Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue 10 - Evidence - September 21, 2009 - Morning meeting
YELLOWKNIFE, Monday, September 21, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 9:01 a.m. to study issues relating to the federal government's current and evolving policy framework for managing Canada's fisheries and oceans (topic: matters related to the Canadian Coast Guard and fisheries in the Western Arctic).
Senator Bill Rompkey (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: This is a meeting of the Senate Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I am Bill Rompkey, chair of the committee. I think we might just introduce the senators, although I think we all know each other.
Senator Raine from British Columbia, Senator Hubley from P.E.I., Senator Cochrane and Senator Cook, who are both from the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, as am I, so that gives us the balance of power on the committee. Quality makes a lot of difference, however, and Senator Raine is here to hold up the banner of the west coast.
I would like to welcome everybody. I particularly want to acknowledge Dave Nickerson, a former colleague of mine from the House of Commons. He is a former MLA for Northwest Territories and former MP. Welcome Dave, it is good to see you again.
Our first witnesses are from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and I think everybody knows what our mandate is. We have two focuses, one is the fisheries and the other is the Coast Guard, and that leads us into the whole question of security in the Arctic region.
We are very pleased to begin with witnesses from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. I welcome René Grenier, the Deputy Commissioner of the Coast Guard, and ask him to introduce the people with him, some of whom I think we already know. Then we would be glad to hear your presentation, after which we will have questions.
René Grenier, Deputy Commissioner of the Canadian Coast Guard, Fisheries and Oceans Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will present the first paragraph of my presentation in French and then the rest in English.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, honourable senators and committee members, it is a pleasure for me to be here today in Yellowknife to help you understand more about the Canadian Coast Guard's activities in the Western Arctic. It is truly a pleasure to be here with you outside of Ottawa in order that you may meet some of our regional staff from the Coast Guard as well as from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans who all work in close collaboration. You will see that their reality is quite different from ours in the nation's capital.
[English]
On the panel with me are four key people from Central and Arctic region: Mr. Wade Spurrell, Assistant Commissioner of the Coast Guard in Central and Arctic; Mr. David Burden is Associate Regional Director General with DFO; Mr. Burt Hunt is Regional Director of Fisheries and Aquaculture Management with DFO; and last but not least, Mr. Mike Hecimovich is Area Director of the Western Arctic Area of the DFO.
Today I wish to give you an overview of Coast Guard activities in the Western Arctic with details on more specific activities that I am sure you will have an interest in. I also know you are eager to receive the government's response to your latest report entitled Rising to the Arctic Challenge: Report on the Canadian Coast Guard. Please be assured that we have been working diligently with a number of other government departments so that the response may be tabled in the Senate on or before October 9.
Back to the topic of the Western Arctic. My colleagues and I here today are very happy to entertain your questions once I have given you this quick overview.
The Canadian Coast Guard has a long and proud history of service in the Arctic. Icebreakers are deployed to the Canadian Arctic each year specifically to provide services in support of the various mandates of DFO and the Coast Guard, as well as to meet the general needs of the people and the Government of Canada.
Every year from late June to early November, Coast Guard deploys one light, two heavy and four medium icebreakers to the Arctic, one of which I believe you visited yesterday. These icebreakers operate in a harsh climate with some of the most challenging sea ice conditions in the world.
Commissioner Da Pont mentioned in his last address to you that the well known icebreaker, CCGS Louis S. St. Laurent, which we are looking to replace in 2017, has done some important sea mapping work to support Canada's submission to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Coast Guard also has three vessels that provide services on the Mackenzie River and Beaufort Sea. Of all the vessels deployed, two are dedicated solely to science missions: the CCGS Amundsen and the CCGS Nahidik.
Close to 70 Coast Guard employees are assigned on a seasonal basis to northern operations. In addition, the officers and crew of six icebreakers from Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec and Pacific regions are deployed to the Arctic in the summer as part of the regular fleet operations plan.
The following is a succinct account of our activities in the Arctic, many of which are delivered in partnership or on behalf of other federal departments and agencies, academic institutions and northern communities.
We escort commercial ships through ice to ensure their access to northern communities. Activities in this area include providing ice route information, escorting commercial vessels through ice-infested waters and harbour breakouts. The number of foreign-flag ships escorted each year by Coast Guard icebreakers varies depending on ice conditions. Ice conditions notwithstanding, 12 foreign-flag ships benefit on average from this service yearly.
We operate two seasonal Arctic Marine Communications and Traffic Services (MCTS) centres and provide marine telephone service such as radiomedical calls. Our services are provided from one centre located in Inuvik, covering the Western Arctic and another centre located in Iqaluit, servicing the Eastern Arctic. These MCTS centres are only in operation during the Arctic navigational season.
We provide support to other government departments, agencies and other organizations to conduct important work in the Arctic environment. We provide vessels, aircraft and marine personnel to assist in carrying out important work related to the Arctic. Coast Guard icebreakers on Arctic deployment are also the most visible and effective marine element in support of Canadian sovereignty in the North.
We support scientific endeavours related to hydrographic charting and marine science. Our activities include providing a marine platform and personnel in support of DFO science activities, the ArcticNet science community and other scientific organizations through initiatives such as the International Polar Year where possible.
We maintain aids to navigation in the Canadian Arctic waterways. Activities include deployment, recovery commissioning and maintenance of floating aids, and construction and decommissioning of fixed aids.
We act as the primary response lead for pollution incidents north of the 60th parallel. The Coast Guard is keenly aware of the unique marine environment sensitivities in the Arctic. That is why we have had a first-response capacity in place across the region for decades. In case an increased response is required, our national response system incorporates a cascaded approach to marine spills wherever they occur.
Finally, we provide marine search and rescue services. Ships, aircraft and personnel are secondary search and rescue resources, unless designated as primary, and as such are used for search and rescue as appropriate. The joint rescue coordination centre tasks all vessels, aircraft and personnel to search and rescue directly.
Members of the committee, this concludes my opening remarks on what we do here in the western part of the Arctic. My colleague, Mr. Burden, has a few remarks related to the DFO programs and services, and then we will be pleased to respond to your questions.
David Burden, Associate Regional Director General, Central and Arctic Region, Fisheries and Oceans Canada: As Mr. Grenier has indicated, partnership and co-management is an integral part of how we work in the Arctic. It influences the delivery of Department of Fisheries and Oceans programs and services as well as how we involve communities and individual northerners. This is illustrated in our science research program, from the establishment of priorities to planning, funding, program delivery and decision making.
You had the opportunity yesterday to see the work of the Canadian Hydrographic Service while on board the CCGS Sir Wilfrid Laurier. These hydrographers collect the critical data necessary to produce new and updated Arctic charts, an essential tool for safe navigation, especially here in the harsh conditions of the North. They stand ready aboard the Laurier and other vessels in our fleet to conduct surveys whenever the vessel is not engaged in other Coast Guard activities.
Most of our interactions with the co-management boards with responsibilities for fish and wildlife management are related to their mandated responsibilities, which are focused to a large extent on managing the harvest of fish, marine mammals and other wildlife. This means that the stock assessment work we carry out is of great interest to them.
We are carrying out a variety of research activities in both Eastern and Western Arctic on marine mammals and marine fish adjacent to Baffin Island. In freshwater, our research continues on a number of species, including Dolly Varden, Arctic char, Shortjaw Cisco among others. Our research on the potential impacts of oil and gas developments in the Mackenzie Delta and Beaufort Sea is also very important, and recent media reports have noted the hydrographic survey work we have undertaken across the Arctic.
On the side of fisheries and aquaculture management, there is again great focus in the Arctic. Staff involved in resource management live and operate in the North, as do the staff of our conservation and protection group, the Fisheries Officer cadre. There is presently no aquaculture activity in the North section of the region.
Staff are similarly involved in management of various commercial fisheries in the Northwest Territories. Unlike in the Eastern Arctic, commercial fishing operations in the Western Arctic are primarily carried out on inland and freshwater lakes. The largest and best example is the fishery on Great Slave Lake, which you will no doubt hear more about in coming days.
The recreational component in parts of the Western Arctic enjoys world-class quality and reputation. Resource management staff and partner agencies as well as the Government of the Northwest Territories are involved in the management of recreational fisheries, the most notable of which occur on the Tree River and in Great Slave and Great Bear Lakes.
Our resource management staff work as well with partner agencies to manage marine mammals. Seals and certain species of whales remain very important components of the diet of a number of Western Arctic communities.
Mr. Chair, I think I should stop here so we will have sufficient time for any questions.
Senator Cochrane: Thank you for coming. Just let me say that some of you we have already met, some of you are we are very familiar with. I am looking at Mr. Burt Hunt and at David Burden. I am really pleased to have you here and we are anxious to get some of your responses to our questions.
We visited Cambridge Bay on the weekend, and we met with the mayor and some councillors. One of the points they raised was that they would like to see a greater Coast Guard presence. At a minimum, they believed there should be a Coast Guard presence there for the whole time that the water is open; that is, they are telling us, from around the end of July into September.
Their words are: We are part of Canada, and we should have a Coast Guard presence here.
Given the changes in the ice and the concerns of people coming through the Northwest Passage and the increase in traffic, the increase in shipping, are Coast Guard services in the North being re-evaluated?
Mr. Grenier: First, I am very pleased that the Cambridge Bay community would like to see more of the Coast Guard. We are always pleased when people want to see us more often, so that is good news.
The way we operate in the Arctic is highly seasonal, as you know, because of ice in the winter. We have centres in different part of the Arctic but we also have people who are following cargo ships or activities, wherever they may be in the Arctic.
So even though there is perhaps no permanent person in Cambridge Bay as such, there is always what we call a beach master or superintendent of the sealift operation. They are travelling and they are going wherever is needed, so that is how we try to be efficient and cover as much ground as possible, but clearly, we cannot be in every community. Coast Guard is mostly on the water.
Senator Cochrane: How are you responding to these changing realities in the North? They are changing rather quickly, according to some of our people.
Mr. Grenier: Indeed they are, and we are working closely with other departments in looking at climate change and possible changes in traffic patterns. As we speak, we are looking at renewing our fleet plan for new ships.
We are trying to look at what will happen 20 years from now and what kind of ships we will need, not only in the Arctic but all over the country. We are actually not trying to change ship for ship, but are trying to have more modern built-to-class ships, so we will probably have fewer ships. We are looking at having something like 97 ships instead of 114 or 116. Those ships will be multi-tasked to do, as the name implied, many tasks.
We are also working with the security community as well as the support department. That is basically what we are trying to do to see us into the future, and of course, we are drafting a vision for the department on the Arctic.
Wade Spurrell, Assistant Commissioner, Central and Arctic Region, Fisheries and Oceans Canada: One of the things we are doing is a review of the levels of service of the Coast Guard across the country, and trying to meet with our users and determine what changes are coming and pending and how we might better serve the public.
Unfortunately, we are hearing similar messages in the South as in the North. With the changing climate, people are looking for more Coast Guard services, both on the east and west coast and on the Great Lakes and in the North, so we are hard pressed to meet the anticipated demand in all areas at the same time.
Senator Cochrane: So then are you saying you do not have enough resources to do the job, to meet those changing demands?
Mr. Grenier: It is very tempting to —
Senator Cochrane: Speak your minds?
Mr. Grenier: We are in the process of fleet renewal and we of course are looking at every possibility. I think we are well resourced for what our mandate is now, but in the future, we will try to bring to the attention of the government what resources would be needed to meet the challenge.
Senator Cochrane: One of the things you mention in your brief was that you are acting as primary response for pollution incidents north of the 60th parallel.
We met with the mayor. He knew nothing about this, nothing. They spoke about pollution and in particular about the danger of oil spills, but they indicated that they knew nothing about what the Coast Guard does.
Mr. Grenier: Well, we have 10 communities, and I believe Cambridge Bay is one of them, in which they have the community small pack for oil pollution prevention. We also have three depots and one container in Hay River that you will probably see tomorrow for us to stage a response if there were pollution.
However, as Coast Guard, we are looking for our icebreakers, which all have some equipment, to be the first responder, especially in isolated waters, so this is how we will respond if there were to be a spill.
Senator Cochrane: So are you meeting with the local people and telling them all these things? Because they told us that they had a plan in place to deal with spills on the land that go into the sea. We were told that they apparently have the equipment and the know-how, so are you working with these people?
