THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 18, 2023
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met with videoconference this day at 6:45 p.m. [ET] to study the impacts of climate change on critical infrastructure in the transportation and communications sectors and the consequential impacts on their interdependencies.
Senator Leo Housakos (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome. I’m Senator Leo Housakos, representing the province of Quebec and the beautiful city of Montreal. I invite my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator Simons: I am Senator Paula Simons from Alberta, and I live in Treaty 6 territory.
Senator Clement: Bernadette Clement, Ontario. Former mayor of Cornwall, Ontario.
Senator Quinn: Jim Quinn, New Brunswick.
[Translation]
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Julie Miville-Dechêne, senatorial division of Inkerman. I represent the beautiful province of Quebec and the beautiful city of Montreal, as does this committee’s chair.
[English]
The Chair: We are in agreement.
Honourable senators, we are continuing our study of the impact of climate change on critical infrastructure in the transportation sector and, more specifically, our in-depth study of the issues facing the Chignecto Isthmus.
For our first panel, we are pleased to welcome from the Canadian Propane Association, Shannon Watt, President and CEO, and Royden Boudreau, Chair of the Atlantic Canada Committee; and Matthew Hynes, Executive Vice President of Oceanex Inc.
Welcome. Thank you for joining us. We begin with your opening remarks.
Shannon Watt, President and CEO, Canadian Propane Association: Good evening, senators. The Canadian Propane Association, or CPA, is pleased to join you this evening at the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications as you study the impacts of climate change on critical infrastructure in the transportation sector.
My name is Shannon Watt. I am President and CEO of the CPA. I am one and a half years into the job, so I’m still leaning on the expertise of my members.
Prior to joining the CPA, I was Vice-President of the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada. While I’m intrigued by the opportunities of the molecule that is called propane, I’m still learning the ropes about the more minute details of this fascinating industry. This is why I’m pleased to have joining me this evening, Royden Boudreau. Mr. Boudreau is the Chair of our Atlantic Canada Committee. He is presently the Director of Business Development at Sullivan Fuels Ltd. in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia. With over 25 years of experience in the propane industry, Mr. Boudreau brings a wealth of knowledge, and he is happy to respond to questions that deal with Atlantic operations and logistics.
The Canadian Propane Association is a national association for the propane industry, representing 400 companies from every region of the country. In fact, there are as many CPA members as there are senators and MPs combined, and we have quite the reach. You know our members. Many are family-run businesses. They are members of the local chambers of commerce. They volunteer their time with community groups and provide scholarships for local causes.
In many ways, our members reflect the communities they serve. Many of these communities, including almost all of those in Atlantic Canada, are rural in nature and not on the natural-gas grid, nor do many of these communities have access to inexpensive electricity. Across Canada, CPA members include producers, wholesalers, transporters, retailers, manufacturers, distributors, service providers of equipment, appliances and associated industries. Annually, the propane sector contributes significantly to the Canadian economy. Propane supports over $5 billion in GDP, provides over 280 kilo barrels per day in propane production, provides the main energy source to almost 200,000 households across Canada and supports, directly and indirectly, approximately 30,000 jobs in almost every corner of this country.
For our governments, propane generates over $1.8 billion in taxes and royalties each year. In terms of use, propane is required in many applications from agricultural, commercial, institutional, manufacturing, mining, oil and gas, non-energy use, temporary power generation, residential and transportation. We also contribute to the global reduction in emissions. About 50% of the propane proposed in Canada is exported. In addition to the United States, propane is exported to Japan, South Korea and Mexico. These are communities that seek cleaner, reliable and affordable energy options.
Propane is already recognized by governments around the world for the contributions it can make towards improved indoor and outdoor air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions, as evidenced under Canada’s Alternative Fuels Act.
Unlike methane — or natural gas, as it is called — propane is not a greenhouse gas prior to combustion. If spilled, it does not harm the air, land or water.
Supplying affordable, reliable and clean energy will continue to be the goal of Canada’s propane industry, whether that is in Atlantic Canada, across the country or in countries across the globe. We are also looking at ways to further decarbonize propane so we can provide clean energy today and tomorrow.
With regard to the issue before us tonight, let me just say that the corridor between New Brunswick and Nova Scotia along the isthmus is of fundamental importance to our industry. The propane that is used in Atlantic Canada, outside of what is produced and delivered by Irving, originates in Western Canada via Line 5 into Sarnia, Ontario. Propane is then railed or trucked from Sarnia to locations throughout the Maritimes and then, via trucks, to customers. All the propane used in Newfoundland and Labrador is delivered by truck via Marine Atlantic out of North Sydney, Nova Scotia.
From the propane industry’s perspective, any disruption caused to the corridor along the Chignecto Isthmus, whether by climate change or anything else, would have an extremely negative impact on the propane supply chain, including thousands of propane customers in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you, again, for asking us to appear before the committee. With that, Mr. Boudreau and I are ready to answer any questions that you might have.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Watt, and now I turn the floor over to Mr. Hynes.
Matthew Hynes, Executive Vice President, Oceanex Inc.: Good evening, my name is Matthew Hynes, Executive Vice President of Oceanex. I’ve been with the company about 15 years now. Oceanex is a door-to-door freight transportation service provider with a focus on the island of Newfoundland.
We appreciate the opportunity to speak here this evening. I will speak specifically about the flow of goods to the island, and we’ll talk about what Oceanex’s part in that process is.
The island of Newfoundland, with a population of about 500,000 people, generally consumes goods that are brought to the island by sea. There are three primary marine links that move freight over to the island: Montreal to St. John’s, Halifax to St. John’s and North Sydney to Port aux Basques. Those three links are integrally connected to the road and rail infrastructure throughout North America and the road infrastructure on the island of Newfoundland and are the key arteries where the vast majority of goods flow to and from the island.
I will give you a bit of background about Oceanex. We move close to half of the goods to the island. We’re dealing with a true cross-section of the economy, whether it’s retailers, wholesalers, building suppliers, food manufacturers, automobile manufacturers and also other transportation companies. The major trucking companies that service the region are also customers of ours for moving freight to the island.
Our customers count on us for our on-time performance, which is second to none in the region. We have an on-time delivery performance of over 97%. Our customers have built just-in-time supply chain systems to the island, and we are a key piece they rely upon to ensure goods are moved efficiently and effectively, day in and day out and year-round to store shelves — ultimately to the consumers on the island.
We have also been recognized as one of Canada’s Best Managed Companies, a program that we have been a happy member of for over 13 years now. We’re also recognized as a lower emissions means of transportation or freight to the island. As an example, if we take a trailer load of freight from Montreal to St. John’s, and move it by road all the way using a ferry service for the marine link, that emits over seven times the greenhouse gases that would be emitted for that same load moving via our marine service from Montreal.
We are privately owned. We have a team of over 450 people working directly with us and about 600 indirect employees throughout eastern Canada. We’re based in St. John’s with offices in Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia.
What we bring together for our customers is our ships. We operate two ships out of Montreal and one out of Halifax that call into St. John’s on a weekly basis. We have the terminal operations, trucks, logistics management and equipment to ultimately move freight door-to-door for our customers, again with a primary focus on the island of Newfoundland.
To get back to the issue at hand, if we look at the freight that flows to the island, if that there was a disruption to the road and rail infrastructure that resides on the isthmus between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, we estimate that approximately two thirds of the freight that flows to Newfoundland would be impacted by that disruption.
I will break that down.
We move freight out of Montreal, which, of course, would not be impacted by this disruption. But we also move it out of Halifax. We estimate that we move about one sixth of the total freight moving to the island via the Port of Halifax. The majority of what we haul from Halifax, actually, comes from further west than the isthmus. The other half of the total freight moving to Newfoundland travels via the Port of North Sydney and the Marine Atlantic ferry service. If you take our one sixth and their one half, you are up to two thirds of the freight that, at the end of the day, is moving from further west than the isthmus.
