terms of the areas that this research station should be involved in. The nature of the station, the location and so on, will be driven by the priorities that we will pursue from a scientific perspective.
We had an engagement process first with federal scientists involved in the Arctic. We then engaged with Aboriginal groups. We asked them to provide input. We then talked to the Canadian scientific community and involved people from the business community that have interests in the North.
We consolidated all that information and turned it into a Canadian-type of proposal, which was submitted to the Council of Canadian Academies, CCA. We asked them to take a look at what we have done and subject it to an international peer review, which they completed last summer. They issued their report, I believe, in October or early November, which is available on their website.
It is a good report that recommends the four priority areas that should be pursued, which include human health, climate change and resource development. I forget the fourth one, but the report is good in that area. It also gave advice as to the governance that should surround the station and how it should link into a broader network to support research in the Arctic. That piece is important. That report led to advice to the government and the decision in the last budget to move into the feasibility study stage.
We, in parallel, looked at a large number of locations in the Arctic and subjected that review to a number of criteria. Based on those criteria, we recommended that the last three, Resolute, Cambridge Bay and Pond Inlet, should be retained. We will now engage with the Nunavut government as well as those communities to prepare a more detailed assessment before we provide advice to the government as part of this feasibility study.
We have hired an architect, so we are starting to lay out what the research station would look like. We are moving ahead with a lot of that work. We hope to go back within the next six to nine months with advice to the government so that, if they are comfortable with the advice, we can then move to the next phase, which is design and construction, so off we go.
Senator Munson: In about nine months, we can expect a decision from cabinet and the government of Nunavut; is that right?
Mr. Borbey: We are tasked with coming back within that period of time. When cabinet will decide is up to cabinet. I cannot control that part. We hope to have a decision sometime within the next nine months or so.
Senator Munson: Following from the chair's question, I am curious about the Northern Strategy and approving governance, because northerners do not have much control over their own destiny, resources and territory, as we all know. The Nunavut Devolution Negotiation Protocol established a process. It sounds rather convoluted, and it seems like it will take a long time to transfer province-like responsibilities. Are the devolution negotiations under way now? If so, what are the challenges?
Mr. Borbey: There are five steps in the devolution process. We are moving in that direction. We have moved past step one with Nunavut. We are moving towards negotiations, but we are not there yet. We have a protocol that sets the framework of what will be negotiated and at what pace. For example, there has been a decision to focus primarily on non-oil-and-gas issues at this stage in the negotiations. Again, the approach to negotiations is an incremental one.
We have a ministerial representative, Bruce Rawson. His appointment was announced a few weeks ago. He has been engaged with his counterparts from Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, NTI, and the Government of Nunavik. During the next year, we hope to be in a position to seek from cabinet a mandate for negotiation, which is the next step.
In the case of the Northwest Territories, we already have a mandate, and we have had an offer on the table with the government of the Northwest Territories for some time. The government of the Northwest Territories is still considering its next move. We are in a holding pattern there.
It is important to note that this process involves not only negotiation with the government of the two territories; it must involve a certain amount of consultations and more than consultations, agreements, with the First Nations or the Aboriginal people. That requirement is built into the negotiating process as well. That process creates some complications, particularly in the Northwest Territories where they have both settled land claims and unsettled land claims. The level of support for devolution is not uniform amongst the Aboriginal people in the Northwest Territories.
The Chair: I remind the committee that our main focus is the Canadian Coast Guard. We wanted representatives from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada to appear here to fill in some gaps that we perceive with regard to the operation of the Coast Guard. That leads us to security in the North.
Senator Hubley: I will leave the questions on the Coast Guard to you, because you ask them much better than I do. However, I will ask about the sovereignty of the North.
One of the most important issues, when we talk about sovereignty of our North, is the health, happiness and prosperity of the people who live there. Having said that, I have found within your presentation not a lot of what I might call ``people friendly'' advice or information. I, perhaps, am following from Senator Cook's question. You have given us the focus of the Northern Strategy.