Mr. Spurrell: In the Coast Guard, we have identified the risk of pollution primarily as we see it at this point at the oil-handling facilities in the communities. That is why we have placed that first-line response capacity in those remote communities, while we are expanding it to other communities and enhancing it in some of the communities that already have that capacity.
Staff from my environmental response group in Maritime Services have travelled through the North this year and met with communities to help determine the placement of the additional equipment. Our primary contact, it is fair to say, is with the individuals who transport oil cargoes and the individuals who are responsible for the transfer ashore. So, yes, we are getting out into communities and discussing the proper placement and the proper utilization of that first line of response.
Mr. Grenier: I would just point out that we are the first responders, so all our crew and our people ashore have some training in responding, so the first one we would be calling is ourselves along with the crew of the ship or tanker which has a shipboard emergency plan to respond.
If it were to cascade, then we would be looking at additional people to help us out, but really we are the primary responder north of 60.
Senator Hubley: You had mentioned you were in the process of developing a vision for the department for the Arctic. I am wondering if that is a new initiative and, if it is a new initiative, if you might fill us in a little bit on that vision.
Mr. Grenier: There have been talks for quite a while and I note that the Senate report also asks for the Coast Guard to develop a vision.
We are working on it. The commissioner is the champion for this initiative, and we are also working with different departments to make sure that we have all our ducks in order, so it is new and it is not new. It is something that evolved and that we are taking more seriously.
We believe that we need a vision as a department, not only as the Coast Guard, because there are many activities that we are doing together, and we need that vision to sort of direct us to where we want to go in the future.
Senator Hubley: I think that will be very helpful not only for the department but also for the communities that you serve. There need to be lines of communication open so that there are expectations on both sides.
To that end, I am wondering if, in your vision, you see using more of the Inuit people in dealing with some of the issues that you will be facing, and if that is perhaps part of your thinking, and how would you see them working with you?
Mr. Grenier: It is certainly a work in progress, so I do not have all the definitive answers for sure, but just this year, the Coast Guard created the National Labour Force Renewal Directorate, that is a long title, because we feel that we need to reach out.
In the Arctic, and not only in the Arctic but in the country itself, and in many other countries as well, going on to a ship is not as appealing a job or profession as it used to be, so it is harder for us to recruit. We have to sit down and think of new strategies for how to do that.
As well, what we do in the Arctic is highly technical, and sometimes people from the south come in and do the work. However, we want to look at different ways of attracting people to work for us.
We already have eight Inuit who have self-identified, there are probably more, but it is on the application to self- identify. We gain benefit from their knowledge for sure.
Senator Hubley: You had mentioned one of your roles is escorting commercial ships through the ice. You mention that 12 foreign-flag ships have benefited from this service, or approximately 12 each year. Do you have foreign ships pay for the service?
Mr. Grenier: No, we do not. It is part of the service Coast Guard delivers, and I guess we err on the safety side. It is better to escort ships in difficult situations than it is for them to wait and ask for help when it is too late, so no, we do not.
Senator Raine: I am new to this committee and new to the North, so I apologize if my questions might be a little bit naive.
I am interested in knowing about the role of the Coast Guard in terms of Canadian sovereignty and surveillance and really being our border guards, if you like, in the whole North of our country. In view of the fact that Canadian border guards are now being armed along the southern border, I would like to find out from you what your feelings are about having an armed capacity in the Coast Guard, especially if there were to be some kind of a breach of our security in the North.
Mr. Grenier: I am always wary when somebody says they have a simple question. They are very often the hardest ones.
First of all, our mission is not primarily security. We are there more to help and to assist and support the other departments in terms of security. We provide the information to other departments through MSOCs, which are centres which receive information about marine traffic, and then it is redistributed to the departments that need to have this kind of information.
In the MSOCs, there are also officers who are well aware of marine traffic and what is going on in the marine world, so not only do we supply name, position and so on, but we can also expand if needed on where they are going and so forth.
We also are the world's leader in LRITs, a long-range identification and tracking system that started this year and that will be in full effect by March 2010. These are signals that ships on international trade will send to satellites and then to countries. For Canada, it means that all for Canadian ships that are on international trade and all ships coming towards Canada within 1,000 miles, we will receive their time and position, and if ships are going to Canada from up to 2,000 miles, then we will receive their signal.
We will have sort of a picture of not only what is within the country but also of ships coming within 1,000 miles of our coast, where they are every day. I believe it is four times a day that their messages are sent.
We also work with the RCMP, especially in the South. We have ships that are dedicated to the RCMP for patrols and we are very involved with them. We also have an automatic identification system, AIS, that we are installing in the South so ships are not only sending signals through satellite but they are also sending signals through VHF transmitters and other ships in the vicinity can catch their messages as well as Coast Guard towers.
As we speak, we are working with DND in putting some of those receivers and our installations in the choke points in the Arctic as well. We are not there yet, but we are looking hard at this.
I do not know if that is what you were looking at for an answer.
Senator Raine: In the vision for the future, if the Northwest Passage opens up and there is more traffic, and there is a lot of interest from the northern people, and we have learned that Russia is building new naval ships that will be based in Arctic waters and Norway is arming its coast guard's new vessels. Denmark has 12 new ships with two more coming, and in fact, Sweden, Norway and Finland conducted war exercises in the Arctic, I think it was this last summer. Of course, the Americans have been under the sea with submarines that can go to the North Pole.
I just worry that in Canada, we are sitting here without strategy that allows us to be a part of that level of activity. I do not know if it is the Coast Guard's role or the navy's role but is this being discussed?
Mr. Grenier: Well, it is certainly not the Coast Guard. In Canada, the Coast Guard is more of a civilian enterprise, although we have officers that are armed for fishery patrols, but we are there for support. If DND or the RCMP were to ask, we certainly could, and we do from time to time with the RCMP and the fisheries, we could support them and they come on board our ships and we help them do whatever they need to do.
This is a matter of policy, so you will understand that I will not be able to fully answer your questions, as far as where we could go, but the Coast Guard is always willing.
Senator Raine: My final question then would be that given that we have ships that are being built at present and you say in the future we will have fewer ships in terms of numbers, but they will be able to multi-task, so will we build into them now the capacity to have arms if necessary?
Mr. Grenier: If necessary, if the agencies request that we do that. We are, as we are speaking, working on mission profile, so if the agencies that are responsible make that request, we will oblige for sure.
Senator Raine: So it is not too late to build a ship that can be multi-tasked that way?
Mr. Grenier: Well, we are not a military organization, so if you are looking at building a frigate and all that that entails, I do not think the Coast Guard is there. However, if it is light armament, if it is carrying people to remote places and things like that, we have the helicopters, it would be easy for us to do so. As a matter of fact, this is part of what we do whenever it is requested.
Senator Cochrane: When you talked about satellites, are you talking about the RADARSAT-2?
Mr. Grenier: You mean for LRITs?
Senator Cochrane: For checking the ships that are coming through.
Mr. Grenier: We have a marine satellite, I forget the name, but there is a special constellation for marine transmission and communication, and we are using the same satellite with the same radio to send the signals. It is in MARSAT, that is the name of the constellation, so that is the satellite that the ships are using to transmit I believe four times daily their position, date and precise position.
Senator Cochrane: What about if a ship is coming in through the Northwest Passage and it could very well be a ship that is not licensed within our region to come there? Just go through the procedure with us.
Mr. Grenier: Well, if a ship is coming to the Arctic, hopefully next year it will be different but now it is not obligatory to report to NORDREG. A foreign ship will have to report 96 hours before coming into Canadian waters its presence and its final destination.
Senator Cochrane: To whom?
Mr. Grenier: Well, they report to us and then, because we have the radio communication system, we transfer this to Transport Canada. It is a Transport Canada regulation and they are enforcing this regulation, so we are only the transmitter of the information.
Senator Cochrane: What happens? Would it be possible that a ship be turned back? What would be the circumstances?
Mr. Grenier: Well, you would have to ask a Transport Canada ship inspector. They would be able to answer this question.
Senator Cochrane: That is fine. That is the larger ships you are talking about, is it not?
Mr. Grenier: I believe it is ships that are 300 gross tonnes, or if it is a barge and a tug, it is 500 tonnes, or if the cargo contains any pollutant or dangerous goods, then they have to report.
Senator Cochrane: In Cambridge Bay, we heard that people are very concerned that they allow small vessels coming in, and small vessels could be just as — what is the word I am using? I will not use the word ``dangerous'' but they could be as illegal as larger vessels. What are we going to do about those?
Mr. Grenier: Well, it would be RCMP that would intervene on this, not the Coast Guard.
Senator Cochrane: These are the ones that satellite cannot pick up?
Mr. Grenier: Well, just maybe to explain it a bit further, with the satellite that we are using, it is the ship that is transmitting the signal.
RADARSAT is a different kind of radar for ice and also to see what is there, and the ones who use it use it for ice information on RADARSAT. So you would have to ask whoever it is who is using it.
Senator Cochrane: Sorry, these are all questions that we have been posed.
The Chair: Because there are two issues here. One is the utility of RADARSAT, because evidently, it cannot identify ships under 100 metres. That is the first problem, and in terms of identifying ships, RADARSAT seems to be a prime tool for doing that now.
The second problem is that under NORDREG, as we understand it, ships under 300 tonnes are exempt, and we have heard of one particular case, and I hope it will come up again during the day, the case of the Mad Viking in Cambridge Bay. As a matter of fact, the Laurier confirmed that it had made contact with the Mad Viking, but did not know they were in the area. They had already brought ashore.
We are not sure, we need to do some more research into it, but it is possible that they were apprehended in Halifax and even charged in Halifax, but they did come back in to Canada again after that, after having broken certain Canadian laws for sure, because they were apprehended by the RCMP, and they actually encountered the Laurier but nothing happened. Both the Laurier and the Mad Viking went their ways.
So there are two issues here as we see it. One is the utility of RADARSAT if it cannot identify ships under 100 metres, and the second problem is the utility of NORDREG even when it becomes mandatory, if ships under 300 tonnes are exempt. As we understand it, there are going to be more and more of those. We may not get tankers for 10 years but we are going to get cruise ships, we are getting more cruise ships now, and we are getting more individual yachts and small vessels of all sorts, so there are two problems there, as we see it.
Mr. Grenier: I do not want to sound like I am responding like a public servant, especially here in Yellowknife and not in Ottawa, but with due respect, it is not the Coast Guard's mandate to look into this. We are using RADARSAT for ice information and as for NORDREG and the regulation, it is Transport Canada. If they do not satisfy NORDREG for any reason, then we turn to Transport and they are the ones that will pursue it.
The Chair: Part of our problem here I think is the system. We are going to be very interested on October 9 if we get a response to our last report, because we made certain recommendations.
First of all, there does not appear to be an over all coordinated strategy for the Arctic on the part of government. This is not a criticism of the Coast Guard.
Secondly, we identified Coast Guard as the front end of Canadian activity and sovereignty in the North. That was our recommendation, and we made that recommendation because we were convinced of the capability of the Coast Guard and the experience and knowledge of the Coast Guard.
Senator Raine quite rightly identified armaments for security purposes, but in all of our questioning here, we are all dancing because we do not know what the response will be to our report on October 9, but we hope that some of our recommendations will be accepted and that Coast Guard, which is a service arm now, will become an enforcement arm. That is our hope.
We understand why you are having difficulty answering some of our questions.
Senator Cochrane: Has there been some reorganization between Coast Guard and Transport within the last couple of years? I really had faith in Coast Guard having more power than it seems to have now, and I do not know why.
Mr. Grenier: I am a 36-year veteran of the Coast Guard and it was with Transport when I started in the Coast Guard.
In 1995, we moved from Transport to DFO.
Senator Cochrane: 1995?
Mr. Grenier: Yes. Previous to that, Coast Guard included ship safety. We had a whole bunch of other activities that stayed with Transport and Coast Guard went to DFO and we became sort of the core activity Coast Guard and left the regulation and policy in Transport.
So now, with DFO, and that is no fault of DFO, it is just the way that happened, we are more looking at icebreaking, emergency response, search and rescue and so on, and we do not do policy. We became an SOA in 2005, which meant that we focused on service, not on policy.
That is why I am having trouble answering your question. I understand why you are asking the question, but I hope you also understand that I cannot go outside my mandate or the mission of the Coast Guard.
Senator Cook: Good morning, and thank you for confusing me. I flew over the Arctic from Rankin Inlet to Cambridge Bay on a sunny day, and it does not make me an expert on what it is, but it is a big land with lots of water.
