[Page 115]
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY
Mr. David Wilson (Sackville-Cobequid)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon, everybody. I'd like to call to order the Subcommittee on Supply and I call Resolution E7.
Resolution E7 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $44,334,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Environment, pursuant to the Estimate.
MR CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Environment.
HON. STERLING BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, it's a pleasure to be here in this particular historic building and I welcome all my colleagues, all the members from the respective Parties, and I look forward to engaging in this particular process.
I want to introduce to my left, Laurie Bennett, who will be assisting me in the next several hours and my deputy, Nancy Vanstone. I want to take the time here just to emphasize that usually you see politicians and there are a lot of staff, a lot of people behind them - so I can tell you, I'll probably thank them a number of times throughout my speeches. We are the ones who face the camera, but I can assure you there are a lot of people who are behind us who support us, and I just want to thank the quality of professionalism that I have here today with me.
[Page 116]
Mr. Chairman, it is my honour to present to you and my colleagues, and the people of Nova Scotia, the details of this year's budget for the Department of Environment. I am proud to be the Minister of Environment and we have accomplished many things since our government was elected in early June, and it will build on those accomplishments in this coming fiscal year. I just want to point out that it was a great privilege to go through the election process and see different individuals getting involved in a campaign where they felt important, they felt involved, they felt engaged with their community, and it was really fulfilling to have those 30 or 31 days and people in your community coming forward to engage in a process that you can make life better for today's people. It was really a pleasure to go through that, so I enjoyed that particular part of my life and here we are today.
My department's mission is to lead the way for all Nova Scotians to value, protect, and enhance our environment, and our mandate is to support and promote the protection and especially the enhancement and careful use of our environment. It's also to create, manage, and protect the wilderness areas, and to preserve, protect, and study ecological sites and promote understanding and appreciation among the people of Nova Scotia. It's also to conserve and allocate water resources to ensure long-term, self-sufficient utilization and also to promote the connection between a healthy economy and a healthy environment for the province's long-term prosperity. And fortunately, for me and for the people of Nova Scotia, we have a talented and dedicated workforce that helps us deliver this mandate - and I emphasize that right from the start.
Mr. Chairman, I draw a lot of connections - and I love the word "connections", because one of my first boats was named the French Connection, and the second boat - and I've had these boats for 15 or 20 years, each one of them - the second boat, well, for a 20- year duration was the Loose Connection, and the final boat that I've had is the Disconnection. I think that someone's going to say probably this is my "political connection", but, to me, I just want to stop and pause to think I spent a lifetime and I've had a lot of different careers, and I want to emphasize how important it is to have a good crew, pardon the word here.
In the fishing industry you always have strong individuals, many women who supply services, they work on your boat, and you can have a captain, but you are not going to be out there sometimes in inclement weather - and you can see rough waters in these Chambers, you don't have to be on the ocean to see some rough seas - I just want to point out that I have the experience of 38 years on the ocean and I was very privileged to have some very experienced people with me, actually we were very successful. I think I'm very fortunate to go to two departments, Environment, and I wear another hat, Fisheries and Aquaculture, but I'm also privileged to know that I have a good crew there, and I think we're all very satisfied with the work efforts that I have seen in the last four months. So I just want to point that out - they work in their jobs in countless ways every day to protect the environment and make life better for Nova Scotian families.
[Page 117]
Today we'll discuss only the highlights in our 2009-10 budget, but I'm also well aware that our past successes and our ambitions for the year ahead rely on the dedicated service and the hard work that is evident today from each member of our staff of 278 employees, and they're in 11 offices throughout Nova Scotia. So my task - and I can assure you that I intend to visit every area of this province - and I go back to my crew, basically when you have a good crew you can take pride in your work, and I'm sure that's very evident in what I've seen in the last four months here, this professionalism, to understand the issues, and when you have that success of enjoying your work you look forward to going to work each day, and it's evident.
I can go into a number of announcements that I'm probably going to talk about here in the next few minutes but you're going to see that reflected, that people are taking pride in their jobs, and it's going to be reflected in our mandate as we move forward. Working with them is certainly a privilege that I hope to enjoy for quite some time to come - and I'm sure the members opposite may have some other opinions on that, but right now I intend to make that somewhat of a longer career.
As you may know, I am a former fisherman and I made my living working closely with nature, and I've also spent many years on the municipal council dealing with environmental issues in our community such as solid waste and waste resources, and after you get to this particular level in politics, you get a chance sometimes to reflect on your life.
[4:00 p.m.]
We all come from different backgrounds and, to me, I think it's a big step from the deck of a Cape Sable Island fishing boat, something like 38 years, to the seat that I'm sitting in now, and life experience I think is probably the one, that each day you go on I think we are learning.