I want to read a quote from a fact sheet on the Northern Strategy: ``. . . the federal government is working on broadening and deepening the Northern Strategy, particularly the people dimension.''
What steps have you taken to involve the northerners and Aboriginal groups in the development of the Northern Strategy. Can you comment on how you see people dimensions?
Mr. Borbey: You are right that the strategy is a bit softer when it comes to the people dimension. Some of that softness is because the federal government's role in the North is different when it comes to issues such as sovereignty, the environment and the economy versus many of the social issues, which are the responsibility of the territorial government. Investments and initiatives have been aimed at certain key priorities, such as housing, for example, and investments in social housing in the Arctic. Significant investments have been made in those areas. There has also been recognition that the territories need the appropriate funding through the territorial funding formula to support their services and that funding cannot be on the same basis as we provide funding to other parts of the country; so there is recognition of the higher cost structures.
Through the research activity, we have been able to focus on some of the people issues. That focus is something that distinguished Canada's International Polar Year program, for example, from that of other countries, which were more focused on the natural sciences. We have tried to contribute in that way. We still have more to do. We want to continue working with the stakeholders of the North to broaden the scope of the strategy to include some of those key areas.
Senator Hubley: In your presentation, under economic and social development, in the third bullet, you said that recent growth in northern economies has not translated directly into significant improvements for northern Aboriginal Peoples, particularly in Nunavut, and in smaller print, you have ``education and skills gaps.'' How do you see your role in resolving those problems? How do you, working with other departments, strengthen an educational system to the point where you can then partner with development that comes in to ensure that people are provided with job opportunities and the training required to facilitate those jobs? Do you feel that role is within your mandate to a certain extent?
Mr. Borbey: Yes, it is. We can make a contribution in those areas. Sometimes the contribution is in an indirect way, for example, through the settlement of land claims. The conditions under those land claims can establish a rapport de force between the local Aboriginal people and proponents such that the impact and benefit agreements, IBAs, that can be negotiated at the end of the day ensure that the benefits flow to the community. I will give you an example. In the diamond belt in the Northwest Territories, the Tlicho have been effective in negotiating IBAs with the mines. One of the chiefs of the Tlicho told me recently that before the mines opened, one or two of their young people were in post- secondary education, and today they have about 200 in post-secondary education. Those are ways that we can leverage our role because we are still the managers of the resources in the North.
The MacKenzie Gas Project has projected a $500 million socio-economic fund that will be made available to the people all along the MacKenzie Valley to invest both in taking advantage of the opportunities as well as dealing with some of the mitigation of the impacts. Those are examples.
In Nunavut, the Inuit own the resources, by and large. With all the projects currently under development in Nunavut, they chose well when they settled their land claim. They have the ability to leverage that ownership into significant benefits.
That leverage does not change the fact that they have a 24 per cent or 25 per cent graduation rate in high schools. At the end of the day, people need to be able to take advantage of those opportunities. How do they do that? Mr. Kozij has strong relationships with Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. We try to ensure that we put Aboriginal groups together with programs offering special skills development. There are examples in the mining sector in the Northwest Territories where Aboriginal groups benefit from such programs. The programs are not ours, but we may be able to make some connections.
Mr. Kozij: You may be aware that HRSDC has a number of skills-based programs that apply in the North, in particular, to the Aboriginal people. The Aboriginal Human Resource Development Agreements between the Government of Canada and Aboriginal groups across the North include agreements with the Yukon First Nations; Metis, First Nations and Inuit in the N.W.T.; and three Inuit organizations in Nunavut. These agreements provide for skills development and training funds to flow directly to Aboriginal people, and for Aboriginal people to define and use those resources as they see fit in their communities.
The most recent budget, Canada's Economic Action Plan, also provided additional resources to the Aboriginal Skills and Employment Partnership. This partnership-based initiative strikes partnerships between private sector entities, the government and holders of Aboriginal Human Resource Development Agreements. This initiative brings Aboriginal peoples, say, in thresholds of 50 and above, into training opportunities and jobs in large resource development projects across the North, as well as south of the sixtieth parallel. A number of different programs are ongoing between the Government of Canada and Aboriginal people that make a difference in skills.