If I understand the purpose of the Coast Guard, you are a service provider for the Department of Transport and whomsoever. You are a service provider for the people of the North to see that their lives are orderly and that they are taken care of. You respond to things.
I am looking for a coordinated leadership for the development of the North; especially because of the opening of the Northwest Passage.
In your brief, you say that you escorted foreign-flag ships, 12 of them, and you provided that service for them and they do not pay for that service. I find that interesting, but more important for me is the question of who would give you the information that those people need to be escorted? If those ships chose not to be escorted and went on their merry way, what would happen? More importantly, if there was pollution when they went on their way, what would happen?
Last, is Canada legally responsible for misfortunes or whatever once foreign vessels come into Canadian waters; i.e., are you erring on the side of caution and escorting ships when they come into our waters because if they get in trouble later, your workload is doubled? Am I correct in assuming that?
Mr. Grenier: The Coast Guard is deemed to be the civilian fleet of Canada. We are there to support the navigable waterways, and when ships come to Canada, they talk to us through our radio station. They may report their position or if they have difficulty. If they want to have ice information, for example, we will provide them ice information. On a regular basis, we provide them with what we call ice routing in the Arctic and in the winter, in the gulf of the St. Lawrence River and so forth.
So we as Coast Guard see ourselves as helping the traffic to go from A to B to Z in a safe manner, but that does not preclude the ship from having its own insurance arrangement for pollution, for liability and so on. We are there to facilitate their passage.
We know that in the Arctic, there is a lot of ice, there is multi-year ice, there is a lot of current. I have been in both the Antarctic and the Arctic and navigation in the Arctic is very difficult.
So we position our icebreakers where we deem it best, looking at ice and traffic and so on, to make sure that our ships can respond as quickly as possible. If a mishap occurs, we are there. We are probably the only ones around, so we will be helping, but if there is pollution, the captain of the ship is the one that would initiate the response and we would monitor the response. If it is not satisfactory, then we would push and help and cascade as we see fit.
I do not know if I answered all your questions.
Senator Cook: I understand a bit. I can see you are stationed when navigation opens on both sides, if you like, of that imaginary sovereignty line. No one has told me where exactly that is, but that is for another day.
You are a service entity and you do wonderful work and you are there. That morning when the helicopter went down in Newfoundland, not long ago, the first words I heard from my staff after they told me the news was that the Coast Guard was on the way. So you respond. I would hope, if I can think outside the box a bit, that you would respond but you would have the capacity to respond, and I think as we move forward, enforcement must be part of that.
I look at number of ships that you have. I come from a little outport. I look at the map of the Arctic and I do not think the capacity is there for you to do the job that people are expecting you to do, given that the Northwest Passage is going to be ice free.
The other thing that concerns me, you are looking to replace the Louis S. St. Laurent in 2017. That is only seven years away. Is that thing off the drawing board yet? That is a simple yes or no. I do not mean to get you in trouble.
Mr. Grenier: No, not at all. I think actually I was hoping somebody would ask that question because I think we are moving along.
The mission profile has been received and approved, so right now, we are on the second mode, to identify and validate critical operation requirements for the icebreaker, and we will do a concept icebreaker so we can then sit down with naval architects and do a detailed design, and we will be ready to give that contract in probably a year or two. When the designs are completed, then we will be able to build.
So as far as we are concerned, we are on track and looking good.
Senator Cook: In my own opinion, by the time someone gets a design off the table, the design will have to be modified because the climate conditions in the North are changing so rapidly. That is an issue for me.
If you go to Ottawa and go to a section of Health Canada, you will find the Centre For Infection Control and Diseases which is connected to the world organization. You can go in a room and look at 360-degree screens that show you the world and will literally show you the level of the flu in the world.
Would that not be a vision for the Coast Guard, with an enhanced profile? Someone has to guard the North in addition to everything else. Is it going to emerge to be the military or the non-military? Who do you see as picking that up? In this world of technology, do you see that as a possibility for your operation? Then you will catch everybody.
Mr. Grenier: We will answer in this way. We are probably the one that provides — do not quote me on the percentage — but probably much more than 80 per cent of the picture of maritime awareness. It is provided by the Coast Guard, so this is a big contribution to the MSOC, which then distributes the picture to other departments. We are looking forward to LRIT and AIS improving the precision of the pictures we are given and we are just striving to do an excellent job.
The Chair: We are coming to the end of the day. It is ten o'clock. There are a lot of questions we have not asked. Maybe I could just identify a few and you could get back to us in writing, perhaps, because we are interested in a number of things.
One issue is hydrography. We understand that at the present rate, if we continue with the program, it will take 50 years to complete. That is unacceptable, considering what traffic will be going through the Arctic. I would like you to respond to that. Perhaps you could do that in writing.
The other thing is research. We understand that the Americans have put a moratorium on the marine area off their coasts and that they will be doing some research on new species, and so the question becomes, what is Canada doing relevant to the action that the Americans have taken. There is a disputed territory there, clearly, and there are both marine resources and perhaps petroleum resources off there, but in terms of fisheries, what is the research program that will be carried out, particularly in that area?
So these are two questions that I think we would like answers to, and if you could get back to us in writing, that would be good.
Have we missed anything, senators? Are there other questions that we need to raise?
Senator Raine: I would have enjoyed hearing about the cooperation between the Canadian and American Coast Guard, especially seeing as we will be talking to the American Coast Guard in Juneau later this week. If there is any information your officials could give us on that, especially some examples of good cooperation and perhaps examples where it might be lacking.
Mr. Grenier: That will be an easy one, because I think we tabled a paper or we should be tabling a paper, it is a two or three-pager, on just that topic, collaboration between the U.S. and Canada, which is very, very good. We will provide you with this paper.
I know my colleagues were taking notes, but maybe the Clerk can provide the questions so we are not responding to questions we think we heard but to the questions that we have been asked. It would be our pleasure to answer them.
The Chair: Are there any other questions we have not raised that we should?
Senator Cook: I would just like to raise the issue of the 30,000 people who live up in the North, who are Canadian, and we need to move somehow to an integrated system.
You moved from Transport in 1995 and now you are with Fisheries and Oceans and the Environment. I think we have to have a tripartite system or something like that, because there can only be one leader when there is a mistake. Someone has to call the shots. At the moment, you do tremendous work but you are at the beck and call of a number of people. I do not think that is adequate.
The Chair: Thank you very much for being here and thank you very much for responding. I am sure we will talk again.
Our next witnesses are from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. We welcome Trish Merrithew-Mercredi, Regional Director General, Northwest Territories Region, and Teresa Joudrie, Director of Renewable Resources and Environment.
We are interested in hearing from you, and then we will have some questions. Please proceed.
Trish Merrithew-Mercredi, Regional Director General, Northwest Territories Region, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I welcome you to Yellowknife and thank you for the opportunity to tell you about the work that INAC does here in the North. I am also a long-time northerner so it is always a pleasure to have visitors to the North. I would also like to introduce Teresa Joudrie, who is our new Director of Renewable Resources and Environment for the region.
My remarks today will focus on providing you with some context, looking at the demographics of the North, our political landscape, and then I would like to spend a bit of time talking about the various roles and responsibilities of the department and finish up by talking a bit about where we are today.
The North as you know is undergoing change at a very rapid pace, ranging from the impact of climate change to the growth of northern and aboriginal governments. Responding to the pace of change is no small task.
INAC's mandate in the Northwest Territories is both broad and expansive, from our relationship with Aboriginal people to northern development, to our role as environmental stewards on Crown land here in the North. Canada's Northern Strategy is central to focusing our efforts in delivering on our mandate.
Our priorities in the North include promoting social and economic development, protecting northern environment, enhancing Arctic sovereignty and improving and devolving northern governance so that northerners have a greater say in their own destiny.
I would like to give you a quick overview of some of the demographics here in the North. The Northwest Territories is almost 1.2 million square kilometres, with a population of slightly less than 42,000 people. Of that number, roughly 21,951 are male and the remaining 20,686 are female.
Our population is almost evenly split between those of Aboriginal ancestry and those who are non-Aboriginal. We have a very young population; 23.6 per cent of the population is under 15 years of age and our average age across the N.W.T. is 31.1 years.
The average income for the Northwest Territories is slightly more than $48,000. In Yellowknife, the average income increases to $57,000, whereas in the smaller communities, it falls to slightly less than $31,000. So there is a discrepancy between larger and smaller communities.
Of the 33 communities here in the Northwest Territories, 14 have fewer than 500 residents. In terms of the communities here in the Northwest Territories, 10 communities have access to the three major highways in the Northwest Territories and six communities have all-weather access roads. Thirteen communities, however, only have access to the outside world through a series of winter roads.
In the Northwest Territories as well, there are 11 official languages. We have four settled land claims, the Inuvialuit, the Sahtu, the Tlicho and the Gwich'in. The Tlicho agreement includes a self-government agreement. There are a number of other negotiations under way, though, that deal with land resources and governance matters.
On the political side, the Legislative Assembly where we are sitting today has 19 members and functions in much the same way as a provincial legislature but without political parties. It is unique, in that it operates under a consensus style which means that each of the members is elected as an independent to represent their constituency.
In terms of the work that INAC does here in the N.W.T., by virtue of our responsibilities and the size of our regional office, INAC is the face of the federal government in the Northwest Territories.
Our key areas of responsibility are threefold. First, we support northern and political development; second, we support the management of federal interests, largely under the Indian Act; and third, we promote sustainable development of the North's environmental and natural resources.
Our specific responsibilities include having the lead role in managing INAC's inter-governmental relationships, through areas of common concern such as Aboriginal governance and resource management. On an operational level, we manage the federal Crown lands in the region through the disposition of land rights and interests. The region also issues land use permits, land tenure documents and water licences.
As well, we have responsibility under the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and the Territorial Lands Act to inspect and enforce the terms and conditions of these authorizations. We manage water resource in the N.W.T. under a number of pieces of legislation, including the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, the Northwest Territories Water Act and the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act.
Finally, we conduct resource assessments and do scientific field work here in the north. We collect geoscience and mapping data to determine mineral potential and we provide expert advice in environmental assessments.
Up until very recently, INAC had a more direct role in providing support for Aboriginal and economic development here in the North, a job which now rests with the newly established Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, CanNor. The region does, however, retain its responsibilities to provide administrative funding to communities and Aboriginal groups and help them in building and maintaining their organizations. We continue to have a role in encouraging business investment and development here in the North.
Despite the current economic challenges, we can boast that we have three operating diamond minds, Snap Lake, Ekati and Diavik. The Mackenzie Gas Project is still a possibility and we hope that the joint review panel will submit its report in September.
There is exploration in the Beaufort offshore area. Last year, exploration companies bid a record $1.2 billion for the rights to certain areas and we are encouraged by their plans to extend that exploration activity into the future.
Improving the northern regulatory system is also an important feature of the Northern Strategy and contributes to both the economic and social development of the North as well as its environmental protection.
The mining and the oil and gas industry currently contribute about 38 per cent of the gross domestic product of the N.W.T. economy. That includes some 2,000 jobs as well as increased Aboriginal business and Aboriginal employment opportunities. It is of critical importance in order to sustain and attract new business that we also have a regulatory system which supports that kind of development.
Without a doubt, the resource industry plays a key role in exploring and developing the full economic potential of the Northwest Territories, generating important economic, fiscal and social benefits, and having a positive impact on production, employment and income. This also effectively makes INAC the ``Energy Mines Ministry'' for the Northwest Territories.
While exploration activities for oil and gas and for minerals are continuing, there are increasing demands for more all-season roads and better infrastructure to support and transport the N.W.T.'s oil, gas and minerals to market.
We are also responsible for cleaning up contaminated sites on Crown land throughout the Arctic, an activity which is funded until 2011 under the Federal Contaminated Sites Program. Canada's Economic Action Plan for 2009-10 in the Northwest Territories is valued at approximately $85 million and this contributes significantly to the Northwest Territories both in terms of economics and development. However, the lack of diamond mine effluent regulations under the act is problematic.
Virtually every major project has implications on water and the Fisheries Act is the most powerful water protection tool. In addition, we rely on Fisheries and Oceans legislation and in particular its fisheries and habitat expertise.