At the end of the day, what we see in the freight world is that the majority of the goods actually moving to Newfoundland are coming from Central Canada — Ontario and Quebec — and further afar throughout North America. To a lesser degree, there are regional distribution centres in the Maritimes, and they are primarily in the New Brunswick area — in Moncton, specifically. Again, we feel that having that disruption on the isthmus would have a very significant impact on the flow of goods.
If the unfortunate event did occur, we do see a couple of alternative solutions as temporary stopgap measures. Over time, transportation systems would adapt, but, of course, we believe there would be an immediate impact on the flow of goods.
One option we can bring to the table is that we also have capacity available on the Montreal service for freight that is further afield — not only west of the isthmus but west of the Maritimes — and we could intercept that freight and bring it through the Port of Montreal for furtherance to Newfoundland. The second option is this: Based on the fact that the vast majority of the freight we haul from Halifax does, actually, originate in New Brunswick, we could temporarily operate a service from the Port of Saint John into St. John’s Newfoundland. The terminal infrastructure is there in Saint John for us to deploy that fairly quickly. We believe we could work with shippers and our transportation partners in the region to effect that change. That would allow us to carry out a weekly service from Saint John to St. John’s, very similar to the weekly service we provide today from Halifax to St. John’s.
Of course, we are confident that the government will take the right steps to avoid such a severe incident from occurring, but — again, as I mentioned — we do feel confident that we could play a role in providing alternate service solutions — if indeed it did happen — to keep freight moving to the island.
Marine Atlantic, which operates the service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques, may be able to avail of alternate ports of call as well, but they would be best to speak to that.
Again, we thank you for the opportunity to speak and for recognizing us as a part of the supply chain in Newfoundland. I am happy to answer any questions that you have.
The Chair: Thank you Mr. Hynes and Ms. Watt. We have, Mr. Boudreau, here with us as well and is available to answer questions during Q and A.
Senator Simons: I appreciate that the witnesses are here to talk about the vulnerability of the supply chain. I’m a little bit perplexed because, in all honesty, we need to be hearing from people who can tell us about the subject of our study, which is the impact of climate change on critical infrastructure. I’m hoping that Mr. Boudreau could answer this question for me: Can you tell us about the state of the roads and the rails through the isthmus and how you have seen them affected by extreme weather events in the last few years?
Royden Boudreau, Chair, Atlantic Canada Committee, Canadian Propane Association: I would say that for the majority of the time we have experienced, there have been issues with snowstorms in the New Brunswick area — across that isthmus area — that have halted some of the transportation.
The biggest concern we have from the perspective of the Canadian Propane Association is that basically all the propane supplied into Nova Scotia and Newfoundland goes through that isthmus. Basically, it would completely shut down all the propane we use in those two provinces.
Senator Simons: With all due respect, we are the transportation committee. What we are looking at is the state of transportation infrastructure. Because you are from Atlantic Canada and because you are so reliant on that passage way, what can you tell us about the actual state of the roads and the rail? Has there ever been a situation where things were shut down? Have you experienced a condition where the road has washed out or where the rail line has been blocked? I understand what you are saying, namely, this is one pinch point and if it is closed off, people will not have heating fuel. That would be terrible. What can you tell us about how vulnerable this passage way is?
Mr. Boudreau: I think the big issue that we have encountered in the past was, for example, the CN strike which we dealt with in November 19-26, in 2019, the blockade near Belleville, which cut us off with supply.
Senator Simons: I want to interrupt you again, Mr. Boudreau. The focus of our study is the impact of climate change on critical infrastructure. Do you have any observations that you can share with us about the impact of climate change on this road and railway? Perhaps I will ask Mr. Hynes as well. Again, I want to ask you to please limit your comments to the impact of climate change on the infrastructure.
Mr. Boudreau: The only component that I would be aware of right now is there has been some flooding in that area which has caused some issues. As far as knowing exactly to what degree, I would have to call upon other resources to clarify.
Senator Simons: Mr. Hynes, can you speak — and, again, I want to ask you to be as focused as you can be — to the impact of climate change on this infrastructure?
Mr. Hynes: I apologize but I will have to echo the comments that you just heard. I can speak anecdotally in the sense that we have experienced some issues.
Senator Simons: Yes. That would be great. Can you give me an example of a time when there was an issue?
Mr. Hynes: I cannot but I can commit to come back and tell you what we have experienced for the last five years in terms of the flow of goods to the Port of Halifax.
Senator Simons: I do not want to minimize the importance of the goods that you are all transporting, but this is not a study of that. This is a study of the impact of rising waters, winter storms, hurricanes.
Mr. Hynes: I can appreciate that. With all due respect, however, at Oceanex, we are not the experts per se of the infrastructure in that regard. We can speak to the context of the impact.
Senator Simons: All right. As an ocean expert, oceanic conditions are changing as a result of climate change. How much more vulnerable does that make you to other supply chain shocks?
What are you seeing in terms of winter storms or hurricanes where there didn’t use to be hurricanes and that sort of thing?
Mr. Hynes: It is anecdotal again, but we are seeing more frequent and intense storms. This is something that our system has to contend with. Thankfully, the equipment that we have is designed for these types of conditions.
Senator Simons: But you are not actually running any equipment over the isthmus at all?
Mr. Hynes: Yes, trucks.
Senator Simons: Have your trucks had problems going through?
Mr. Hynes: As I said, I will have to commit to come back with the facts as to how often that has happened in the last five years.
Senator Simons: That is what we’re actually studying, namely, how vulnerable is that road and that rail system to weather shocks.
Mr. Hynes: The only thing that I would add to that is we use a lot of infrastructure. It is important not to confuse good luck with good management.
Senator Simons: Yes, that is very true.
Mr. Hynes: I would rely heavily on the forecasting and the engineering studies that I believe have been done.
Senator Simons: Do you have those studies? It would be terrific if you could forward them to the clerk.
Mr. Hynes: I would be happy to do that.
Senator Simons: We are struggling to find that information. That would be marvellous. Thank you so much.
The Chair: Apparently, those studies are in the briefs that were provided to us. I have not seen them either but apparently they are in there. I’m sure that Senator Quinn has read them.
Senator Quinn: Thank you, chair, and thank you for being here this evening. I want to build on this and help to bring some clarity here. One witness the other night spoke about some of the events that could affect the isthmus, for example, the changing weather patterns, et cetera. It is important for the committee to understand that that isthmus and the transportation that takes place are directly affected by climate change.
This past summer, for example, we have seen the rail washed out near Truro, Nova Scotia. That prevented trains from getting down into Halifax, Nova Scotia, for five days. It is also trying to underscore the importance of that particular transportation corridor on the economy and what would happen should a disaster occur. We’re hearing that there are rising sea levels, which is real, and we’re hearing about the increasing frequency and intensity of storms. I think that other witnesses will be talking about this in a more succinct manner. This is all interlinked. While it may not be specifically what my colleague was getting at, the subject matter is linked.
You mentioned that both of your businesses rely on the isthmus to get cargo. If that isthmus were disrupted because of climate change — that is, by the rising sea levels and the dikes being breached — what impact would this have on your business? You have mentioned alternatives but I believe those alternatives would cause increased pricing. Costs would go up in the system and that would end up being passed on to consumers at some point to the point where I think it would affect business overall.
It is really coming down to the isthmus being that critical point. If it were breached or damaged, frankly, it is not a question of if but a question of when; we know that. We know that it has been breached in the past, in the early 1900s and the late 1800s. We know there were issues with respect to some overspill and we also know that it is at the maximum height right now. When the tide is high and the moon is right, and you get the winds from the wrong direction, it is going to breach. There is no question about it.
Climate change affects it, but it is important, as committee members, that we understand what that means to our economy and to the businesses that supply Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and link into the international trading lanes of North America that connect through Halifax and Sydney, et cetera. That is what we would like to hear a bit more about. What would that mean to you?