Another piece of the socio-economic pillar and collaboration in northern development was the development of the first small craft harbour in the North at Pangnirtung. You would have seen that announcement. That harbour was the direct result of a study between the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Government of Nunavut to identify an opportunity in the North for a commercial fishing harbour. That project was a clear example of collaboration between northerners and the federal government to identify a future project.
Senator Hubley: We had the pleasure last night — I think Senator Greene Raine was also there — to have Chief Clarence Louis comment on the Aboriginal economic development plan. We looked at the plan from the Aboriginal standpoint. Mr. Louis observed that sometimes they need economic development to stimulate students and to show possibilities. Where we might think education comes first followed by economic development, he saw it in the opposite way.
The Chair: I want to follow up on wharves. There was, indeed, collaboration between the Government of Canada and the Government of Nunavut on wharves. I understand seven were recommended. Only one was identified, Pangnirtung.
Senator Robichaud: Just the wharf.
The Chair: However, that wharf is not in place yet. Those of us from the Atlantic who went to Nunavut were mystified that there is not a single harbour in Nunavut. All of us here in Ottawa from the Atlantic spend our time obtaining wharves and breakwaters. That is what we did for a living if we were from the Atlantic. Every harbour in the Atlantic has a wharf and a breakwater.
There are none in Nunavut. It is not the fault of one government; that situation has gone on for a long time. However, we are now talking about resource harvesting, with priority given to people who live in Nunavut. If they cannot land their catch, how do they benefit from the resource off their shore? We were impressed by the lack of fisheries infrastructure. What will be done and when will it be done?
Mr. Borbey: Again, I will not speak on behalf of my colleagues from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. They are aware of that study. Pangnirtung is the priority right now.
The Chair: Again, we are running into interdepartmental difficulties. DFO has absolutely no money in its small craft harbours budget for Nunavut, and never has. The budget for small craft harbours now is fixed and it is not growing. They are only repairing wharves. They are not building any new wharves at all. If we are looking to DFO to provide money for wharves and breakwaters in Nunavut, that money will not happen.
The question is this: Does the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, who was fiduciary responsibility for Aboriginal people, feel a responsibility for providing fisheries infrastructure for Aboriginal people? Should there be a special program for the North in view of the fact that Fisheries and Oceans Canada is not doing the job?
Mr. Borbey: The relationship between INAC and Aboriginal people in the North is different from the relationship with Aboriginals on reserve. I will not comment on the fiduciary nature of that responsibility because that responsibility is subject to the Indian Act. By and large, Aboriginal people in the North are not subject to the Indian Act.
The Chair: However, they are subject to the Constitution of Canada, which identifies a fiduciary responsibility for the Government of Canada.
Mr. Borbey: I cannot comment on that because I am not an expert on that subject.
The harbour situation is not the only area where there are infrastructure gaps in the North. We recognize that situation. There are gaps in a lot of other areas. It will be a The undertaking to help the North bridge some of those gaps is a large one.
These challenges are expensive and complicated, technically and in engineering. A huge amount of work needs to be done whether it is for a highway along the MacKenzie Valley, deep-water ports for commercial or industrial needs, or the possibility of railways to take resources to southern markets.
The government has recognized that the territories need additional help in some of the allocation formulas. Having a base formula rather than only a per capita allocation for infrastructure funding is an example. The territories have their say in what their priorities are in infrastructure investment.
We will continue to work on identifying the needs and issues. We need to continue to advocate with our colleagues from other departments to make resources available to deal with some of those requirements. You are right.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: Thank you, Mr. Chair, almost all of my questions have been answered, except for one.
Your department is responsible, in fact, for coordinating and developing the northern strategy. Could I ask you where, on a scale of one to ten, you are at in developing the strategy? Or is this simply an unending process?
Mr. Borbey: I would be hard-pressed to give you a number on a scale of one to ten, but I can tell you that we have been working on the strategy for over two years. I believe that the four pillars of the framework are quite robust; they have withstood the test of these past two or three years. On the slide, you can see the activities of each of the pillars, and we are currently at the implementation stage.