As I mentioned earlier, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act is a unique piece of legislation that evolved out of the N.W.T. settled land claims. The act most importantly established public co-management boards to regulate the use of land and water in the Mackenzie Valley. A key feature of this legislation ensures that consultation is an important part of the environmental assessment and regulatory processes. In fact, the region has developed an interim approach to consultation that is more responsive to the unique regulatory environment here in the N.W.T.
Some of our successes, very briefly, include providing credible science advice, as well as community education, developing and prospecting a permanent agreement with the Akaitcho First Nations, ensuring that fully 90 per cent of users here in the North are in compliance with the terms and conditions of their permits, environmental agreements and monitoring activities, our partnership with the Taiga Lab here in Yellowknife, the development of mine site reclamation guidelines and an important water resources management strategy that we are working on in partnership with the Government of the Northwest Territories, a strategy for the Northwest Territories.
Some of our challenges include the impact of the economic downturn here in the North, the investment climate which has been impacted by perceptions of regulatory complexity and Aboriginal consultation issues, the lack of transportation infrastructure which is a major impediment to the development of non-diamond mines here in the North, workplace or workforce availability which is somewhat less of a factor now due to the economic downturn, and finally, community capacity.
In closing, we appreciate that the committee has made the effort to travel North to meet, both because we believe it is important for national government to reach out to regions and to get to know them and also for northerners to see their government at work and for them.
Senator Cochrane: Thank you for coming. We are happy to be here as well. After all, we all are a part of Canada.
I am interested in the contaminated sites left over from old mines and so on. Some of these sites are so exposed, with chemicals in them, and there are consequent health problems. Tell us about that. You did say that the lack of diamond mining effluent regulations is problematic. Do you want to elaborate on that a bit?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: There are two points here, Senator Cochrane. First of all, we do have a very extensive program, what we refer to as the CARD program, which is concerned with the remediation of contaminated sites, and there are a series of sites throughout the N.W.T. that we are currently working with.
In fact, we have nine sites that are currently in some state of remediation and we have seven more where we are in the final planning stages for remediation. One of the perhaps most famous of those sites is approximately two kilometres from the building that we are sitting in, which is the Giant Mine site that we are currently involved in, a very large remediation project.
The diamond effluent regulations problem to which I referred is that we have effluent regulations here in the North but they only apply to metal mines, not diamond mines, so they govern, for example, the disposal of waste products from those mines and so Environment Canada is currently working to develop guidelines for diamond mines.
Senator Cochrane: So are the mine owners coming to grips with some of these problems, especially as it pertains to health?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I think I can say two things. First of all, senator, is that the health and safety of northerners is our foremost concern. We do everything within our mandate to ensure that that is in fact the case. Mine owners now are currently required to provide security deposits when they enter into exploration, and those security deposits are held by the department in the event that there should be some kind of an environmental situation which requires remediation.
However, many of the sites that we are dealing with at this point are sites that are legacy mines. They may have been closed down 30, 40 or even more years ago. So the federal government finds itself in the unenviable position of having become responsible for the cleanup of those sites.
Senator Cochrane: Are they cleaning them up?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: We are.
Senator Cochrane: You are happy with it.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Obviously we would like to do more if we had the manpower and financial resources to be able to tackle all of those mines. At the current time, we are working on a priority basis based on a very careful assessment of which mines present the greatest risk to the human health and safety of the area.
Senator Cochrane: You mentioned the water resources management strategy that you are working on with the territorial government. Tell us about this, would you? What issues does the strategy address? Perhaps you can tell us about the level of cooperation that exists between the feds and the territorial governments.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Let me start with the level of cooperation. I think in my experience, this is a piece of work where there has probably been the greatest level of sustained cooperation between the two levels of government. It is a relationship and an initiative that both parties entered into quite willingly. It was not a legislated part of our responsibilities. I think it was felt by both levels of government that there was a need to ensure that there was a strategy in place to manage the water resources of the N.W.T. in a way that responds to the needs and desires of northerners.
We are looking, for example, at water standards, water guidelines. We are hoping that the strategy, when it is completed, will represent the needs of northerners and the wishes of northerners with respect to transjurisdictional boundary issues and the development or negotiation of agreements between, for example, ourselves and Alberta regarding flow of water across jurisdictional boundaries.
Senator Hubley: Thank you for your presentation. I have sort of a people question. The roughly 43,000 people in this area are pretty well evenly divided between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. I am wondering, how many employees do you have in your department and how many of those would be Aboriginal?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I have right now 327 warm bodies. In fact, there are 350 positions but 327 are staffed, and 28.9 per cent of those individuals are of Aboriginal ancestry from the N.W.T. We are also actively working to increase the number of Aboriginal employees here in the region. One thing, though, that I should mention, senator, is that out of the 327 employees, probably half of that number are long-term northerners. So it would include Aboriginal but also people who have made the North their home.
Senator Hubley: Do you have a program especially designed for Aboriginal people so that they can enter into government workspaces?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: We are working on two initiatives right now, one of which is a national program looking to increase the number of Aboriginal representatives, Aboriginal employees, in the ranks of the EX's or executive positions, and that is actually a national committee I sit on, and we are actively working here in the N.W.T. to input people into that program. This is the first year.
The second piece I think that would be of interest is that we are also working with a panel of northerners and Aboriginal leaders to work to increase Aboriginal capacity and leadership at the community level. It is an initiative that is being driven by this panel. We are doing our best to support it and provide it with the resources that it requires to implement new and different kinds of programming and activities at the community level to assist the communities in that regard.
Senator Hubley: I am wondering, $30,000 I believe is indicated as the average income in small communities. How would that money be earned, mainly? What would be the main source of income for those small communities?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: In many of the small communities, it would be seasonal income; for example, firefighting in summer months, working in the winters doing slashing and site preparation with oil and gas companies. Obviously because of the economic downturn, the importance of the latter is going to be somewhat less this year than it may have been in the past. We have a small percentage of the population, a very small percentage, that still makes its livelihood from fairly traditional means, but most people are dependent on a wage economy.
Senator Hubley: Is the fishing industry important to this region?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: It is important in certain areas, particularly here in Yellowknife where we have a commercial fishing industry on Great Slave Lake. I would not say that it is important, though, elsewhere in the N.W.T. Obviously people fish for a livelihood, but not commercially.
Senator Raine: I have two questions, and one is with regard to your pollution and environmental programs.
Is there a program for dealing with garbage and waste in the remote communities, the very small communities? When you are hiking, there is a very good example; basically what is accepted is to pack out what you take in.
The packaging industries in our economy in the south seem to be creating more and more packaging. Is there a way of disposal for this in the more remote areas?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Solid and liquid waste management in the communities is actually a community function. Within the municipal boundaries, it is under the legislation of the Government of the Northwest Territories.
So obviously we are concerned and we work where and when possible with the government of the Territory to develop better processes and protocols, but it is a territorial responsibility.
Senator Raine: You are right, it would be a territorial and community responsibility, and there is not really a role for the federal government in that sense.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: No. Although as I said, where and when required, we certainly participate or provide expertise if asked to.
Senator Raine: Probably more important, what is your policy? If a company wanted to explore for oil and gas in the disputed section of the Beaufort Sea, would you allow it?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I was afraid you were going to ask that.
Offshore development in the Beaufort is a shared responsibility. Obviously we have a role to play as the federal government. However, the Inuvialuit and their land and water management board are a very important player in that process. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans participates in the process. There are a number of other organizations which have some role to play.
The Land and Water Management Board or Land and Water Board for the Inuvialuit, however, are responsible for leading the process, and that is something that we support them in. So obtaining a permit to carry out development in the offshore, the Beaufort area, is a rigorous process. It is inspected very carefully and there are I would say rigorous terms and conditions that are laid down to protect the water resources in the Beaufort.
Senator Raine: Why does it seem that the decision to allow BPX and others to explore for oil and gas in the Mackenzie Delta and Beaufort was made much quicker than the decision regarding the Mackenzie Valley pipeline?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I would say because it is under entirely different pieces of legislation.
BPX bid on a process that we run each year in the Northwest Territories. We accept bids. It takes approximately a year from the time that the bids are accepted till they are announced.
The Mackenzie Gas Project, though, is an environmental assessment that is the responsibility of a number of parties, including the Government of the Northwest Territories and ourselves.
Senator Raine: Is the environmental assessment as rigorous for the Beaufort Sea exploration as it is for the Mackenzie Valley?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I would say it is as rigorous, in a different format, but yes, it is as rigorous. Obviously it is subject to different processes and different pieces of legislation. If you want, we can provide you with more information on the specific pieces and processes, if that will help.
Senator Raine: I think that would be very useful. Thank you.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: No problem.
Senator Cook: Thank you for coming today. I want to talk a bit about the Northern Strategy, in particular, the aspect of it that relates to improving governance and devolution; i.e., the transferring of powers to the provinces.
The Yukon finished up in 2003, and in Nunavut, the federal government is working with the territorial government and NTI to move towards devolution.
Is progress being made towards a devolution agreement in the Northwest Territories? Do the Aboriginal groups in the territories support devolution? Finally, do you have an end date for that process?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: All right, let me start. Hopefully I will remember all of your questions.
I have been in the N.W.T. in this position for two years now. The last set of negotiations between the Government of Canada and GNWT was concluded unsuccessfully in August of 2007, just shortly before I arrived.
I think it is fair to say that in the intervening two years, there was a new territorial government elected approximately two months later. They had many things on their plate to deal with. Devolution was certainly important but there were other issues that they were working with.
More recently, much more recently, we have begun to talk again with the territorial government a bout the possibility of reaching an agreement in principle. I think that those discussions are somewhat more advanced now. I could not put an end date on them because I do not think it is possible to frame the negotiations by saying that in two or three years, whatever the case might be, we will actually have an agreement in place.
With respect to the role of Aboriginal groups in the devolution process, that is a subject for discussion. I know that the Premier of the N.W.T. has met with most of the Aboriginal groups fairly recently to update them on the status of the devolution discussions and to determine their interest in being involved and what shape or form that involvement might take.
Senator Cochrane: Why not give us an update on the Mackenzie Gas Project?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: It is a very difficult to provide an update —
Senator Cochrane: Sorry.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: If I could tell you, I am sure I would be sitting elsewhere than right here.
It is a process that is been delayed for a number of reasons, none of which, in my estimation, are the fault of any one party.
It is a hugely important project to the future of the North, and I think that the parties who are involved have chosen to err on the side of caution, to ensure that if a decision is reached to go ahead with the Mackenzie gas pipeline project, that it will be done in a way that truly benefits the North and protects our environment.
Senator Cochrane: Where is it held up now?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I would say right now, the major hurdle is that we are waiting for the final report of the joint review panel, and I know that the joint review panel heard many hundreds or thousands of hours worth of testimony and entertained something in the neighbourhood of several hundred thousand pages worth of testimony, so there is certainly a lot of information to be reviewed and analyzed, and I suspect that that is part of the reason for the delay in the receipt of the report.
Senator Cochrane: Does Ms. Joudrie have anything to add to that? You were nodding your head there for a while.
Teresa Joudrie, Acting Director, Contaminants and Remediation Directorate, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: That is the case. We are waiting for the panel. The hearings took a number of years so it is a lot of information to go through and various proponents or various parties to the environmental assessment participated, so weighing all of the options would be a very onerous task for the panel. However, we are optimistic that the report will come through and then we can move on to the next phase.
Senator Cochrane: Could this agreement be expected to enhance the commercial potential of offshore gas projects in the Beaufort Sea?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: The scope of the Mackenzie gas pipeline project does not include offshore developments in the Beaufort, but I would assume that if such deposits were found and were found to be commercially viable to exploit, that there would be some tie-in, perhaps, eventually to the pipeline. That is just simply my speculation here.
Senator Cochrane: We will await that too.
Senator Cook: What is the appetite like from the oil companies at the moment? Are they satisfied with the level of review panels and all the things that are happening or are they anxious to get on drilling?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I think that the proponents are anxious to move forward but I think, as business owners and individuals who are involved in big companies, they are also cognizant of the economic downturn, so there needs to be a good economic reason from their perspective to proceed with exploration and the development of the pipeline, if that is in fact the recommendation of the JRP.
Senator Cook: I notice that the MGP is mainly the oil companies, other than Canada North and the Aboriginal Pipeline Group. It seems to be weighted on the side of the oil companies, so it seems complicated.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Aboriginal Pipeline Group, I believe, at the current time are a 40 per cent partner in the development with the major proponents. There are a number of Aboriginal groups that are represented through APG. I think that APG has done its very best to ensure that the needs and aspirations of northerners and Aboriginal groups are represented in terms of their work with the other proponents.