Ms. Watt: We actually have clear examples that are helpful in providing context for what would happen if the isthmus were flooded. One is that CN strike from November 2019 and the rail blockade from February 2020. It really did interrupt supply of propane into the Atlantic region.
I will turn to Royden Boudreau to answer a bit more from a personal perspective on the impact of those two events on his business.
Senator Quinn: Can I clarify? I think what you are trying to do is set an example. If the isthmus was lost because of climate change, you already have a precursor of what it means when there is a disruption to the service. However, to my colleagues’ point about the isthmus, what is the condition of it, et cetera? We know that climate change will have an impact on it, so it’s really the disruption that you have experience with.
Ms. Watt: Yes.
Senator Quinn: With the isthmus gone, can you cite here is what happened for another reason?
Ms. Watt: Exactly. We have 150 million litres that pass through the isthmus each year. Mr. Boudreau, what were the impacts of the rail blockade and the CN strike?
Mr. Boudreau: Basically, we couldn’t get the product into Nova Scotia, so we had to bring in everything by truck. When the CN strike happened, the blockades happened, everything that came into Nova Scotia basically came in by truck. We had no other alternative.
As a small organization in the province of Nova Scotia, we went to Alberta to pick up a b-train that carried approximately 70,000 litres of propane to be able to service our customers in Nova Scotia. We really didn’t have any other choice in the matter. Either that or customers would run out of the product in a short period of time. Our anticipation was that customers would be running out of propane in approximately two to three weeks. We supply manufacturing, agriculture, hospitals and power generation, so it was crucial to get the product in as soon as we could. We’re basically out of business in the propane industry in Nova Scotia within two weeks for the most part.
One of the other companies that service the propane industry in Nova Scotia has started to bring a lot of railcar product into Nova Scotia and provided additional storage on the rail side to try to help alleviate any major issues that would happen again in the future. Along with that comes, of course, demurrage fees for holding out that product on rail sidings.
Propane companies in Atlantic Canada, for the most part, have tried to increase their storage capacities to try to offset any major shortfall, whether it be a CN strike, a rail blockage or the weather conditions and climate change that have been transpiring. A couple of times during this past winter, trucks could not get through the isthmus because of storms, and we were without a product, but it was more of a temporary, not a long-term basis.
Mr. Hynes: I spoke more about the general freight flow to Newfoundland. Specifically to the question of Senator Quinn on how this would impact Oceanex — well, a third of our business would stop. We would have to come up with alternative solutions, some of which I mentioned earlier. But all of that takes time and, as you said, money.
At the end of the day, a third of our freight and a third of the employee base would be sitting there, waiting to figure out how to ultimately get back on track to move freight for our customers.
Quite a few critical goods and essential products move through the system, but at the end of the day, all freight comes to the island. I’m trying to say that the general freight that moves to the island is what makes up retail trade on the island. If you look at the retail trade last year, the total value was about $11.5 billion in Newfoundland. If you take away the automobile fuel, you are talking about $27 million or $28 million daily economic activity on the island.
We’ve seen disruptions in the supply chain in the past. Economic activity is taken away, and it doesn’t come back. I’ll give you an anecdote. If someone consumes an apple a day and if, all of a sudden, they can’t get any apples this week, then they don’t eat any apples. They don’t eat two a day the following week.
You don’t make up that shortfall in the economy. We saw that with the port strike in Montreal in 2010 and its impact on the flow of goods to Newfoundland. Our Montreal service was impacted for a short period of time through that. We saw the impact on the economic indicators for the province.
Critical and essential goods are key aspects that need to be considered in terms of infrastructure and sustainability in the future, but we must also look at the key infrastructure that is required for promoting efficient and effective economy and trade.
Senator Quinn: My final point, to help bring clarity, is that our study is looking at infrastructure and the effects of climate change on infrastructure. Is it fair to say, given what we’ve heard previously and what we’re hearing now that it’s not a question of “if” but “when”? If we don’t do anything, that critical infrastructure will be affected by climate change.
I’d like to know your opinion. Is that critical piece of land in the general interests of Canada for our trade, our international trade and our domestic trade agendas? Is that something on which you both could comment?
Ms. Watt: The answer is yes, absolutely.
Mr. Hynes: I echo that, based not only on trade in Newfoundland but our exposure to activity in the Port of Halifax, which feeds into Canada and into the U.S. Midwest. A tremendous amount of trade passes over that isthmus.
The Chair: Senator Quinn, if we were in a court of law, what you just did would be called leading the witness.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Leading questions are forbidden in journalism, too. It’s the kind of thing you don’t do.
The Chair: With journalists, you expect it all the time.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: No, no, no.
Senator Quinn: I was trying to bring clarity to what our study actually is.
The Chair: Before we go to Senator Miville-Dechêne, I have a question. I’ve been listening to the back and forth. I get the sense that we would like you to identify all the climate change incidents that are disrupting your businesses, but at the end of the day, we want to get to the facts. We don’t want to presume anything. From my understanding, over the last few years, your biggest obstacles to your businesses, in terms of infrastructure, were the rail blockades, labour strikes, but severe environmental and climatic issues have not impeded getting your products to customers. Correct? I just want to be clear on what I understand from the testimony so far.
Mr. Hynes: Certainly, we are experiencing that. In preparing for today, obviously we tried to focus on the issue at hand, the issue we were asked about. But a few years ago, we saw a major ice buildup on the St. Lawrence River, which runs into Montreal. All ship traffic was shut down for several days, including our service from Montreal to St. John’s. That hasn’t happened in over 20 years. It has happened before, but we are seeing changes in climate for sure, changes that are impacting movement of goods throughout the country.
We could list other examples. I would be happy to put together a summary of that.
The Chair: Particularly, as I said, if we’ve had climatic change, which occurs every 20 or 25 years, that is a trend. It might be 20-odd; it might be unusual.
I’ll ask the question differently. Is there anything in the current infrastructure that your industries rely on that is problematic and needs to be improved? It could be climate-related or otherwise. I’m stretching the study a little bit, but out of curiosity — and since I am the chair, I take liberties sometimes. Does anyone want to answer that?
Ms. Watt: In the aftermath of the strike and the blockade, we actually worked with the Canada Energy Regulator, Natural Resources Canada and Transport Canada. We funded an issue briefing with the Conference Board of Canada just to discuss the supply chain issues and what the issues were. It did say the Canadian propane supply chain was fairly stable, but there were external factors that were really important in terms of creating critical situations.
It sounds much like the issue here. The number-one solution was to find more data. Right? That was from, I think, 2021. We need better data in terms of what we’re doing here.
That was number one. Number two was consideration of more strategic storage, which is what you heard from Mr. Boudreau in terms of people taking side rails and using them to store extra propane. That is definitely one of the solutions we need to examine — how to better understand and how to get the data we need to do things better.
Mr. Boudreau: We’ve obviously been impacted with more and more hurricanes, over the past couple of years. We were impacted by ice storms in the transportation of the product. But as for direct impacts related to the isthmus itself, the impact was felt throughout the entire region.
The reason transportation is becoming more critical for the propane industry is that propane production has been halted in Nova Scotia because the Sable Offshore Energy Project was shut down in January 2019. Prior to that, propane was being produced and used throughout the Maritimes. The Come By Chance refinery shutdown halted production of propane in the province of Newfoundland. We’ve really become exclusively dependent on trucking and rail to supply customers across the region.
The Chair: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Ms. Watt, what I’d like to know concerns the fact that you’ve experienced two events that have shown the fragility, especially of your propane supply chain. Once you know that, climate change being what it is, in general, there are necessary preparations that need to be made. Here’s what we’ve experienced, here’s what’s likely to happen, here’s our plan B.
In the propane industry or in your case, do you have a way to transport your goods other than through the isthmus, which may at some point no longer exist should it flood? Have you made any plans?
This morning, I was participating in a conference where they said preparations must be made. What are you doing to prepare? That’s my question. I know I’m a bit off topic, but it’s slightly related.