Our challenge is to ensure that all the initiatives we have settled on are implemented before we undertake new ones. There must be proper follow-up and any problems that arise must be resolved. In the case of the small craft harbour in Pangnirtung, for example, financial requirements were greater than expected; so we had to increase appropriations for the project.
That is an example where we had to review the process from the start and make changes because things sometimes cannot be implemented as planned.
We are currently rolling out a number of our activities. There are still some shortcomings, areas where we still have work to do. We are generally satisfied. We have done good work over the last two or three years.
Senator Robichaud: I am not saying otherwise, I simply want to know what stage you are at. Let us look at the planned development of a port in Nanisivik. It appears the local communities are questioning why the port is being located there. Were you involved in those plans? You are responsible for coordinating the strategy that led to the selection of that location. Was the coast guard consulted? How did you come to choose that location?
Mr. Borbey: We were not directly involved. The Department of National Defence made that decision for national defence reasons. They consulted with coast guard officials because that facility already serves the needs of the coast guard. I did not contribute directly to that. The decision dates back to the start of the northern strategy, when we began to play a coordinating role. That was two years ago. I have nothing really to add. As Mr. Kozij said earlier, National Defence officials could tell you how they are coordinating the work on the port in Nanisivik and on other investments in the North.
Senator Robichaud: If other decisions had to be made regarding other ports, would you be involved, or does National Defence manage those things without outside involvement? You are now at a much more advanced stage than when the choice of Nanisivik was made. You can speak freely.
Mr. Borbey: I would not be directly involved in a military decision, although National Defence colleagues do participate in our committees and keep us informed of the progress they are making. Our governance regime was not in place at the start of the northern strategy. We can do that kind of coordination. If we had to decide on another northern port, the decision would be based on economic conditions. In the case of Bathurst Inlet, a proposal was made by a consortium of private companies that is looking to establish a commercial port, and we supported that project through our investments for northern economic development. We also have a regulatory system that is currently reviewing that proposal. It has been shelved for the time being, given the current uncertain economic climate, but the project could go back to decision makers in order to create a new commercial port.
Senator Robichaud: You say a commercial port. Would it be for the mining industry?
Mr. Borbey: It would mostly serve the mining industry in the region. There are several deposits in the Bathurst Inlet area, and the private sector would have strategic and business interests there. Another port might possibly be established in the south of Baffin Island, serving the proposed Mary River iron mine that is currently being developed by the Baffinland Corporation. There could be another commercial port, but these operations will be funded by the private sector, not the Canadian government.
Senator Robichaud: Funded completely by the private sector?
Mr. Borbey: Yes.
Senator Robichaud: When we visited the communities last year, they wanted to be able to practice traditional fishing, which they can no longer do. Now that the sea ice is melting, species are beginning to appear in the North that have never been seen there before. Those people have to be able to harvest that resource. My fear is that all of our attention will go to mining or oil and that the people will be marginalized.
Mr. Borbey: One of our mandates is to ensure the economic diversification of the North. We will certainly continue to support the natural resources industry. It is part of our mandate to support fishing, fish product processing, tourism development and a number of other sectors with development potential for the North. We provide this support through our economic development programs and with the creation of a new agency that was announced in the last budget.
[English]
Senator Johnson: I am interested in talking about our study as it relates to the policy framework for Canada's fisheries and oceans management. Integral to this policy framework is the Arctic Council and working with those nations. I want to ask you a few questions about that subject, if that is appropriate at this time.
For example, INAC implements the northern dimension of Canada's foreign policy and other activities related to the Arctic; and, of course, we all participate in the Arctic Council. It is the only forum we have in the North for a group, other than a larger organization like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, for example, which has a different mandate.
Do you think these countries have specific goals for managing their fisheries and oceans? How often do they agree, that you know of, as a council on these matters? Can the council be a force, or is management all determined by their international treaty? Was the Arctic Council formed by a treaty in the beginning?
Mr. Borbey: No, the Arctic Council of Canada was instrumental in creating the Arctic Council.