Senator Raine: I want to clarify something on the disputed section of the Beaufort Sea, because this has come up several times. It is looming out there as a potential problem area in Canada-U.S. relationships.
You did not really answer if you would approve exploration in that wedge area. It is a hypothetical question, I appreciate that. If a company met the joint requirements of the various Canadian and territorial and land claims organizations, as you outlined in your answer, would they be allowed to explore in that disputed area, at this point?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Senator, I really cannot answer that, and it is not that I am stonewalling you. I am simply not well enough aware of the facts to be able to speak to that, but I will endeavour to get the information for you.
Senator Raine: It would be good if we could get a report on looking for what you would do if companies wanted to drill there.
Senator Hubley: I am wondering if you would comment on the fact that you said in your presentation, ``However, the lack of diamond mine effluent regulations under the act is problematic.'' I am wondering if you might share with us the problems that is presenting and if in fact it is a serious pollution problem.
I did experience a visit to a diamond mine up here and I was certainly impressed with how environmentally sensitive they were at the time. When I read this, I thought, well, now, is there something that we did not see when we were here?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I do not think there was anything that you did not see, and I do believe that the diamond mines here in the North and the companies that are involved in diamond mining take their environmental responsibilities very seriously. We certainly work very closely with them, as do other members of the federal family here in the N.W.T., including Fisheries and Oceans.
I think it is also fair to say that in spite of the fact that there are not regulations in place yet, waste deposits and waste water from the diamond mines are managed in a way which meets the highest environmental standards.
Having the regulations in place, however, would codify the requirements and provide for industry a very clear understanding of what their responsibilities are and what the terms and conditions would be.
Senator Hubley: Are you moving to seeing those regulations put in place?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Actually, the regulations or the development of regulations are being worked on by Environment Canada, and I believe you are going to be speaking to Environment Canada later today.
The Chair: I had a couple of questions on process, on CanNor, the new agency, and the Arctic strategy.
The Arctic strategy is quite comprehensive. There is money there for infrastructure and development and so on. There is also the exchange of responsibilities from Indian and Northern Affairs to CanNor. I am wondering about your relationship with CanNor and whether Indian and Northern Affairs is still the lead agency for the Arctic strategy and how is that coordinated with other government departments.
In our last report, we had hoped that there would be a coordinated Arctic strategy. There certainly has been movement towards a strategy. The question now, I guess, is how is it being implemented? Where is the responsibility? So I would like to know about your relationship with CanNor and whether you are still the lead agency for the Arctic study.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: As you know, senator, CanNor is a very new organization. It is a new agency which just came into place in August under an Order in Council. The new president, Ms. Nicole Jauvin, was here in Yellowknife last week and I had the opportunity to spend some time with her talking about some of the issues that face the agency and our working relationship.
I think that it is fair to say that our relationship with CanNor is excellent. In fact, the two senior managers here in the Northwest Territories are former INAC employees who I have worked with extensively, so we have good personal working relationships.
I think that there is the will and the drive on the part of both agencies, both CanNor and ourselves, to ensure that our working relationship is such that it supports the development of the North and that we are seen, not only seen but that we are in fact supporting and working to support each other.
INAC will still have some responsibilities for community development and development of Aboriginal groups, funding of Aboriginal groups with respect to governance, but the Aboriginal economic development function has transferred over to CanNor.
Both agencies report to the same minister, Minister Strahl, but there is a separate president for CanNor. INAC still remains the lead agency for the Northwest Territories and the North.
The Chair: So apart from your relationship with CanNor, what would your relationship be with other government departments?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: We work quite closely with other federal government departments here in the Northwest Territories, Environment, DFO, some of the others, HRSDC. None of the other agencies actually has a senior presence here in the Northwest Territories, though. I am the only regional director general and we certainly are by far the biggest department.
So I think that from the perspective of northerners, it is often seen or believed that we have a bigger role to play than we do, and we get questions about things that are not specifically a part of our mandate. We do act as a clearing house, if you prefer, to other agencies and direct groups to the appropriate department or agency.
The Chair: One of the things that we recommended in our last report was that the administration of the Arctic be moved into the Arctic. In so many cases, the administration is somewhere else in Canada. We felt that the administration of the Atlantic is on the east coast, the administration of the Pacific is on the west coast, but the administration of the Arctic is all over the place.
I am wondering if you would like to comment, because you just said that not every department has a senior person here. Is there any movement that you know of to change that and to over all move the administration of the Arctic to the Arctic?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I can tell you several things. First of all, with respect to CanNor, the new agency, the headquarters are in fact in Iqaluit, so there is a headquarters office in Iqaluit and regional offices both here in Yellowknife and in Whitehorse, with a very small liaison office in Ottawa, roughly five people when it is fully staffed.
With respect to my own department, Indian and Northern Affairs, responsibility for the North is vested in the Northern Affairs Organization and the biggest part by far of NAO is actually here in Yellowknife. So I think that there is recognition on the part of our department that we are seen to be and actually are a part of the North.
I cannot speak to other federal departments or what their plans are.
The Chair: Finally, in your presentation, you indicated priorities, and one of them was Arctic sovereignty. I am wondering if you would like to elaborate on that.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Arctic sovereignty is a part of the Northern Strategy. I think by virtue of the fact that there are people who live here in the North who are northerners and have been here for many thousands of years, that is certainly a demonstration of sovereignty on the part of Canada.
We as a department do not play a direct role in sovereignty; i.e., we do not patrol northern waters or overfly northern territories, but certainly because of our relationship with northerners and the people of the North, we do have a role to play in terms of sovereignty.
Senator Cochrane: Do Aboriginal groups in the Northwest Territories support devolution?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I believe they do. I think they all have questions about it and certainly there are many unanswered details. It is my personal perception that they support it in principle, that they would like to see the North control its own destiny.
Senator Cochrane: Really? I am surprised by that.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: As I said, that is my personal perspective, so I am not saying that as the RDG.
Senator Cochrane: But there have been discussions with the Aboriginals, has there?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I believe there have been discussions, yes, over the period of a number of years. I have not been present for those discussions, and as I said, the last round of devolution discussions was concluded in August of 2007. That is just a couple of weeks before I came back to the N.W.T.
Senator Raine: I have a question about the transportation infrastructure and the proposals that we are hearing about for some all-weather roads to serve different communities and potential mines.
How does the planning for these kind of routes proceed? Does it proceed in a logical fashion or is it as a reaction to a mineral discovery, or how would these projects move forward?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I think it is fair to say, Senator Raine, that many individuals in the North have long believed that we need further infrastructure in terms of roads to connect communities for reasons as basic as providing people with food security and food that can be purchased at a reasonable price, to allow people to move back and forth between communities, to visit friends and access employment opportunities. I do not think the drive to increase roads in the North is a new one.
It is driven to some extent obviously by development. Proponents of diamond mines and investors in economic activity want to ensure that they are able to do those activities in an economically sustainable way, and part of that is having all-weather access.
Some of it is driven by other things. For example, right now in the N.W.T., there is a movement afoot to have a highway run up the corridor, run up the core of the Northwest Territories and to mirror, perhaps, what would be the pipeline route.
Right now, in the Northwest Territories as well, our minister recently announced feasibility funding in the amount of almost $1 million to look at a road which would connect Inuvik with Tuktoyaktuk, and in fact be an extension of the Dempster Highway all the way to the Arctic Ocean.
I think the proponents of these activities are varied and many and it depends on the individuals' responsibilities and interests in the North.
Senator Raine: Is there an all-weather road now to Yellowknife? Is there a bridge across the Mackenzie?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: There is no bridge across the Mackenzie. There is a bridge under construction which I believe will be finished in approximately two to three years. That is a private business arrangement actually that is being funded by one First Nations group and a private contractor. The territorial government does have some role to play in it. It is not a federal initiative, though.
Senator Raine: At present during the non-ice time —
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: We are dependent on ferries.
Senator Raine: There is a ferry and then an ice bridge?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: Yes.
Senator Raine: So how many weeks and months of the year is that highway closed?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: It is never closed. It is just that sometimes it means a longer wait on one or another side of the river.
Senator Raine: So they have an icebreaker that breaks the ice as it is forming to build the bridge?
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: No, we have ferries in the summer and actually the road is frozen across the river so we cross on the ice.
Senator Raine: I just had a hard time understanding how there can be a ferry one day and ice the next day.
Ms. Merrithew-Mercredi: I understand what you are getting at. Yes, we are closed for a very short period, roughly three weeks, two or three weeks at the end of each season. Sorry about that.
The Chair: If there are no further questions, I want to thank you very much for being with us. You have been very helpful and we appreciate your time.
I am pleased now to welcome Brigadier-General Dave Millar, who is Commander of Joint Task Force (North). He will be joined, as I understand it, by representatives of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Mr. Jack Kruger and Mr. Grant St. Germaine.
Brigadier-General Dave Millar, Commander of the Joint Task Force (North), National Defence Canada: Mr. Chair, Madam Deputy Chair, distinguished senators, it is an honour to participate and speak with you today.
The Canadian Forces in the North is very proud of its role amongst its federal government partners in providing security to the North and to northerners. Albeit each government department has its own specific role and mission, success in the North is derived from the very close relationship between departments. This is particularly evident in the bond between the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Canadian Forces and the Canadian Coast Guard.
As the Canadian Forces in the North, our primary roles include sovereignty and presence, building capacity to respond to emerging security issues and supporting social development in our communities.
In terms of sovereignty and presence, it is achieved through our almost 1,600 Rangers and through our major annual exercises, Operation Nanook being the largest recently completed in the Eastern Arctic.
Building capacity in the Arctic to respond to emergency security issues precipitated by climate change, the opening of the High Arctic and the second and third order effects is being achieved by expanding our Rangers, building naval capacity through the procurement of the Arctic offshore patrol ships and building the berthing and refuelling facility in Nanisivik, constructing the Arctic training centre in Resolute Bay to provide year-round training, enhancing situational awareness using RADARSAT-2, specifically the Polar Epsilon military application, and the stand-up of the new infantry here in Yellowknife.
Capacity building is also accomplished by building upon the close working relationship with the territorial partners, namely the Emergency Management Organization, and our federal partners, which is achieved through the Arctic Security Working Group of which the RCMP, Coast Guard and Canadian Forces are members.
Lastly, supporting social development in our communities is achieved through our Cadet and Junior Ranger programs for children from the ages of 12 to 18 years of age.
As I alluded to earlier, the success of the Canadian Forces mission in the North is very much linked to the close working relationship with our partners, especially the Coast Guard and the RCMP. As you will note in my formal comments submitted to the committee, the Coast Guard is our pathfinder in the Arctic upon whom we rely for safety and navigation, information, communication, escort, transport, direct support and friendship.
Grant M.E. St. Germaine, Superintendent, Criminal Operations, ``G'' Division, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: I would like to welcome all members of the committee to the Northwest Territories.
I will be very brief and just give you an overview of what the Royal Canadian Mounted Police does in the Northwest Territories, which we refer to as ``G'' Division.
Our primary role here is providing policing services to 22 communities and that is done by way of 195 regular members and approximately 40 support staff which we have stationed throughout the division. We provide both a contract policing component at the various detachments, as well as a federal component done by 14 members which covers off the areas of drug enforcement, proceeds of crime, diamond protection and division criminal analytical services.
We also provide and are the first-line provider for search and rescue response within the Northwest Territories, which Mr. Kruger, a retired staff sergeant from the division, coordinates for our people. They are kept quite busy in that particular area.
We also, through our national integrated operations council, have identified Arctic sovereignty as an issue for the three northern divisions, that being the Yukon, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories, and part of that is done by way of an integrated border enforcement team asset, which is a 29-foot Zodiac. That particular vessel along with a vessel which we obtained last year from our Arctic integrated marine security both have done patrols into the Beaufort Sea.
This summer we provided Operation Gateway, which saw that vessel patrol over a two-week period, and we had extremely good cooperation from our friends with Department of National Defence in providing air support. The Coast Guard and Department of Fisheries and Oceans were also main players in that.
As far as Arctic sovereignty goes, having 22 detachments within the territory and having a detachment at every community that basically has a marine component, we are the Government of Canada's main people showing up. If something happens, the first people that are usually called are the RCMP, and we go out from there after that.