[English]
Mr. Hynes: At Oceanex, we do have contingency plans for significant issues and events that impact our business. I mentioned one of our potential alternate solutions in the event of disruption of the road and rail infrastructure on that isthmus. We would call into an alternate port in the region to contend with that issue.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: You would go to a port and have stuff delivered by boat?
Mr. Hynes: I apologize; I probably wasn’t clear earlier. We provide door-to-door freight transport. We coordinate the trucking activities, the terminal operations and the shipping piece. We own the ships, and we own a lot of trucks that are moving around there. For example, when a shipper has a load of freight in Moncton, New Brunswick, which they want shipped to St. John’s, Newfoundland, we would coordinate a truck and a chassis and container or a trailer to go from Halifax to Moncton, pick up the load of freight and bring it back to Halifax for furtherance to Newfoundland.
If we can’t pass the isthmus, we would work with the shipper to somehow get that freight to the Port of Saint John, New Brunswick. That port could be accessed from Moncton. We can divert our ship there, and we can still maintain a weekly service in that area.
In the past, we have generally found that the transportation system is very tight. The capacity is very well matched to the demand. People tend not to pay a premium to have all these alternate solutions waiting, ready, on standby.
Things could adapt and change over an extended period of time. For example, if the isthmus were never joined again, freight would eventually get across to Nova Scotia. Alternate means will be put in place. However, in the immediate term, a significant impact would be felt while everyone adjusted to that change.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: What about you, Ms. Watt? Do you have contingency plans?
Ms. Watt: There is always a plan B with propane. This is an entrepreneurial type of sector with a lot of small companies that are very good at what they do. If something is not working, there is always a plan B. The problem is the additional cost to the customer.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Okay, but what is the plan B?
Ms. Watt: Mr. Boudreau gave a great example. When the rail lines went down, the owner of his company called up his dad and said, “We’re going to Alberta to get propane.”
Mr. Royden, over to you. What would be the plan B if the isthmus were flooded?
Senator Miville-Dechêne: I don’t want you to invent one now. Have you researched it? Is it there?
Ms. Watt: We have not personally researched it beyond ensuring that our members are aware of some risks out there. I believe every company would have their own scenario in terms of certain things happening. They know the risks to their companies and how to mitigate those.
Mr. Boudreau: As Ms. Watt just mentioned, we basically would make the needed changes based on what happens. The rail strike wasn’t something we anticipated. We didn’t have a plan. Are we thinking about a rail strike tomorrow or next week? What do we do in the event that it does occur? That corridor is just so important.
Mr. Hynes from Oceanex mentioned taking the product from New Brunswick over to Newfoundland via boat, but that could not happen on the propane side. That would be a real challenge. I don’t know what we would do. We could possibly bring the product across the fixed link to P.E.I. and then cross on a boat, but that would only work during the summer months, which is not our period of greatest demand, for sure.
Mr. Hynes: That’s a prime example, as he just mentioned. Could propane be moved by ship to Newfoundland? Actually, it does move on a ferry today, so, theoretically, yes, it can. That’s an example of equipment needing to be procured. We would need shipping containers to carry the propane. You can’t just go down the street and get that. You have to work with the suppliers of that equipment, procure it, get it in the right location in North America, to ultimately have it filled for furtherance to Newfoundland, as an example. All of that takes time. Anything can be done, but time and money are required to make it happen at the end of the day.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Thank you.
Senator Richards: Thanks for being here. I don’t have much to add to this. I think climate change is a factor, of course, but having grown up in Newcastle and knowing people from Amherst and Moncton and Sackville, I know about the floods that happened there. The big flood of 1974 flooded half the province, and there was the Escuminac disaster which went up the Northumberland Strait. Is there any relevant example of the damage that was done there compared to what would be done now? Can you look back at how the damage was handled then, if there was damage, and compare it to how it would be if it happened now? The hurricane that went up the Northumberland Strait in 1959 was one hell of a hurricane. It must have caused some damage along those marshes. The floods of 1974 were the same.
I know you two are too young to remember these things, but I’m wondering if there is anything to look back at to say, “Well, this happened then and this is what we did.” Might we handle it the same way now, or can we at least know how much damage would be done in the event of a catastrophic event like the hurricane of 1959? Do you have any idea about that?
Mr. Hynes: Today, I do not. I can research it and come back. We do have corporate knowledge that goes back that far, or at least to 1974.
Senator Richards: Okay. The lines were open then, and goods were transported then as well as now. I know much less was transported then than today, but it still went along that highway and that rail line.
Mr. Hynes: Absolutely.
Senator Richards: I’m just wondering how it was handled in 1959 and 1974. Those were two major storms. They impacted that area just like it impacted most of that side of the province. Is there any knowledge about what happened then compared to what would happen now?
Mr. Hynes: I can certainly commit to going back into our corporate knowledge and coming back to the committee with something on that.
Senator Richards: That would be fine. I don’t want to lessen the impact of climate change, but having lived most of my life down there, I know that this has happened before — not on a regular basis; it was infrequent, but when it happened, you could tell it had happened. And it will happen again.
Mr. Hynes: Yes. One thing that I can say is different from 1974 is that supply chains have gone full force to “just in time.” There is very little warehousing and storage in Newfoundland, as an example. For the most part, as we bring in goods, it arrives on, say, a Tuesday morning, goes out by truck on Tuesday afternoon or night. It gets put on a store shelf and, on Wednesday morning, someone is picking it up and taking it home. That has changed, which would make the link more critical.
Senator Richards: So the level of commerce is really one of the problems? That is the same everywhere else in Canada and in the United States, I suppose.
Mr. Hynes: For all these things, if you want a warehouse and to build inventory, that comes at a cost. At the end of the day, the consumers want costs as low as possible. Major retailers are tending to that desire, in one way at least, by cutting out any fat in their systems. That means, on a good day, it runs very well, very lean, but on a rainy day, such as we’re discussing here, the system is much more susceptible to the risk of a shortage.
Senator Richards: Thank you very much.
Senator Clement: Thanks for being here. I want to follow up on the questions asked by Senator Miville-Dechêne and to go a little further, if you can.
How much of your budget is spent on climate crisis planning? How much do you invest in climate crisis mitigation? Do you have a strategic plan as a corporation that refers to climate crisis specifically, and in what way?
Ms. Watt: We are association. We represent 400 companies who may or may not have developed these risk-mitigation plans. I cannot speak to that.
I can speak to the fact that we very much believe climate change is an issue that we have to deal with. We are developing a decarbonization pathway to deal with that aspect of propane. We are releasing our study on decarbonization in the coming months in the hopes that we can get actual renewable propane made in Canada, with Canadian feed stocks, and not just made in the United States.
Senator Clement: Thank you.
Mr. Hynes: I cannot put a number on how much we spend, but we do have a strategic plan as a company. One of the key pieces in it is how we are dealing with climate change. As a transportation provider, it is more about what sort of fuel type are we going to use in future to run through the system.
Having said that, our infrastructure is in focus. The number one piece that we look at is the terminal that we operate. We have a long-term lease with the port authority of St. John’s and we maintain and operate the marine terminal there. That terminal is a key piece of infrastructure for our business to the island and one that we are working on with the port in terms of a long-term plan to ensure that it will deal with rising water levels, potentially more severe storms, rain and those types of events. It is in focus for us, but we spend more of our time and energy looking at alternate fuels and how we are going to be able to reduce our emissions going forward.
Senator Clement: And you keep data on this?
Mr. Hynes: Yes; absolutely.
Senator Simons: I want to try to come back to something that you will feel more comfortable answering. I’m afraid that I was a bit mean last time.
In the propane industry, obviously you are extremely reliant on this one transportation corridor. How much pressure are you putting on the rail companies to maintain those rails? What are you hearing when you speak to them about your concerns around being so vulnerable with just this one passageway?
Ms. Watt: That is a great question. We work as close as we can with the rail companies. It is not always an easy relationship. Making sure that our concerns are heard above everybody else’s concerns can be challenging because numerous sectors use those rail lines.