Senator Johnson: When was it created?
Mr. Borbey: About 15 years ago, I believe. We have been active participants ever since. The senior Arctic official for Canada is a colleague from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, but I sit on the council as an alternative to that senior official. I participate in as many activities as possible, and my staff are also active, particularly in the working groups.
There are a number of working groups under the Arctic Council. Some of them are led by Canada, in terms of chairing the activity. Also, for some of the specific studies under those working groups, Canada has an important role to play.
There are two recent major studies; one has been released and one is about to be released. One is the oil and gas assessment prepared by the Arctic Council and released last year. Again, from the perspective of development of the oil and gas sector and the risks associated with that development, including the risks of spills, and intervention if there are spills, a good body of scientific work has been done there. There are solid recommendations in terms of how Arctic nations should deal with some of those challenges, individually, bilaterally or multilaterally.
The other assessment we have been involved in will be released hopefully at the upcoming ministerial meeting at the end of April. That assessment is the Arctic shipping assessment; looking at the conditions under which shipping should or should not take place in the Arctic, and some of the challenges and recommendations in terms of interventions. Again, some of the challenges and recommendations are multilateral; some are directed at specific countries or all countries that have a role to play.
Those assessments are examples of the work we do and what comes out of that work. It guides our domestic policies in terms of how we move forward with development in those areas. Other working groups are looking at biodiversity. On the issue of oceans, a lot of work is undertaken with other countries.
Senator Johnson: Is the study you talked about on Arctic shipping, the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment?
Mr. Borbey: That is right. We hope it will be finalized in time for the ministerial meeting taking place April 28 and 29.
Senator Johnson: Chair, we should look at both those studies.
Does anybody else have any comments on the council in terms of any other policy? Do you like it as a policy forum? Is it working well as a council with the countries involved?
Mr. Borbey: Generally, the council works well. When eight countries sit around the same table, often there is not agreement in some areas. However, it is a forum that I find it works effectively at the officials' level. There is a lot of scientific collaboration.
Senator Johnson: The scientific collaboration is important.
Mr. Borbey: When they turn scientific information or assessments into recommendations, then that collaboration enters the world of nation-state politics. Clearly, it is difficult sometimes to tie some of the countries to specific recommendations, and Canada also wants its space to decide what is good for Canada. However, the collaboration has been good.
One of the early areas where we were able to transform science into good policy on a global scale was that of transborder pollutants, which eventually led to a ban of a certain number of pollutants under a United Nations convention. The work that the Arctic Council produced in collaboration eventually led to the reduction of the emission of those pollutants in countries that have nothing to do with the Arctic, at least directly. We know, given the science, that the pollutants all end up somehow accumulating at the poles. That accumulation has an impact on the health of mammals and the health of humans in Canada's Arctic. We have a small program that we run at Indian and Northern Affairs Canada that measures and studies the presence of these pollutants or contaminants, and we have been able now to see reductions, although we are still concerned about mercury, which will now be studied, or it will be the subject of a convention.
Senator Johnson: Air pollutants can come from far away and land on pristine lakes.
Mr. Borbey: That is why countries like India and China are increasingly interested in Arctic research and science. China sits as an ad hoc observer at the Arctic Council.
Senator Johnson: That is good. Do you feel you have the resources and influence to respond to the emerging challenges? Do you ever have enough resources?
Mr. Borbey: The challenge to respond to everything taking place in the Arctic is huge. That is clear. We try to be as imaginative and creative as possible. We try to pool our resources with others, whether domestically or internationally, to make progress in certain areas. We try to leverage our resources as far as we can, yes.
Senator Johnson: Do you have any information on why the ambassador for circumpolar affairs was eliminated in 2006? Did you conduct a review on the elimination?
Mr. Borbey: That was before my time.
Senator Johnson: Do you think it is an important role with the Arctic Council as well? Would you recommend it?
Mr. Borbey: It is important to have strong representation at the Arctic Council, and I believe that we are able to achieve that representation with the current structure.
The Chair: Is that a no?