Senator Cochrane: According to information I received, there was a vessel that entered Canada in Halifax from which crew members were deported. That was last year. The vessel was sent to Greenland. The two men who were deported were sent to Greenland and the vessel went to Greenland to pick them up but then they returned to Canada via our Arctic waters.
Would you tell me about this whole affair that happened?
Mr. St. Germaine: Senator, I believe I have heard a little bit about it and it took place in Nunavut, which is in ``V'' Division. I do not have any firsthand knowledge about that incident whatsoever.
Senator Cochrane: You do not have that?
Mr. St. Germaine: No, it is a different division. That did not come in through the Northwest Territories.
If it is the vessel that I think you are referring to, I believe it had access into Canada through Pond Inlet over on Baffin Island and that is a different division so that normally would not come through criminal operations in this particular division. That would be handled through Nunavut.
Senator Cochrane: So you do not know anything about it?
Mr. St. Germaine: No, I do not.
Senator Cochrane: Does anybody else on the panel know anything about it? Brigadier-General, would you know anything about that?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: No, senator. As a policing matter, we would not have been directly involved.
Senator Cook: I think from what I have heard and what I understand, I understand that it is not within your jurisdiction so you would not know. Where would you direct us to find that information to pick up the lead as to that incident and what happened? The icebreaker, I think it was the Sir Wilfrid Laurier, met or intercepted or whatever, saw it in Arctic waters. Where would we go for the information?
Mr. St. Germaine: That would be through criminal operations in Iqaluit at ``V'' Division, and it would be Superintendent Howard Eaton, but I can make those contacts for you.
Senator Cook: Would you track it back to Nova Scotia, to Halifax? Does the RCMP have a maritime command now?
Mr. St. Germaine: No, there is an Atlantic region which covers the provinces of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.
Senator Cook: It would be valuable to make contact with your partners in Iqaluit, but more so for us to be able to trace back to the source and recreate what happened, because sovereignty to the North and the open Northwest Passage is really on the radar screen now. Maybe we can learn from what happened and then work toward a coordinated effort. It seems there are many agencies taking care of the North, such as the Coast Guard and the RCMP, Department of Transport and Environment, a whole host of people.
But if you could trace that back to its origin, that would be helpful for us.
Mr. St. Germaine: Yes, I can contact Chief Superintendent Blair McKnight, criminal operations officer in Nova Scotia, so I can push that back through those two individuals.
Senator Cook: That would be really helpful.
The Chair: Just to clarify, the vessel that we are interested in is called the Mad Viking, I think, and we are not sure what happened to it in Halifax. We do not have facts on that, whether there were charges laid in Halifax or not, but the crew or at least some members of the crew were apprehended by the RCMP.
They were out of Canada and came back into Canada again and the Mad Viking, as we understand it was,, it was met, it is not fair to say it was intercepted, by the Sir Wilfrid Laurier, but the two vessels proceeded on their separate ways without anything happening between them.
So we are interested in what actually happened in Halifax. Were there charges laid, were the people involved in criminal activity or were they charged in some way? Why did they come back into Canada again? Why was their presence not noted and why did the Laurier not know that they were in the vicinity?
I think those are the questions that we would like to have answered, and it is significant because it brings into focus the whole question of Arctic sovereignty and who gets into Canada under what circumstances and who is responsible for surveillance and apprehension once people like that are in our waters. So we would like you just to clarify some of the facts as we know them to be.
Senator Cochrane: This issue is of concern to people within the region, especially up in the Cambridge Bay region. They want to know what happened for the future, in case other things happen like that. So we would like to get some information.
The Chair: That is right, they actually came ashore in Cambridge Bay.
Senator Raine: It is a pleasure to have you here. I am new to the committee and I would really like to learn a little bit more about how the Rangers work and what is the difference between the status of somebody who is a Ranger and a reservist, and is there any movement toward any projected changes?
From what I can see, it is a great program and especially I would like you to comment on the Junior Rangers and how they can help with recruiting.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: In Canada, we have Rangers in all our communities. Here in the North, I have approximately 1,600 of the current 3,500 Rangers. The Rangers are unique to the Canadian Forces. They are indeed a part of the reserves, so the Rangers are a component within our reserves. They are a very special component and I will try to explain that in characterizing the Rangers.
Our Rangers are the schoolteachers, the mayors, the elders, the administrative officers, the businessmen and women within the communities that dot our North. Indeed, you were at Cambridge Bay yesterday. We have Rangers in 56 of the 77 communities here in the North. So our Rangers are part-time soldiers like our reservists.
Our Rangers are not recruited by the Canadian Forces. Instead, they are recruited by their own communities. The Canadian Forces go to our communities in the North and ask them, the communities, the community elders, the mayors, if they would like to have a Ranger patrol within their community. That Ranger patrol characteristically is about 35 Rangers from ages greater than 18 to an indefinite period of service. Our oldest Ranger right now is 89 years old, still young, Ole Ittinuar who you may have seen in Rankin Inlet when you travelled through Rankin.
Our Rangers are part of the fabric of our communities. They have a part-time Canadian Forces role where in any given year, we will employ them for 30 days. That does not seem like a lot in any given year, but you must remember that as members of the community, as hunter-gatherers, as people who are out on the land, they provide a sovereignty footprint and presence all year. The unique skill of our Rangers is that they come from the land, come from the community and are of the land. Therefore, they have the natural skill sets in order to navigate and survive on the land.
When we ask a community if they would like a Ranger patrol, it is overwhelmingly yes, and I will speak about our ongoing recruiting campaign.
The Rangers undergo training but not training in how to survive and navigate on the land, because they understand that well. We provide leadership training, training in some of the more current technology such as GPS, satellite phone, navigation tracking capability, as well as first aid and other skills development.
So a patrol of Canadian Forces Rangers of a community provides not just the sovereignty and presence and not just the presence out on the land with about a 300-kilometre radius of action, but they actually perform operations. They are the protectors of the North Warning System that provides our air sovereignty here in Canada. They will provide support to the RCMP and the Coast Guard for search and rescue, both on land and in the water. They will participate in all of our exercises and operations here in the High Arctic such as Operation Nanook that you heard about recently. We will be deploying up to the High Arctic in Alert in March-April next year where the concentration of the force is our Rangers.
The other role of our Rangers is to provide the necessary life skills and mentoring of our forces from the south. Typically, if there was a security issue here in the North, we would have our Rangers be the vanguard, the first on the scene, if you will, in anticipation of the forces coming from southern Canada. We exercise routinely those very exigencies and that provides our troops from the south the opportunity to be trained on how to survive in the North.
Our Rangers are our protectors, they are not our defenders. The regular force troops that come up from the south will defend. It is our Rangers that are the heart and soul of the North and therefore provide us the protection.
The Junior Canadian Ranger program is one of our two youth programs here in the North. In many communities, it is the only youth program in the North that provides skills development, structure, discipline, leadership and guidance. It also is the means by which we continue to cultivate the traditional knowledge, spirituality and language, because it is the Ranger patrol that takes care of and does the mentoring of the Junior Canadian Ranger patrols.
So where you have a Junior Canadian Ranger patrol of children numbering from 20 to 40, from ages 12 to 18, you have a Ranger patrol, and the Rangers will inculcate within the Junior Canadian Rangers those traditional values and skills and language but also structure and discipline and skills ranging from canoeing, snowmobiling, learning how to properly survive and navigate on the land.
We currently have 37 communities with Junior Canadian Rangers for a total of 1,370 youth in that particular program. Our other program that we have for our youth here in the North is the Cadet program, Army Cadets and Air Cadets, in 16 other communities throughout the North.
Senator Raine: How many Juniors did you say you had?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: The figure is 1,370.
Senator Raine: That is fantastic.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: It is, and when you have a population across the North of about 100,800, it is quite a significant percentage. Of course, like the Rangers, the Junior Canadian Ranger are role models. They are role models for their community and just by their simple presence, they have a direct effect on the other youth within the communities.
Senator Raine: Is there an interface between the Rangers and the Junior Rangers and the Coast Guard?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: There is an interface between the Rangers and the Coast Guard as there is between the Rangers and the RCMP. Because the Rangers are in the community and are citizens of the community, they are also available to the RCMP and to the Coast Guard at any time for search and rescue.
There is not a direct relationship, though, between the Junior Canadian Ranger and the RCMP and the Coast Guard. There is an indirect one. When you go into the communities as you have done and you attend a gathering of our Junior Canadian Rangers, because the RCMP are so dominant in all our communities in the North, they actually become part of the teachers for our Junior Canadian Rangers. The Junior Canadian Rangers will invite the RCMP into their weekly education sessions and have the RCMP teach them, much as we will invite in the Rangers and other community leaders and elders as part of that formal education of our Junior Canadian Rangers.
The Chair: If I could have a supplementary on that, the Rangers are indeed a part of the reserve forces, but they are not regular reserves. They do not have the same status as regular reservists.
One of the things we thought might be useful is to make them regular reservists. We heard testimony in the Eastern Arctic that some of the Rangers were apprehensive about taking part in missions, partly because of an insurance liability. They were concerned that if something happened to them while they were on an exercise, they would not be covered as other reservists might be. So they were concerned about their families.
We wondered if it might be useful to make the Rangers regular reservists and to actually pay them a reservist's salary to cover them as other reservists are.
The other thing that we wondered might be useful is if they had a formal marine role. As you say, they do perform a marine function in the case of search and rescue, but I am not sure that they have the kind of equipment that they would need for that.
So the questions are, in addition to expanding the Rangers as the government has said it will do and as we recommended, would it be useful to make them regular reservists and would it be useful to give them a marine function so that they could actually take part more capably in search and rescue activities?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: In terms of reservists and making Rangers regular reservists, indeed they are regular reservists. They are afforded every equal benefit given our other reserves that are in Canada. Let me explain that.
Our Rangers do participate in operations and exercises. When they participate in operations and exercises, they are under the same class of employment as a reservist out of Edmonton, and they are afforded the exact same medical, family care benefits that are all our reservists are.
We have numerous examples of that. The most recent case is where one of our Rangers was up in Eureka conducting an operation when his Ski-Doo rolled over on him and he had a potential broken hip. He received all the same medical benefits, he is continuing to receive the medical benefits, will receive a medical pension, is being fully covered under the Canadian Forces casualty support administration and will be looked after as all our reservists are.
Like our other reservists, going to war, Afghanistan or peacekeeping is always voluntary. That is not an issue for our Rangers in the sense that our Rangers do not become a part of the Canadian Forces with the intent of deploying out of Canada. Our Rangers' heart and soul is in the North. We would never see a circumstance where we would deploy one into Afghanistan or another theatre of operation. That is because they are recruited by their communities to be the protectors and the eyes and ears of the communities.
The difference, however, between our Rangers as reservists and all other reservists is their training. Our reservists throughout Canada will be given a specific trade and will be trained as an infantier, as a maintainer or on ship on our maritime coastal defence vessels.
Our Rangers do not have a specific trade. Their trade is their life skills and abilities to operate on the land. So we do not provide them any additional formal training from the perspective of a specific trade. We do provide them formal training in terms of the types of roles that they have to fulfill and the equipment that they are going to use to do that. So that is the difference. Other than that, our Rangers are reservists and are afforded the exact same privileges.
The Chair: But they are not paid like reservists.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: That was my last point.
The Rangers do not have the same rank structure as the rest of the Canadian Forces where you start off at private, corporal, master corporal and sergeant and all the way up. Part and parcel of that is because we do not integrate our Rangers into the Canadian Forces succession planning, moving from place to place throughout Canada and ascending through rank to responsibilities and duties of greater import, because our Rangers stay in their communities.
There is a rank structure within our Rangers whereby the Rangers themselves select their leader, and that leader is given the rank of sergeant and he has a second-in-command, who has the rank of master corporal. But that Ranger leader will fulfill that leadership role for a period of time and then may step down, stay as a Ranger but allow one of the other Rangers to become the leader. So there is a leader and a second-in-command we give the rank of sergeant and master corporal to, but that is the extent of the military structure and hierarchy.
From a pay perspective then, our Rangers when they are employed in active service are paid at the same rank level as a corporal reservist; that is, $100 a day, approximately. And so for 30 days times $100, that is what their pay would be, in addition to any other exercises or opportunities when we employ them directly, such as a search and rescue in support of the RCMP or the Coast Guard.