Mr. Boudreau, is this something that you can answer in terms of the concerns that you might be able to communicate to the rail companies in terms of risks?
Mr. Boudreau: For the most part, we have been putting pressure on CN and other rail companies, even in Nova Scotia. For example, rails were running from the New Glasgow area going to Sydney. However, those rail lines have been abandoned by the rail companies. More and more pressure is being put on the propane companies to get another alternative supply. In a lot of cases, the propane companies in Cape Breton, for example, are now fully reliant on trucks to get the product to Cape Breton whereas before they dealt with Cape Breton & Central Nova Scotia Railway, or CBNS. That option is no longer available.
A lot of pressure has been put on CN to try and improve their rail lines. They have a lot of excuses why they are not doing so. For the most part, fewer people are working on the rail lines than in the past. I do not think that the maintenance is where it should be based upon what I have seen in the past and based on comments about it from other people in the industry.
Senator Simons: Since you are running trucks through the isthmus, what is the state of the highway? What are you hearing from the Nova Scotia provincial department of highways about the maintenance of that highway? If we’re that concerned about the vulnerabilities of this one narrow piece of land, what are you doing to push for better roads?
Mr. Boudreau: Quite honestly, I think that most of us have gone to the department of highways to ask for better roads across the province. We are having issues not only there but across the entire province as well. I do not think that they are being maintained as they used to. A lot of provincial dollars supposed to be spent on road tax are spent in other avenues.
Personally, we have gone to the Nova Scotia transportation department about the roads and looking for improvement, but I think it is a province-wide issue more than just in that area.
Senator Simons: The same question to you.
Mr. Hynes: In that region, we work with subcontractors who are owning and operating the trucking companies that provide that service today. We talk to them regularly. We understand that they are engaged with the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia about the conditions of the infrastructure. In recent time, we have not had an active voice on that issue. Going forward, however, I think we will make it a priority.
Senator Simons: Yes. If you are this reliant on one piece of road, it would be good if people were talking about it.
From a ports perspective, have the various ports that you have worked with shown any urgency in addressing the kinds of vulnerabilities to climate change that you outlined earlier?
Mr. Hynes: Absolutely. There’s been tremendous investment in the Port of Halifax not only with the port authority but also with PSA Halifax, the terminal operator there. There’s also been investments in the Port of Montreal. The water level issue in Montreal is a bit different than the one in Halifax. It is not ocean water there but river water coming down. In recent years, we have seen increased water levels in the river as a result of more water coming out of the Great Lakes system. It is a key topic on the mind of both the ports and the operators that we work with there, as well as the Port of St. John’s.
Senator Simons: Thank you.
Senator Richards: Do you know the percentage by rail and the percentage by truck that you receive? How much is coming by truck now compared to the days of rail in the fifties and sixties, a time that’s pretty much gone now? Do you know what percentage of the product is coming through by truck?
Mr. Hynes: What we receive at the Port of Halifax is all coming by truck and what ultimately is received at the Port of North Sydney would be coming by truck. Whether the truck originated in Halifax or in Moncton, I cannot speak to that.
Senator Richards: You mentioned the rail. Where does the rail come into it, from Montreal or from Moncton? Is that what you are saying or is it all truck?
Mr. Hynes: Rail does play a key role in the sense of getting freight for distribution within the province of Nova Scotia.
Senator Richards: I see.
Mr. Hynes: It does for some. There are some distribution centres in the Halifax area, but the vast majority are in Moncton.
Senator Richards: So when you go across on the marshes, that is all truck?
Mr. Hynes: That is correct.
Senator Richards: Okay. I was confused because you were mentioning rail and all I have seen down there are a thousand trucks.
Mr. Hynes: Yes. That’s right.
Mr. Boudreau: In relation to the propane side, approximately 60% would come by rail into Nova Scotia and the balance would probably come in by truck. The railcars carry about 100,000 litres of propane while the truck conventionally may bring in 50,000 or 60,000 litres of propane. It is more convenient to bring it in by rail where it is possible. There are very limited amounts.
Senator Richards: Thank you for that.
Mr. Boudreau: No problem.
Mr. Hynes: The trades outside of Oceanex services is heavily serviced by rail.
The Chair: Thank you to the witnesses on behalf of the committee, my colleagues, for answering our questions this evening.
Honourable senators, we continue our in-depth study of the impacts of climate change on transportation infrastructure on the Chignecto Isthmus.
For our second panel this evening, we are pleased to hear from some of the municipalities situated on the isthmus, Mayor David Kogon, Mayor of the town of Amherst in Nova Scotia, welcome; and Mayor Andrew Black, Mayor of the Municipality of Tantramar in New Brunswick, welcome.
We will begin with opening remarks from each of the mayors whom we have before us here and, after that, we will proceed with Q & A.
Mr. Kogon, you will have the floor to start.
David Kogon, Mayor, Nova Scotia, Town of Amherst: It is truly an honour to be here. I thank you for the invitation.
I am David Kogon. I am the Mayor of the town of Amherst, Nova Scotia. We are here to speak to you regarding Bill S-273, An Act to declare the Chignecto Isthmus Dykeland System and related works to be for the general advantage of Canada.
I became mayor of Amherst in the fall of 2016. The then mayor of Sackville, New Brunswick John Higham, met with me and brought me up to speed on the severe threats that were facing the dikeland infrastructure on the isthmus of Chignecto and the consequent threat to the highway and rail transportation infrastructure that crosses the isthmus. Ultimately, he and I met with our two MPs; it was Dominic LeBlanc from Beauséjour, New Brunswick and Bill Casey from Cumberland—Colchester, Nova Scotia.
These initial meetings led to the procurement of $700,000 for the development of an engineering study referred to as the Chignecto Isthmus Climate Change Adaptation Comprehensive Engineering and Feasibility Study. Three hundred and fifty thousand dollars was contributed by the federal government and $175,000 from each of the two provincial governments.
The purpose of the study was to expeditiously mitigate the impacts of climate change on the communities and farmlands located within the Chignecto Isthmus. As Mayor of Amherst, I am primarily concerned with the protection of my town from the effects of climate change, and maintaining our transportation corridor links to New Brunswick and the rest of the country.
I have structured my remarks to highlight how a breach of the dike infrastructure and subsequent flooding of the Chignecto Isthmus would negatively impact my town, the surrounding area and how those impacts would be felt on a national scale, and beyond.
A flooded Chignecto Isthmus would disrupt the rail line, the Trans-Canada Highway, the power distribution lines, a natural gas pipeline and the windmills in the area.
A significant portion of the town of Amherst, estimated at approximately 25% to 33%, would be flooded if the isthmus of Chignecto were to flood. Specific protection of the dikeland system safeguards the transportation corridor, Amherst and other nearby communities and vast areas of fertile farmland. The areas of land protected by the dikes are below sea level. If this area were to flood, the water would not recede; it would be permanent, with major consequences.
There is an increased frequency of major storm events in recent years. Urgency is being placed on this issue due to concern that one of the next severe weather events will coincide with the high tide, which would breach the dikes and flood the isthmus permanently.
Amherst, Nova Scotia and Sackville, New Brunswick share strong economic and social ties. Many people are crossing the provincial border, and the isthmus, for frequent family or social visits and on a daily basis to attend work.
Furthermore, approximately 40% of Amherst retail activity is based on traffic from New Brunswick which relies almost exclusively on the highway transportation corridor that crosses the isthmus. Per The Chronicle Herald,90% of the food consumed in Nova Scotia is imported through the Chignecto Isthmus transportation corridor. Without the ability to receive shipments in this way, it is estimated that Nova Scotia would completely run out of imported food in approximately five days.
Inversely, the Chignecto Isthmus is the main entry point for goods from Europe to reach the rest of Canada and the United States, having been shipped through the Port of Halifax. A flood to the transportation corridor crossing the isthmus would completely stop this flow of goods. A total of $50 to $55 million worth of goods travel this corridor each day. This is approximately $35 billion annually.