Mr. Borbey: I believe Canada has a strong voice at the Arctic Council.
Senator Johnson: How has the world economic situation affected the other countries or the smaller nations you work with? They are still involved with the Arctic Council. Did you not meet recently in Iceland?
Mr. Borbey: The last meeting of the senior Arctic officials was in Copenhagen, and I could not participate. They are meeting again in Baltimore. There is a special event to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty. The senior Arctic officials are having one last meeting to finalize the preparations for the ministerial meetingat the end of April. The senior Arctic officials usually meet two or three times a year, but the working groups have a much more frequent schedule of meetings.
Senator Johnson: You are engaged in bilateral cooperation agreements with Russia centred on the activities under the Canada-Russia memorandum of understanding. What are the key features of the Canada-Russia MOU, and what do the bilateral cooperation agreements with Russia entail?
Mr. Borbey: I cannot give you the details. I did not prepare for that question. We can provide the information to you. We have collaborated in the past in areas such as environmental concerns, helping Russia deal with some of the environmental issues in the Arctic. Canada has a robust contaminated sites cleanup program. We have cooperated in those areas. We have also cooperated in the area of indigenous relations. Those are a couple of areas, but I can come back to you with more specific information.
The Chair: You referred to two studies, Senator Johnson, and perhaps we could circulate those studies. Also, if you reply to Senator Johnson, Mr. Borbey, perhaps we can see that as well.
Mr. Borbey: We will go through the clerk, yes.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: Mr. Chair, I would like to have struck from the minutes of this meeting the comment I made at the end of one of my previous questions, when I said: ``You may speak freely.''
In no way did I wish to imply that the witness was not speaking freely. Mr. Borbey, I greatly appreciate your testimony here today and I would not want people to have the impression that you were not giving us proper answers. I apologize.
Mr. Borbey: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Raine: I am new to this whole region, and I feel like I am being educated here. Do we have any maps of the area that are not the Mercator projection, all stretched out and rather distorted. Is there mapping that is more on scale of the area?
The Chair: The clerk has those maps, and we can let you have them.
Senator Raine: When I look at the different regions in the North, it seems like there is a huge distance between one place and another. We are looking now at possibly building a research station, wharves in different places and ports for minerals, and I am not sure what the distances are. Is there a study of all these different communities for logical access points? Obviously, if we build a research station somewhere, it will have a significant impact on the economic development of the whole North. How are those kinds of decisions arrived at?
Mr. Borbey: It is a vast region, and we are talking about probably 60 communities spread across 40 per cent of Canada's land mass. Three of the communities are large. Iqaluit has about 7,000 or 8,000 people, and the other two, Yellowknife and Whitehorse, about 25,000 or 30,000. The rest of the communities average anywhere between 500, maybe a little less, to 1,500 in population. The needs from an infrastructure perspective are huge, and the distances between those communities are huge. We are not used to that situation in the South because, for example, if a hockey arena is not available, it may be possible to borrow a neighbouring village's hockey arena. In the North, the neighbours are perhaps 500 kilometres away, and only accessible by air.
The air infrastructure is extremely important to the development of the North and to ensuring that the right kinds of runways are available and maintained properly. There has been significant development in that area. This development extends beyond the three territories. We are also talking about northern Quebec's infrastructure requirements.
During the summer season, the resupply of those communities is ensured through shipping. Large challenges are associated with shipping because of the lack of infrastructure.
Those communities survive by those two modes of travel. If you go to the Yukon, you will see a sophisticated network of roads, which does not exist elsewhere. Most of the Northwest Territories is not served by that kind of road system, and there are almost no roads in Nunavut at all. If we project ourselves 20 or 30 years into the future, we may have significant improvements in the infrastructure. However, those improvements still will not deal with your concern, which is, how do we connect those 60 communities by the same kind of infrastructure that we come to take for granted here in southern Canada.
Senator Raine: Personally, I do not think that is the nature of the North. I have no expectation that they will be served by roads or, perhaps, even by wharves and harbours if air is a better solution.