In addition to that $100 a day, they also receive a stipend to cover the use, wear and tear on any and all the equipment they use themselves, that they actually operate and own. So yes, they are all paid. They are paid at a reservist corporal level.
The Chair: What is the difference between a Ranger and a special constable in the RCMP? Are the special constables paid and is there any comparison to be made?
Mr. St. Germaine: Special constables in the RCMP: we used to have the old special constables, who were Aboriginal members employed throughout a lot of communities in the North. That particular program went by the wayside I am going to say 15 years ago. It is now in the process of being resurrected and the name for the new special constable is going to be community officer. That is starting out as a pilot.
They are hoping to have a troop of what would have been the old specials through in January. With 21 weeks of training, we hope to have a number of those members in the field. They would fall into a detachment where they are working, provide a lot of the same services that a regular member would, but only up to a certain level. They would be carrying side arms and are paid at a different level than the regular members that are there. That program is coming back into effect here probably within the next eight months.
The Chair: General, would it be fair to say that the Rangers are working well as is and that we should not really look to make too many changes?
I realize this is a policy decision and that we are talking to people who carry out policy and not people who make policy, I understand that. We are trying to figure out for our own benefit what is the best use of resources that we have in the North for exercising Canadian sovereignty. It seems to us that the people who live here are prime evidence of Canadian sovereignty. It is their land, and we have been looking for ways to involve them as much as possible in exercising that sovereignty. It seems like Rangers and search and rescue is there, and I am wondering how we can enhance it.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Yes, Mr. Chair, and that allows me to answer your other question about marine capability.
Indeed, our Rangers are the heart and soul of the military sovereignty presence, and I know the committee knows that sovereignty is much more than the Canadian Forces. It is vibrant, prosperous communities that have the social services and education with a very strong Mounted Police presence and Coast Guard presence and all the Government of Canada presence.
Having said that, as we have seen, the Arctic is opening up. I just received a briefing this morning that the actual Northwest Passage, the main Northwest Passage, is now open and you have may have been told that when you were in Cambridge Bay. So in 2007, the passage was opened, and in 2009, it is now open. There is less ice than before.
We are seeing tremendous change within the Arctic and part of the metrics I used indicate there is an increase in activity. The amount of shipping that we are seeing is on the increase, whether it is cruise ships or passenger adventure craft, cargo carrying ships, all those sorts of things.
Part of my role within the Canadian Forces here is to prepare our Canadian Forces for those increased activities, the emerging security issues that are going to require the Canadian Forces to come to the assistance of the territories, and certainly, the Rangers factor significantly in our capability today and our capability tomorrow.
This is one of the reasons that we are expanding our Rangers. We are going to expand from 56 communities to 61. As you are aware, we are increasing our numbers over the next four years by 460 to bring our total number up to 2,000.
What is very encouraging is already we have recruited 200 additional Rangers and have trained about 150 of those. This is encouraging because it is an indicator to me of the success of the program and the desire of our communities to have additional Rangers within their respective communities. At the same time, we are expanding the Junior Canadian Rangers as well.
Now, in terms of enhancing our capabilities for our Rangers, as it stands today, our Rangers do provide search and rescue support and come to the fight, if you will, with their own equipment. Indeed, senator, as you mentioned, the marine role is becoming more pervasive; less ice, more water, it only makes sense to have a more robust capability within our Rangers to be able to provide coastal and inland water support.
Indeed, in my travels throughout the North and in conversations with our Rangers, today they use their own boats to provide support to the RCMP and the Coast Guard and their own equipment. Given the fact that our ice is receding and there is more water, it only makes sense now to start examining how better we could equip our Rangers in very strategic locations.
When you look at the Northwest Passage, Cambridge Bay, Tuktoyaktuk, Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, it would make a lot of sense to be able to augment your inland and coastal SAR capability but also your presence and surveillance capability by formalizing and modernizing their equipment.
I am in the process along with National Defence headquarters to examine exactly how we could enhance our on-the- water capability with our Rangers. It could be as simple as providing the same sorts of in-water and coastal vessels that the RCMP uses right now to be able to augment their capability as well.
We are also examining improvement in equipment for our Rangers. I mentioned satellite phone capabilities as well as GPS as well as tracking capabilities for our Rangers to enhance their equipment to operate out on the land.
So, as the Arctic opens up, there is a requirement for a greater presence, more robust capability and equipment that will allow our Rangers to perform those new and burgeoning roles that are becoming more pervasive as a result of the receding ice.
Senator Cook: There are reports that suggest the offshore patrol ships will be limited to a slow speed of 19 knots, will not be able to carry a gun and will not have the capacity to carry a missile. This is not what the Russians and the Danes and the Norwegians are doing.
Why are we not giving our ships equal capacities to our far northern neighbours? Thirty thousand Canadians call the North home, and from what we hear, other countries are, to use a military phrase, spit and polish ready.
I think it is commendable that the people of the North are engaging in being part of this sovereignty debate, if that is what you want to call it. But I get the feeling that we are not building the capacity that is required to defend our sovereignty in the North.
I think your program is commendable for the people. Their training I would suspect would be manoeuvres once a year maybe. I would think you would have a dedicated program for your Junior Rangers in the community. To me, that adds to your capacity, but my concern is we are not a match for the other countries in the Arctic who are using the latest technical equipment, enhancing their capacity for recruitment and all those other things. I would like your comments on that.
Can you comment on the progress of the joint support vessels? Will they have the capacity to go in first-year ice? Because first-year ice is harder than third-year ice, and there is more of it.
I would like you to comment on those two or three rambling questions, if you would, please.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: The Rangers in Canada are unique relative to the other Arctic countries, indeed are the envy of the other Arctic countries.
I have had the opportunity to visit Alaska, United States, which has considerable military power, as well as Denmark, and specifically Greenland, and each country has come to visit us because they think we have greater capability to maintain sovereignty and to demonstrate a presence all of the time. So it is interesting how they view us.
Indeed, our Rangers know how to survive, orient, navigate on the land. I was up in Ellesmere Island last year during Operation Nunalivut and I was in Alexander Fjord. If you could picture a glacier in behind, the Arctic Ocean frozen with icebergs impregnated in the ice at minus 50 with the wind howling and some of the most extreme conditions. We were circumnavigating Ellesmere Island and demonstrating to whoever was watching our capabilities to demonstrate sovereignty and presence on our land at will.
The North, as you have seen through your travels, is a very harsh environment. You would not want to visit our sovereign islands unless you knew exactly what you were doing. History is replete with those who have tried and have perished as a result. Yet the Canadian Forces can do that through our Rangers at will.
You are absolutely right. Three times a year, through major exercises, we demonstrate that capability, but that capability is also demonstrated routinely almost on a weekly basis. So in terms of defending our sovereignty, demonstrating our sovereignty, I am very proud to say that we can do that at will.
You are absolutely right in that we do not have the big missiles and the missile defence systems and all those sorts of things in the North to fight a conventional war. However, we do not have a conventional threat that is going to necessitate that we fight that kind of war.
The very fact that we demonstrate our capability to put troops on the ground, to operate within our Arctic air, land and sea, and Operation Nanook was a good illustration of that with F-18s and submarines. I think that that deterrence sends a significant message and signal which has become the envy of other nations.
At the same time, we are in close partnership with other nations. As you are aware, I have travelled over to Greenland and met my counterpart responsible for the Danish navy. We recognize that we both are going to be susceptible to same sort of security challenges when a cruise ship grounds on the bottom, when a cruise ship has an outbreak of Norwalk virus, which happened last year, or when we have an oil spill.
I have had those same conversations with my American counterparts, and next year, Operation Nanook will involve working together with the United States and with the Danish military around Resolute Bay area to demonstrate and to exercise those various capabilities that truly are emerging issues and threats to our Arctic.
So it is through that relationship building, essentially as a part of all our other alliances, that we have the deterrents from the sorts of conventional threats that we routinely talk about.
To your specific question regarding the Arctic offshore patrol ships, I will have to get back to you, senator, on the actual speed. As far as a gun is concerned, yes, it will have a gun. The ship itself will be similar to what the Danish navy have in their Rasmussen class surface combatant the ship which I have had the opportunity to see. It is capable of getting through metre or less ice. It does have a gun on it and going through ice, as you know, you are going at really slow speeds anyhow, but it delivers a tremendous capability and I expect that our offshore patrol ships will give us the same type of capability. For me, first-year ice is not the issue.
Having six to eight of these ships up in our Arctic waters, remembering that the majority of the activity that occurs in the High Arctic occurs when there is no ice or less ice, is going to give us a tremendous capability.
Senator Cook: When will those ships be available for work in the High Arctic?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: My latest information, senator, is we should see the first one coming into service in the 2014-2015 time frame.
In terms of the joint support ship, you are absolutely right. It will not be ice reinforced. That will not prevent it from resupplying our ships, whether it is our frigates or maritime coastal defence vessels or the Arctic offshore patrol ships, because those sorts of ships stay in the rear. They provide the replenishment as the ice reinforced ships go forward. So the joint support ship will still be a valuable capability here in the Arctic as well.
Senator Cook: What is your relationship with the Canadian Coast Guard? I see in my mind's eye they are the defenders of the North. You talk about ships going ahead of the other one. At the moment, there are only two icebreakers deployed to the North by the Canadian Coast Guard.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Our relationship with the Canadian Coast Guard could not be any closer. During Operation Nanook, it was the Coast Guard that transported our troops during the actual operation. They provided us ice information, navigation information for our submarines and our ships and indeed, they were prepared to channel through the ice with our ships following so that we could gain access to a specific part of land on Baffin Island.
We operate with them on a daily basis and we plan with them on a daily basis. Indeed, we are about to start the planning process for Operation Nanook 2010, and their members are integrated within my headquarters.
During our operations, we have members of the Coast Guard in my operations centre. As Mr. St. Germaine mentioned, during Operation Nunakput, it was a three-department, interagency operation between the Coast Guard, ourselves and the RCMP, and indeed, we have the capability to have our ships alongside the Coast Guard, have our aircraft reporting to the Coast Guard and vice versa.
So the relationship truly is strong and that is in terms of search and rescue as well. The Coast Guard can call upon us at any time to assist them.
Senator Cook: You say that you have a number of partners. I would assume that the Coast Guard is one of them.
This is an outside-the-box question. Would you be supportive or think there is a need for an integrated approach to the North; i.e., to take care of sovereignty all that it means, because at the moment the Coast Guard does not have the capacity for enforcement. It is basically a service provider, because all the things you just named to me are essentially services being provided by a wonderful organization with the mandate to be just that.
I am looking to see if there should be an integrated management of all partners in the North. The Northwest Passage is opening up, and my last point is that 30,000 Canadians are living there, coping with climate change and I would say feeling pretty vulnerable.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: In terms of an integrated approach, we achieve that today through the Arctic Security Working Group which my RCMP and Coast Guard colleagues sit on with me, with Public Safety, and all the other federal departments here in the North. That specific Arctic Security Working Group's focus and mandate is to share information, share intelligence, determine how we best can work together, how we can use one another's resources to greater effect. As I mentioned, the secret to success here in the North is the relationship between one another horizontally but in particular vertically between the municipalities, the territories and the federal government.
The very fact that we conduct Operation Nunakput, Operation Nanook, is indicative of that very cooperation.
I fully agree with you that the North is changing. The North and the Arctic are changing so rapidly that it is through the Arctic Security Working Group, through the operations that we conduct together, that we can give the reassurances to our northern communities and our northerners that indeed, the Coast Guard, the Canadian Forces and the RCMP are there and will be there in strength when they call upon us.
I was up in Resolute Bay recently and had the opportunity to sit with the mayor and her council, and the first question she asked me was when are you coming here to Resolute Bay. Resolute Bay is a very strategic point right along the Northwest Passage in the High Arctic. When are you coming to the Resolute Bay to practice response to an oil spill? Because that is what we fear, we, the community of Resolute Bay, because we see these ocean-going freighters all the time and there is going to be an accident like there has been everywhere else.
My response to the mayor was next summer, we will be here with the Coast Guard and the RCMP and ourselves, and we will practice with you a major oil spill so that we can give you the reassurance that we are there.
We are building the capacity from a Canadian Forces perspective of growing the Rangers, providing greater robustness in terms of their inland and coastal water responsibility, and also developing the Canadian Forces capability to respond within hours of notice to an emergency. All that is being built and developed as we see this tremendous decrease in ice and tremendous increase in activity.