Amherst depends on continued protection of the centuries-old dikeland systems. A failure of this network would be catastrophic for my town and its citizens. Beyond local impacts, our critical trade networks would break down the instant that floodwaters affect the Chignecto Isthmus, road and rail transportation corridor.
For all of these reasons, we must proceed with the declaration of the Chignecto Isthmus dikelands system and related works as critical for the general advantage of Canada.
I thank you for the opportunity to share this with you and, later on, will be happy to take any questions.
The Chair: Thank you. Honourable colleagues, Bill Casey, former Member of Parliament for Cumberland—Colchester, has shared some briefs with us, because he could not be here this evening. All of you should have those. It was distributed by the clerk.
I turn the floor over first to Mayor Andrew Black.
Senator Simons: I would like to clarify as a point of order why our witnesses are here.
The Chair: You can clarify the point of order.
Senator Simons: In fairness to you, gentlemen, you are not here to discuss the bill. That is not what this committee is dealing with, at all. Just so that you understand, we are not debating Senator Quinn’s bill. We are not discussing the subject matter of Senator Quinn’s bill. This is a separate committee, the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, which is looking at the transportation corridor and its vulnerability to climate change. I just feel that if you were given incorrect information, I want you to understand why I reacted that way because this is not the time or place for that debate.
The Chair: Senator — Mayor — Black, maybe a senator one day.
Andrew Black, Mayor, New Brunswick, Town of Tantramar: Mr. Chair and members of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, I want to thank you for this opportunity to be a witness before you today. My name is Andrew Black and I am the Mayor of Tantramar, formerly the municipality of Sackville, Dorchester. I am also the president of the Union of Municipalities of New Brunswick and, as such, have a seat on the Board of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. I am here today to speak to you about the tenuous position that my community is in regarding the Chignecto Isthmus, and the fear and concern that we live with day by day. My beautiful community is situated on the banks of the Tantramar River, which is connected to the mighty Bay of Fundy directly, home to the highest tides anywhere on earth. Remember that.
We are also situated on the breathtaking Tantramar Marsh and countless salt and freshwater marsh areas.
The people of Tantramar count themselves lucky for living where we live, and the chocolatey mud flats, the stark flat beauty of the marsh and the teeming biodiversity of those areas have been engrained and interwoven into our history, art, music, culture, educational opportunities, tourism and economy.
Mr. Chair, there is constant dread that it will all be washed away in one perfect storm. The Chignecto Isthmus, as was said, is a narrow piece of land that connects New Brunswick to Nova Scotia, stretching from the Bay of Fundy on one side to the Northumberland Strait on the other. Most of that land is well under sea level and it would take little effort to inundate it with floodwater. The former town of Sackville had its fair share of floods in its past with many parts of the town under water in 1962, more recently in 2015 and once more in 2016 from freshwater floating, exasperated by high winds, high tides and storm surges from the Bay of Fundy.
In 2022, Hurricane Fiona blew through the Atlantic provinces, and my community saw damage and destruction from downed trees and flooding that was significant.
Mr. Chair, I’m here today to say that we dodged a bullet. If the hurricane had followed a different path and the tides had been right, the dikes would have been breached, the CN rail bed washed over and my community would have been under water and cut off from the vital connection to Nova Scotia.
Last month, we dodged a bullet again when Hurricane Lee made landfall, this time having the storm track directly up the Bay of Fundy on the day/night of the highest tides and a full moon. Fortunately, it was starting to blow itself out and was not as bad as people had expected, but the anxiety and fear on people’s minds in my community leading up to that storm was palpable. The reason for this, Mr. Chair, is because we are all aware now after the floods of the past and a quickly changing climate that it is not a matter of “if” but a matter of “when” the isthmus will be under water.
The truth is that what the dikes and the CN rail line that parallels the Trans-Canada Highway protect is difficult to quantify because the impacts of such a devastating situation as a breach are too complicated to list. But I will do my best here today for my community.
Let me start, Mr. Chair, with an easy statistic: roughly $40 billion, as has been said, travels across the only — only — trade corridor between the two provinces per year. To boil that down, that is just shy of $770 million a week. Within some of that amount is trade that is associated with my community, either importing or exporting, which means that that trade would be shut down if there were a breach. As a result of the proximity of the town of Amherst, many citizens travel to work there. This, too, would be shut down. There are even more people who access shopping and services in Amherst and beyond who would not be able to do so if the isthmus flooded.
Our province, like others, is having a challenging time with health care service delivery to the point that our local hospital in Tantramar almost shut its doors in 2020. The Amherst Hospital with its increased level of service has been life-saving to my community, and once again, being cut off would put Tantramar in a terrible, potentially life-threatening situation.
Tantramar has a strong backbone in terms of agricultural economy, and many farms are located on the sweeping Tantramar Marsh. The ocean would move across this land efficiently and rapidly, submitting arable pasture land to saltwater that would ruin it for years to come. The last point that I will make, Mr. Chair, is the impact on the municipality, directly. Many people would lose their homes, jobs, businesses and schools to the ocean. The municipality would lose its property and infrastructure, from parkland to community buildings, from roads to retention ponds.
Our municipal asset loss would be catastrophic. These are the fears that everyone in Tantramar lives with day-to-day, and it is even worse at this time of year during the hurricane season. As I spoke about in my opening, these fears are so present because we feel like we are on borrowed time.
Mr. Chair and members of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, I thank you once more for this opportunity and I invite you to come to Tantramar and see firsthand the impacts of a changing climate and the situation that exists around the Chignecto Isthmus. Thank you again for your time.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Simons: I want to apologize to Mayor Kogon because you gave a great speech, but I just want you to understand that we’re doing something different here.
We’re focusing on the transportation network, but you gentlemen, Mayor Black and Mayor Kogon, have given us a great overview of the fear in which your communities live.
I wonder if you could explain to us how vulnerable the dikes are. How much more vulnerable does climate change make them, and how vulnerable are the roads and rails now? As I say, this is not about jurisdiction or who is responsible; we need someone to tell us what the problem is.
Mr. Black: Thank you for the question, through the chair. I would say, in my personal opinion, as I’m not a road engineer and I do not build roads, that the road corridor that is a part of the Chignecto Isthmus is actually in fairly good shape. As was said earlier by somebody on the last panel, the roads in New Brunswick are not in the best of shape, but that piece of the Trans-Canada Highway is actually in pretty good shape. With regard to the rail line, it would be interesting to hear from CN and ask them exactly what the condition of that rail line is. I know in 2015, there was a storm that blew through with significant surges, and there is a picture that is stark — you can find it online — of the rail bed with water from the ocean and the Bay of Fundy lapping at the wheels of a train crossing that piece of infrastructure.
Senator Simons: That puts it into perspective.
Mr. Black: I’m reasonably sure that that piece of infrastructure was probably a little bit at risk after that storm event. I think it would be interesting to hear from CN. That being said, the road is in good shape, but if it were to be washed over, if the water were to come over, it would put it underwater, in which case that infrastructure would start to wear away.
Senator Simons: It would be a very good road under the water, but it would not be of much use to people.
The problem then, as are you explaining it, is not so much the road or the rail; it’s the potential for the dikes to fail, which would inundate the entire area.
Mr. Black: Yes, right. Quickly, if I may, Mr. Chair, in 2015 that rail line with the water lapping at the edges, represented a situation in which the dikes had failed. They had already failed. The last thing that kept the water back was the rail line because it was a little higher than the dikes.
Senator Simons: Wow. So, it actually functioned as a mini-dam.
Mr. Black: Right.
Senator Simons: Mayor Kogon, you pointed out something that I had not understood before, that this is not just a question of things going from New Brunswick to Nova Scotia; it is a question of everything coming from the Port of Halifax in the other direction. So, at your end of the isthmus, how vulnerable are the road and rail bed to flooding in the area that you are in?