Senator Robichaud: If you talk to fishermen, wharves are important too.
Senator Raine: I know they are, but think about it. Take what we know today in terms of our knowledge base, and start from scratch on the east coast or west coast. Would we build fishing villages and have ships travelling up and down the coast to ports? I have no idea. Times are different now from when our fisheries evolved on the east and west coasts. I am not sure that can be replicated in the North.
I have a question about quotas and establishing licensing for the fishing industry. I am confused about how that system works, and I think I am probably not the only person. Is your ministry involved in fish quotas? Is fishing part of economic development?
Mr. Borbey: It is part of economic development in the same way that the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, ACOA, would invest in a project related to the fisheries sector, for example, commercialization, marketing or things of that nature. Our programs for economic development in the North are involved in such developments and this new agency that we are creating will also be involved.
Quotas are not part of our mandate. You have to direct those questions to our colleagues at Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
Senator Raine: We will have to do that.
The Chair: We will. That is a good question.
Senator Raine: We are looking at the impact on communities and we are hearing that fisheries are highly desirable as an economic driver for smaller communities. I am hearing from you that this agency will not drive such development.
Mr. Borbey: We will help; we will contribute. We can become involved in activities such as a proposal for a processing plant or something of that nature; marketing the product, whether within the North or to southern markets; or fund a feasibility study. That involvement is the limit of our capacity.
Senator Raine: I have one final question on the location of the proposed research centre. How will that location be determined?
Mr. Borbey: We will visit each of the communities and start a dialogue with them.
Senator Raine: Are you talking about the three big ones?
Mr. Borbey: The three communities on the short list are Resolute, Cambridge Bay and Pond Inlet. We will look at the pros and cons from many perspectives including the capacity of those local communities from an infrastructure perspective. Important considerations include things like water and sewer, the reliability of transportation links and the local population and its capacity to be involved in the project. We want the staff for this station that will be there on a permanent basis to be sourced from the North, whether it is the local community or surrounding communities. We will look at all those factors in making our recommendation on the best community possible. All three communities have potential, as far as we are concerned.
Senator Raine: With your indulgence — I am a lady so I have changed my mind — I have one more question.
The Chair: As a gentleman, I will allow it.
Senator Raine: Thank you.
I learned at an earlier meeting that the Canadian Coast Guard base for the North is located in Sarnia, Ontario. Is there any consideration to having a Coast Guard component to the new research station?
The Chair: Hear, hear.
Mr. Borbey: Yes, we have talked to Fisheries and Oceans Canada and to the Canadian Coast Guard. One factor to take into consideration is the accessibility of that station for the Canadian Coast Guard. That factor is not only to serve the Coast Guard needs, but their vessels are extremely important research platforms. Whether it is the Amundsen, which is dedicated to research on a primary basis, the Louis S. St-Laurent, which also has an important role to play, the des Groseilliers or Radisson, these vessels are all important assets for research in the Arctic. Accessibility for the Coast Guard is one consideration we have in locating the station. That is why communities that did not have relatively easy access from a Coast Guard perspective were set aside.
The Chair: I want to follow up, because those are two very good questions. The operation of the Coast Guard and where it is situated is one thing.
Before we go to that subject, I want to turn your attention to this green map and talk a little bit about quotas. On this map, fisheries area 0A starts approximately at the bottom of the words ``Baffin Bay'' and goes north. Fisheries area 0B goes south from the words ``Baffin Bay.'' The people of Nunavut have 100 per cent of the turbot quota in area 0A. They have 27 per cent of the turbot quota in area 0B. Adjacency is a principle in allocating quotas and those people are nearest to the resource.
I do not know how it is dealt with in land claims if it even is dealt with from a point of view of principle. When we looked at this matter, it seemed to us that to say people of Nunavut have a turbot quota off Nunavut that they do not have primary access to, is simply wrong if we are talking about economic development or even about fairness.
I know this issue is a fisheries one. However, it takes us back again to the whole question of coordination. Who can talk to whom, who can influence whom, and who is driving the ship. We have a lot of departments, but no one seems to be driving the ship. Senator Raine hit on an important issue that we are concerned about, and that we wanted to raise with you because of your mandate.