So together, through the Arctic Security Working Group, we are building those capacities, and Operation Nanook I think demonstrated just how well and how closely we worked together.
One specific example was during the whole-of-government response to an IED incident on the main fuel supply. The perpetrators were actually escaping Frobisher Bay on ship. Between the RCMP, the emergency response team the Canadian Forces diving team and the Coast Guard, we conducted a very successful operation to apprehend the perpetrators. It is through those exercises, through that committee approach, that we are developing capability to respond to those emerging issues, but I agree with you, we need to continue the concerted effort.
The Chair: Now, it is twelve o'clock. I am inclined to go a little past 12 because I know there are a couple of other questions, so if everybody is in agreement, we can do that.
Are you available, General, to stay past 12?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Yes, Mr. Chair. I heard you are buying lunch today so I am more than available. Yes, sir, absolutely.
Senator Hubley: First, I would like to know what the status of Northern Watch is. Second, we have a concern that RADARSAT-2 does not show vessels that are less than 100 metres in length. I am wondering if you might expand for us on Project Epsilon and if indeed the future will give us that capacity to detect those smaller vessels that we will see more of coming through the Northwest Passage.
The Chair: Just to add to my earlier remarks, we are going to go past 12, but I would ask everybody if we could make our questions and our answers as succinct as we can so that I can buy the general lunch as soon as possible.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: That is a great deal, Mr. Chair, and point well taken. I will be much more concise.
The Northern Watch project is a capability demonstration with the sole purpose of fusing sensors together below water, at surface level and in the air to be able to detect motion, movement through very critical points, in particular in the Northwest Passage, so that you could detect the movement of ships and other activity in your waters.
As it currently stands, this summer, Northern Watch deployed its underwater capability and conducted testing. I do not have the results of that testing at this time, because the information is just being collated. I can tell you that next year as a part of Operation Nanook, we will be integrating our operation with the Northern Watch technology demonstration to provide a bit of a test bed for that.
RADARSAT-2: I will have to get back to you on the minimum length. I can reassure you that already I am using RADARSAT-2 to great extent. RADARSAT-2 is in development still, and I will speak about Polar Epsilon. I have already used RADARSAT-2 for ice condition monitoring, for the detection of potential pollution within the waters as well as the detection of vessels in the water, and I will not be able, senator be to be any more specific than that given our circumstances, but I can provide you that information separately.
What I would like to say is I am very, very encouraged about the RADARSAT-2 capability, in particular Polar Epsilon. Polar Epsilon is the military application of RADARSAT-2. Over the next two to three years, as the military applications come on line, we will see even greater and greater capability to detect movement on water as well as on land. That capability when correlated with human intelligence from our Rangers, reconnaissance and surveillance from our Aurora aircraft, will allow us to better characterize in near realtime the activities on our land and in our waters.
So to me, it is a burgeoning capability that has already demonstrated to me a greater ability to provide the situational awareness that I need to be able to react to any issues that may require our collective response.
Senator Cochrane: Let me just start with something more recent. Russia resumed Arctic long-range bomber patrol in 2007. They fired test missiles from the North Pole in 2009. Now, would you comment on what you have seen in terms of increased Russian activity and what this means for Canada?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Sovereignty, air sovereignty of our country is maintained by our bi-national agreement with the United States, NORAD. We have a tremendous capability within our North, formerly the DEW Line, Distant Early Warning, and now the North Warning System, that tracks and monitors air traffic out beyond our borders.
Since the Cold War, absolutely there was a reduction in the amount of Russian strategic aviation. I can guarantee the senator that we continue to watch very, very carefully, that we continue to respond to any potential activity that would come into our airspace without authorization.
I can also confirm that we have not had any unauthorized incursions into our airspace. We do continue to react with our CF-18s. We have four locations here in the Arctic we deploy to: Inuvik, Rankin Inlet, Yellowknife and Iqaluit. That capability is maintained on a 24-7 basis, and indeed, as I mentioned, we continue to react and respond.
In terms of the amount and the frequency, again, I cannot comment in this forum, senator, but we can provide that information separately.
In terms of missiles from the North Pole and Russian missiles, the Russians do and even today are conducting their own sovereignty exercises just as we conduct our own sovereignty here in the Arctic. They do the same in their Arctic and we are aware of those activities because they publicize them.
This past summer, the Americans participated with the Russians in both naval and air activities in the Russian sovereign airspace, water space and land space. Once again, we are very much aware of the activities and they do not pose a threat to Canada nor our sovereignty because we are capable of reacting accordingly.
Senator Cochrane: I hope you are right. I do have a few other things, and this is coming from the Ottawa Citizen, it is the daily newspaper in Ottawa. This is what I read: The navy's project management office told potential contractors that the letter of intent phase for the Arctic offshore patrol ships has been postponed indefinitely.
Now, this apparently happened in June. Tell us if this news story is accurate, and what is the current status of these patrol ships? Is there a time line that you have regarding these ships? Are we on target to meet them? And has a letter of intent gone out, and if it has not, why not?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: I believe the letter of intent has gone out and I believe that it is very, very recently that I read that it had gone out. I will have to confirm that for the committee and provide that specifically to you. I am not specifically responsible for the project itself. Nevertheless, it is of equal interest to me, and that is why I seem to recall in the last couple of weeks reading that the letter of intent had gone out. I will have to get that information back to the committee.
Senator Cochrane: I look forward to that response.
Here is another article. Back in July, the CBC this time reported that the Northern Watch technology demonstration project had been suspended. I understand this project involved trials of underwater and land-based sensors along the Northwest Passage. Is this correct?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: It is correct that the Northern Watch technology demonstration is intended to provide sensing for underwater, surface water and in the air. The project is continuing this summer and has yielded results in terms of its underwater capability. It is not accurate that it has been suspended. Indeed, it is progressing, and again, I plan to incorporate Northern Watch technology demonstration in our operations next year up in the Northwest Passage.
Senator Cochrane: Thank you for that.
The Chair: I just have a question on search and rescue. Would it be helpful if equipment for search and rescue, both fixed wing and helicopter, were stationed in the Arctic at strategic locations?
This would be is part of this whole concept of moving Arctic administration into the Arctic. The testimony that we heard in the Eastern Arctic was that — and you can confirm it or otherwise — that the fixed wing and helicopter equipment is not in the Arctic, that it has to be tasked from somewhere else, either Trenton or wherever, or perhaps Gander. But these are places quite a ways away.
It is a diversion and irrelevant in a way, I suppose, but coming from Newfoundland, we know about the value of search and rescue and having helicopter equipment quite near where the activity takes place. We had an incident just recently.
So would it be helpful for you if you had that fixed wing and helicopter equipment stationed in the Arctic so that it could have a rapid response to search and rescue?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Thank you, senator, for the question. Indeed it is one of the issues that I did not mention earlier and intended to.
Along with all the burgeoning activity and preparing ourselves to have the capabilities to respond when northerners call for our help, we also have to be developing our capability in terms of search and rescue.
Four million square kilometres is our area of responsibility. When you look at the demographic distribution, you see a bit of a band, Whitehorse, Yellowknife and Iqaluit, and then a large empty space, and then up along the Northwest Passage, the south and the north Northwest Passage where the rest of the population is, a huge expanse in between and then another huge expanse above.
Forty per cent of the Canadian territory land mass is here in the North. So a huge, huge space.
We have, as you have seen travelling throughout the North, tremendous indigenous air capability here in the North already. I will ask Mr. Kruger to speak in a moment, but as you may be familiar, part of our search and rescue capability in Canada is CASARA, civilian air search and rescue. This means we have the indigenous military capability with its airplanes and its search and rescue technicians, but in all of Canada, that is augmented by the civil search and rescue capability. It gives us, the Canadian Forces, trained spotters and observers, and private industry aircraft are used to fly those spotters around looking for accident sites in support of our search and rescue coordinated out of our search and rescue regions.
Here in the North, and Mr. Kruger can speak to this, we do have trained observers and spotters available to support search and rescue. The issue at hand for the future, as I expect the number of search and rescue cases to increase because of the levels of activity, is that we need to be prepared to respond.
When I was over in Greenland sharing experiences with my counterpart, Rear-Admiral Kudsk, they employ a commercial air industry to provide dedicated search and rescue, and it is quite an arrangement. They contract Air Greenland on an annual basis to have a readiness level to respond to search and rescue. When an incident comes up, the military in Greenland tasks Air Greenland, who, if they are flying people on their helicopters or their fixed wing airplanes, will land, disembark their passengers and go and conduct their search and rescue. It is a tremendous capability.
With the indigenous air resources here in the North, helicopters, Twin Otters, 737s, Hercules aircraft, there is more air capability here in the North that we need to harness. One of our new initiatives in preparation to respond to the future increase in SAR activity is to recommend to the national SAR secretariat and to the Canadian Forces air force, that we actually build that capacity by contracting a readiness level to the service providers that have airplanes throughout the North.
If you were to sit back and look at 4 million square kilometres and the size of our North, you could never put enough Canadian Forces assets up here in the North, nor do you need to, because those assets already exist here in our High Arctic.
Our initiative is to create a CASARA North, civilian air search and rescue capability North. It would combine the indigenous air capability that exists amongst Air Tindis, the Summit Airs, the First Airs, Canadian North, Discovery Mines and all the air providers, with the observers and the spotters. As a result, any time we have a SAR mission, then the regional control coordination centres have the capability to call upon that capability that is indigenous here in the North.
Jack Kruger, Search and Rescue Coordinator for the Northwest Territories, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: I guess the long answer would be yes. My role up here as the SAR coordinator is to do what the general basically has alluded to. I look after the coordination when a call comes in.
As recently as last night, we had an injured lady 25 miles off the shore on an island. To give you an example of what happens, we get a call, the RCMP get a call, I was contacted very shortly thereafter. We had chartered a helicopter from Yellowknife. We ran into some problems getting medical response. The fire department in Yellowknife provided two EMTs and within 45 minutes, we had a helicopter airborne and on site. That was a good news story. It is not always that way.
The coordination of search assets in the North rely totally on the RCMP, JTFN, 440 Squadron, the Coast Guard auxiliary, CASARA, the Rangers and local ground SAR units. That is my job, putting that together when a call comes in. We have been successful in it. It is a very challenging job, given the demographics, given the vastness of the North, in particular the opening up of the passage.
Anything that can be done, as the general has said, with respect to regionalizing, if you will, air assets, would be greatly appreciated, but we do have to get the people off the ground. Finding them is one thing. Getting them off the ground is the other.
The Chair: As I listen, what I hear is that there is more and more of a civilianization, if I could put it that way, of the air component of search and rescue.
I visited with SAR techs, I have always felt that SAR techs are the cream of the cream. They are extremely well trained and very, very good at what they do. They operate in southern Canada on both coasts and I do not know what the integration is with civilian aircraft there, but I do know that we have dedicated Armed Forces equipment and people.
Are we moving in the Arctic to more of a civilianization, if I can put it that way? I understand that there is a certain amount of training, but basically what I hear is contracting services rather than providing them in-house.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: No, Mr. Chair, it would not be a civilianization. Instead, it would provide another tier of response, in the sense that our spotters and the dedicated airplanes would be on scene very, very, quickly to locate, so that our SAR techs could swing into action.
The Chair: You still need the SAR techs?
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Yes, sir.
The Chair: They are not here.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: No, they are not. They are five hours from here in terms of their response.
The Chair: Well now, that does not seem to be an acceptable situation. I know it is not your responsibility to change that, but we are just discussing what is and what might be. It seemed to us and I think it has been confirmed now that it would be better to have that dedicated equipment actually in the Arctic rather than somewhere else.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: I believe the dedicated equipment is here, both helicopters and fixed wing. As Mr. Kruger suggested, we need to formalize it so that it is available on 24 hours notice so that we can respond with our emergency management capability and our medical support as the number of incidents increases in the future.
Senator Raine: I would just like to comment. I think that is a very good solution because there are limited resources, as we all know, but this way, you have an assurance that there would be one on standby for the event from the whole pool of the equipment that is here in the North. So I see that as a great solution.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: That would be the concept, senator, to have that capability ready and available much like we have in the South.
Senator Raine: So then they could go and be there in one hour or less and meanwhile, if necessary, the others would come.
Brig.-Gen. Millar: Yes, senator, that is the concept.
The Chair: Thank you very much for being with us. You have been very helpful. We appreciate your presence and your responses.
(The committee adjourned.)