Mr. Kogon: That’s the point. The dikes are centuries old and gradually eroding on their own. The sea level is rising. It was predicted some years ago that if the sea-level rise were to continue at the rate it was, there would be a permanent breach around 2100. So that is not what is giving us the urgency that we see today.
What we’re worried about is what occurred, for example, in 1869, which was the Saxby Gale. There was a high tide, a full moon and a hurricane came through. The isthmus flooded, lives were lost, livestock was lost. It was a terrible disaster.
We now feel that because we are seeing the sea levels rise, it will take less of a storm to breach the dikes, and our storms are getting more frequent and more intense. Someone quoted me, and I like to repeat, that the storm of a lifetime has become an annual event. When we look back over the last three or four years, we’ve had more hurricanes than we’ve had in many years prior.
The vulnerability due to climate change is the issue. It’s not that the dikes are destroyed, but they’ll be overcome by one of these storms. So the rail line being in good condition, the road being in good condition and the power lines being in good condition will all be for naught when the flood occurs.
We are vulnerable. We could have a high tide, full moon and hurricane at any time. That’s why we feel there is a major urgency to getting mitigation efforts started.
Senator Simons: And municipalities are always the very first level of government that’s responsible in a time of disaster.
Thank you very much. That’s incredibly helpful.
Mr. Kogon: Thank you.
Senator Richards: I agree with Senator Simons. It was a great presentation by both of you. Speaking to you there at the school, I did not know what you told me. I thought the dikes were managed much better than they are. That was my reticence in speaking earlier about previous storms, but you two saying the dikes haven’t been looked at and haven’t been kept up fills me with the consternation that I think you two have given us tonight.
Is there any idea how high the Fundy tides have risen? Have they risen over the last while, or do you know if the Fundy tides have come up? They’re the highest tides in the world. I wonder if they’ve risen or if anyone has noticed that.
Mr. Kogon: What I’ve been told is the Fundy tides remain much the same as they’ve always been. However, because the sea level is rising, the high tides are higher than they used to be and getting higher every day. So it is becoming more of a threat, and our vulnerability is more apparent.
Senator Richards: Has your concern about the dikes and the repairing of the dikes fallen on deaf ears?
Mr. Black: As we were talking about earlier, there are some dike systems — aboiteaux they’re called, which is a water‑release structure — that are very old; some are newer. With the Bay of Fundy being particular in its makeup, especially in its mud, they get silted very quickly. The Department of Natural Resources and Energy Development or the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure in New Brunswick, certainly at the local level, they can try to keep up on fixing up some of the aboiteaux, but it’s really just throwing a snowball at an avalanche. It doesn’t do anything. It might solve a local problem, but it doesn’t solve the overall issue of the dikes. They are not maintained the way they should be to keep them up.
Senator Richards: It’s like the little Dutch boy.
Mr. Black: Mayor Kogon made the point that even if they had been fixed up to the level that they should have been over the years, they still would have breached. 2015 was a perfect example of that. The water just spilled over them. It’s not that the aboiteaux would have solved that water problem. It would have gone over regardless.
Senator Richards: Thank you.
Senator Quinn: I want to thank Senator Simons for her question, too, and I agree. We’re dealing with two different topics. The bill is not the issue here. It’s the critical infrastructure associated with the area and the effects of climate change on that critical infrastructure. Through the presentations and in answering the questions, you’ve certainly touched on that and brought more clarity to it. I just want to be sure that we all understand that these are two separate streams of activity, if I can call it that.
The Chair: The good news is we don’t have to bring back Mayor Kogon twice. We can thank him for saving us a bit of time.
Senator Quinn: Let’s see where we go with the bill.
In any case, what I want to do is build on the questions and the answers that were given. The pieces of infrastructure that are at risk with climate change are the dikes themselves. There have been studies done to look at those dikes to see what can be done in the face of climate change. Could you talk about what those studies talked about in terms of vulnerability? Why are they even looking at it now if climate change is not something that is concerned?
Second, I know the statistic from way back about the sea-level rise was quoted. I would be remiss if I didn’t make the observation that sea-level rise, I believe, has increased dramatically over the last number of years with the effects of climate change collectively. That would, I assume, have much more of an effect.
I would like to hear about the work that was done and why now.
Mr. Kogon: My awareness of the history of the threat becoming apparent — this is through Bill Casey — is it began with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change back in 2007. It identified the two big threat to areas in North America. That was the city of New Orleans and the Chignecto Isthmus. To quote from their report:
Some large cities (e.g., New Orleans) and important infrastructure (e.g., the only highway and rail link between Nova Scotia and the rest of Canada) are located on or behind dykes that will provide progressively less protection unless raised on an ongoing basis.
I know Mr. Casey, as an MP, had this before the House of Commons as far as back as 2009. So we’ve known about the concern and the threat for a long time. That’s what led to us being able to procure $700,000 and have an engineering study done. That study presented 10 different options for mitigation. The top three are under consideration currently by the two provinces because it is under provincial control at the present time.
As a local municipal leader, I was concerned that one option under consideration might be to just simply build a bridge and let the area flood, which would not have been acceptable. Thankfully, none of the three options that are under consideration do that. They protect the transportation corridor, the marshlands and the two large communities that border on the Tantramar marsh.
There is work being done, and I’m told that behind the scenes of the high-level politicians discussing and negotiating who will pay, that planning is ongoing as to what will likely be done.
I’m not technically expert enough to be able to give you any opinion on what type of mitigation efforts on those dikes would be the best or the most effective. That’s not my field of expertise. I am hearing that it’s not just the best thing to raise the dikes and support the dikes with steel infrastructure, and there may be a place for natural saltwater marshes to be part of the plan. Apparently, it would be less expensive, more effective and more environmentally friendly. But that’s not for me to judge. As I say, my background is nothing to do with this kind of technology, so I couldn’t really comment. But the recognition that this is an absolutely vital issue to be dealt with has been accepted by everybody I’ve ever talked to at all levels of government: federal, provincial and, obviously, municipal.
Senator Quinn: Do you have anything to add, Mr. Black?
Mr. Black: I have one thing to add quickly. The three options were to raise the existing dikes, add some bigger dikes, or do a combination of both of those with a massive control structure near the Tantramar River. All three of the options are building bigger. The reason for that is because there is a recognition that the rail line is the highest dike currently. The acknowledgement is that the dikes have already failed. It’s just about building things bigger to get them up to a certain point where the water can be stopped. So I think it’s important to remember that we’re not trying to fix the dikes because the dikes are already broken, and they’re too small. It’s not going to work. It really is about building something new. It happened in New Orleans when they built a new wall out in the ocean to try to keep the water away. The same thing will happen here. That’s what they’re looking at. They’re looking at just building bigger to get to that point where the water can stay back.
The Chair: From the three options that are being proposed, what’s the ballpark figure in terms of what kind of resources are required?
Mr. Black: Thank you for the question. The most expensive option, which is to do a combination of both and a fairly significant controlled structure near the Tantramar River, was — at the time that the study was written — $300 million. That was a few years ago. The study has been around for a while, and nothing has been happening. It’s been bouncing like a ball back and forth between orders of government. Therefore, of course, that price has ballooned, like everything else, with inflation and rising costs. The estimate for the largest project is around $600 million. So it has doubled in price.
The Chair: I gather the longer it goes before it’s resolved, with inflation being what it is —
Mr. Black: Right. If I may, the study was 10 years. It proposed a 10-year plan. Five years of it is actually doing some work to get to a point where a shovel could be in the ground. We’re already two and a little bit years past when the study was finished, and it’s doubled in price. Add on five years of study to get to the point where a shovel is in the ground, then that price is just going to continue to increase.
Senator Clement: Thank you both for being here. I appreciate your testimony.
I want to disagree with you, Mayor Kogon. You as a mayor — and you, Mayor Black — do have expertise around infrastructure management and municipal management.
Thank you for inviting us to your community. It is so mayoral to invite people to come and spend money in their community. I love it.