Second is the issue of the Coast Guard and why we cannot have a Coast Guard operation stationed in, and managed from, the Arctic rather than from somewhere in Ontario.
Those are two very good questions. It is right to raise them with you because of your particular mandate.
Mr. Borbey: With respect to this map, in particular, we were focusing on the oil and gas resource potential.
The Chair: It is the only map I had to refer to, so I did.
Mr. Borbey: I regret that I am not able to comment on issues related to fisheries quotas. I am learning some of this information from you. I probably need to spend more time with my colleagues at Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
In terms of Coast Guard operations, I think the ships themselves are not in Sarnia.
The Chair: No, they are not. However, they are tasked from Sarnia.
Mr. Borbey: They may be tasked from Sarnia.
Regardless, we work closely with the Canadian Coast Guard regarding, for example, any research requirements and ensuring that those vessels are available to deal with those priorities.
The Chair: We were in Iqaluit and, when we sat down with the Coast Guard people there, they told us that they reported to Sarnia, Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Robichaud: Resolute already has some infrastructure; materials used for scientific expeditions are stored there. Do you believe that the location could now be changed? I thought there already was a whole organization in place.
Mr. Borbey: Resolute is where the Polar Continental Shelf Project is located. This organization was created 50 years ago and provides logistical services to Canadian and international researchers. The organization covers all of Canada's Arctic. Their equipment includes planes and helicopters. They do not have scientific infrastructure per se. They have beds and a cafeteria; people can spend a few days there in transit before going out into the field, but they only have a few temporary laboratories.
Our intention is not to duplicate their role, which is very important, but rather to establish a centre with all the laboratories and equipment needed to conduct research on location, in order to change the traditional way of doing things whereby Canadian scientists head north for six or eight weeks and then return south with their findings and that organization's help.
What we would like to see is scientists conducting their research in cooperation with the northern peoples, with the Aboriginals, the findings remaining in the North and the research centre supporting communities across the north in order to improve their research capacity. That is our goal, to change how things are done.
[English]
The Inuit have a saying, ``In the spring and summer, the geese and the scientists return and, in the fall, we are sad to see the geese leave.'' We are trying to change that dynamic.
The Chair: If there are no further questions, I want to thank our witnesses for coming here this morning. Even though Senator Robichaud said you did not have to be frank, you were. Thank you very much.
Senator Robichaud: I said that he did not have to be.
The Chair: Honourable senators, we have items to deal with. First, we need to approve a draft budget. You will recall that we dealt with this budget at the last meeting but we could not vote on it because we did not have an order of reference from the Senate. We have that order of reference now and we can vote on the budget.
The budget is before you and I need a motion to adopt the budget. Do I have such a motion?
Senator Johnson: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Johnson, seconded by Senators Manning and Hubley. Is it agreed, honourable senators?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: It is carried.
This afternoon, you will have delivered to your offices a draft report on the eastern Arctic. I want you to have a look at that report. We will deal with it next Tuesday evening, so please read it over the weekend. Next Thursday, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans will appear. She was to appear before us Tuesday night but something came up, so we rescheduled her for Thursday morning.
Senator Raine: When is that report coming out?
The Chair: This afternoon and you will receive it in your offices this afternoon.
Senator Raine: I leave at 3:30 p.m. I have to read it over the weekend, obviously.
The Chair: Yes and you have a long flight on which to read it.
Are there any other questions?
Senator Raine: Is it possible for us to obtain a good map of the North? It does not have to be one; it can be several.
The Chair: We have maps but they are big. Perhaps we can obtain a collection of smaller maps for everyone so we can have it in front of us when we discuss it.
Senator Raine: Do those maps indicate the size of the communities?
The Chair: I do not think so.
Senator Raine: That is all right. We will gradually learn, will we not?
The Chair: Yes, we will.
If there are no further questions, I am open to a motion to adjourn.
Senator Manning: I so move.
The Chair: Is it agreed?
(The committee adjourned.)