The Chair: And it’s so senatorial for us to accept the invitation.
Senator Clement: I’m not going to touch that one.
When I was mayor of Cornwall, my concern was how much we as a city council felt out of the loop. When we were dealing with the provincial and federal orders of government, they didn’t loop us in. You talked about the top three recommendations. You talked about the provincial responsibility there. Are you sitting at those tables as mayors and councillors, informing that process? Because if you’re not, we’ve got some major problems in this country around dealing with climate crisis period — full stop.
Mr. Kogon: Well, I can tell you that I have felt out of the loop, as you say. I’m not an expert in what will be the best technical fix. That’s not what I’m arguing. As an advocate for something having to be done, absolutely I’m there front and centre. I have requested a meeting with the minister in Nova Scotia who has that portfolio. It hasn’t yet happened. I requested that meeting because I do want to — as you say — have input, be at the table and know what’s going on. Unfortunately, I have not been brought up to speed. A request to a colleague of mine who is a cabinet minister in the province, trying to arrange a meeting, has still not effected that. We have some challenges in getting the communication going, I’m sorry to report.
Senator Clement: I’m not surprised.
Mr. Black: I would echo that. I met with the former minister of the Department of Infrastructure in February and had a conversation about the Chignecto Isthmus one-on-one. We had a cabinet shuffle, so now there is a new minister. I haven’t had a conversation with that new minister yet, but I think there is a communication disconnect between the three orders of government. I was in Ottawa during the Federation of Canadian Municipalities advocacy days last December and mentioned the Chignecto Isthmus and the vulnerability of that stretch of land to the House of Commons Conservative Party critic, and he didn’t know anything about that at all. That’s not to place blame, because we’re over on the East Coast and maybe not a lot of people know about it. However, he was deeply concerned about it, so I had a further conversation with him.
I think we should put the message out about the vulnerability of the isthmus and what it means — potentially — nationally, provincially and at a local level. Communication in general between the orders of the government would also be great, and municipal leaders around the table would certainly be needed.
Senator Clement: Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I want to go on record as saying that I think this study needs to take this piece very seriously. This chronic disconnect between the orders of government really places all of our communities at great risk.
The Chair: It would certainly be a good focus for a case study.
Senator Simons: I was going to ask Senator Clement’s question, but since she asked it better than I ever could, I’m going to ask a follow-up question.
Presumably some of this transportation infrastructure runs right through your municipalities. What are your own emergency preparedness plans in the face of the kind of catastrophic weather event you’re describing? What are your own municipalities doing to prepare and safeguard the pieces of the transportation network that are within your boundaries?
Mr. Kogon: From my perspective, that was one of the reasons I wanted to meet with the minister involved, because to really have an effective emergency management plan, it needs to have provincial support. We don’t have resources to try to deal with it on that kind of a level. Other than evacuating and going further into Nova Scotia, we have no other ability to do anything.
There was a recent announcement by that particular minister in Nova Scotia that there is a plan either nearing completion or complete, but she stated in her interview that they could not reveal any details as yet. So that was another thing on my agenda for a meeting with her to discuss where we’re at with the isthmus issues — because that’s a very important point you make.
Senator Simons: Mayor Black?
Mr. Black: I think it should be noted that the difficulties around the flooding and our responses between Amherst and Tantramar/Sackville are very different. Nova Scotia is going to make out much worse in this situation. They’ll be cut off. New Brunswick will be cut off from Nova Scotia, but we’re still at least linked to the rest of the country. For Sackville — Tantramar — we now have a much larger town boundary. We went through a provincial amalgamation recently, so our new area is massive. The Trans-Canada Highway and the railbed you may have seen in pictures is entirely within our municipality. Only a piece of the Tantramar Marsh used to be in Sackville’s boundaries, and it is now in the new municipality of Tantramar. The entire thing is pretty much in our community.
Senator Simons: It’s like when Ottawa was amalgamated.
Mr. Black: Yes, we’ve taken on more responsibility.
Senator Simons: How large is the municipality now?
Mr. Black: It’s bigger than the city of Moncton in boundary. I can’t remember exactly the size we’ve taken in, but it’s significant. For us, too, there would be a retreat from the most vulnerable areas, but that’s really all we can do. We have invested heavily in our own community for our own flood-mitigation management. We’ve built retention ponds and tried to naturalize it rather than do grey infrastructure. We’ve done that incredibly well to protect our town from flooding — because we’ve seen it before. But if the Canadian National, or CN, rail breached, then all of that infrastructure — the $15 million plus we’ve invested in our community for infrastructure for our own flooding — would be gone.
Senator Simons: All right, so here’s my follow-up question: What do you hear? Do you have relations with CN? Have you met with and spoken with them? Because presumably they’re the largest company that is held hostage to this potential weather disaster.
Mr. Black: I was at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities AGM in Toronto in May. CN had a significant booth set up, so I was able to speak with the director of government relations for the Atlantic region through CN. I brought up the conversation of the Chignecto Isthmus. I think I said a few words, he responded, and then he followed up immediately with, “we’re not putting any money into it.”
Senator Simons: Well —
Mr. Black: Not to point a finger or be incredibly flippant, but that was the comment that was made. I think I’ll leave it there. We’ve had conversations with CN in the past. We want to bring them to the table to have conversations, but the private investment piece of it may need some work.
Senator Simons: Mayor Kogon, have you had any more luck with CN?
Mr. Kogon: Pretty much the same. We want to maintain a good relationship and not sell anyone out. But I think the expectation of CN is that this is a government responsibility at whatever level, be it provincial, federal or a combination of the two.
I get the impression — this is just a personal feeling — that the need to mitigate against a flood is so massively important that the provinces and CN can take the attitude that, well, the feds should pay for it. They really believe the feds will have to pay for it because it will have to be done; it is that important. I think it is a bit of a poker game. That’s a personal opinion. I’m trying to stay non-political when it comes to all of this. But as a bit of an amateur poker player myself, I like to think that’s a bit of a game that’s being played. Because it is so vitally important that mitigation happen, you can sit back and play it close to the chest, I think.
Senator Simons: Thank you very much.
Senator Richards: This is just a comment, but if the dikes are breached in a major storm, the event will probably cost more to repair than any dike will be to build, won’t it? If the marshes flooded and the town of Sackville — I didn’t know that it was no longer Sackville. But if it were flooded, and if Amherst were flooded, it would be a lot more than $600 million or whatever it will cost to repair or rebuild those dikes.
Mr. Black: For clarification, if I can, we are the municipality of Tantramar. The town of Sackville, the village of Dorchester and the other areas that make up that municipality still exist. It is a conversation that I have day in and day out, and I’m sure I will for a number of years.
Senator Richards: Thank you.
Mr. Black: Back in December I spoke with MP Gudie Hutchings of Newfoundland. She was talking about climate change. The federal language around that was that for every dollar spent on mitigation, there was $15 in savings in disaster relief. That was a year ago. That number could be higher now. I think $15 may be a little low. To your point, I think it would be much more expensive as a cleanup.
The Chair: Just a comment as we wrap up, unless there are any more questions.
Of course, we’re doing a study on the impacts of climate change on critical infrastructure, but it never ceases to amaze me how much wrangling goes on jurisdictionally between governments every time we need to repair critical bridges, viaducts and port investments. It’s mind-numbing. In this town, we seem to find hundreds of millions of dollars to spread around for all sorts of things. It is always amazing to me how infrastructure continuously makes it to the bottom of the priority list, given the fact that it’s so critical, both from a community and environmental point of view and in making sure our supply chains and economy run — which we have known for the last couple of years are under critical attack and in ICU, basically. Yet, governments just keep pointing fingers when it comes to taking care of these things.
Hopefully, our study will look at the particularities of this. Of course, I’ve been around this town long enough to know that it’s not a problem that began just last week or last month, but it seems to fester, as it has for years.
I would like to thank Mayor Kogon and Mayor Black for sharing their views with the committee.
(The committee adjourned.)