One of the issues that I wanted to just stop and reflect on is I spent nine years at the municipal level and then, if I can back up the clock at the rewind button here, back up to 12 or 15 years ago, in our small Municipality of Barrington there was a landfill - it was called a dump. It was not called a C&D Landfill, it was called simply "the dump" and to back up 15 years and know that you took all your household waste to that particular site and just dumped it there, and if you could forward, I spent something like nine years on council, and to see that transition where today that particular place is called a C&D Landfill.
There's a lot of involvement in there of the councils of the day, and councils right across Nova Scotia have changed their way of handling household waste. We are one of the leaders in Canada when it comes to taking that stream of waste away from our everyday landfills and to me, Barrington, the one that I was involved in, is a great example because today you go there and you'll see - first of all, you're welcomed by two or three employees - there are new jobs, there are actually new jobs that were created in the last ten years. You'll
[Page 118]
see a very organized landfill, and the first thing you'll see is a scale and it weighs all the weight that goes in, all the trucks that come in with the wood and with the fishing supplies.
I went through the exercise, Mr. Chairman, of seeing a lot of illegal dumps in our municipality and one of the issues that was brought around our caucus table - and I can tell you that this issue dominated that particular council chamber - is how to deal with illegal dumps and, as you know, Barrington, Shelburne County, has a fishing industry there, it's very heavily dominated by the fishing industry and one of the issues of these illegal dumps was a lot of unused or used traps that have expired, and a lot of the people wanted a way of handling these.
So if you can visualize a few traps in a legal dump site and if you multiply that by literally thousands of licences across the tri-counties, over a period of time when we said, okay, you can bring this stuff to the landfill, there were actually, literally 20,000 or 30,000 traps showing up and all of a sudden the local council had to come up with what are we going to do with these.
We had an opportunity to sit down and talk about the wood. We separated the metals, the steel, and we still had 20,000 or 30,000 wire traps and the number was increasing as we go, but to me the conclusion was that as the markets worldwide became hungry for steel and iron, all of a sudden we had a resource that people wanted. That little council made the right connections and they actually got sales for these wire traps - they were squashed, they were put together along with the metals, all the metals that were across the municipality, and they actually got a profit from all these used metals.
So if you could back up 25 or 20 years ago, basically there were a lot of illegal dumps out there and you had wood product that was not being reused or recycled, and today when you go in there you see a very organized C&D Landfill with a scale, people working, there are certain places for wood products and certain places for metal, and it goes on. To me it's one of the untalked-about success stories in Nova Scotia - that our C&D Landfills or C&D waste streams are a success story, and I think that we all want to recognize that. I think I have earned a healthy respect for our environment and a balance on this earth, and I also know the important relationship between protecting our environment and seeking economic prosperity from nature's resources - a healthy environment and a sound economy rely on each other, they go hand in hand.
I just want to point out, again, that life experiences, and I've had a number of them, when you stop and reflect on being connected with the fishing industry, I spent 10 years in aquaculture and the link between the environment and the fishing industry - a lot of people, and I've heard people since I took this office - some see it as a conflict. I actually see it as a complement; they complement each other. That's the point I want to take here, because life experiences have shown that in order to have a healthy fishery, you need a healthy or strong
[Page 119]
environment, and if you have a strong and healthy environment you will have a healthy fishery.
I can show you that in a number of examples. For instance, in the lobster industry, my partners and I, and my competition, fished for years, and almost on a seasonal basis they store lobsters waiting for the price to go up. They store them in homemade lobster cars - that's what they're called, homemade lobster cars. They're anchored off - and I've seen at one time eight of my colleagues, we had close to $750,000 combined, sitting there, just holding, waiting for the price to go up in a few weeks, usually before Christmas.
To look back on that, there was a lot of common sense, there was a lot of preparation in the knowing where to put these lobster cars, because when you have a product and if you have close to $750,000 sitting there amongst eight or nine fishermen - usually that's, if you multiply that by five or ten, on the boats, the families - you can see that it is important that the location of those particular lobster cars for that storage is in a very clean environment. The fishermen are paying attention to where these lobster cars are located - they appreciate the importance of water quality.
One of the things that I've learned is that when I steam into the harbour and when you look at water, a fisherman can look at water and just by looking into the depth of it, the clarity of the water, you can tell whether you're going to have surface water, rainwater, as we refer to it, just by simply looking at the depth, how far you look down into it. The fishermen are very aware of the environmental surroundings - when you make a decision to put $750,000 worth of product in a place you're going to pay attention to the environment.
So when the people talk about an opportunity for Fisheries and Environment to have two portfolios, I think it is a great opportunity, myself, and that's just one example.
I have been in the position of the Minister of Environment for about three months and we have been hard at work working under these particular guiding principles, and I'm pleased to say that we have already achieved a good number of important accomplishments within this short time.
Mr. Chairman, our 2009 Climate Change Action Plan has more than 60 actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants and help us adapt to an already changing environment. I'm pleased to report that our government has made Nova Scotia one of the first provinces to impose hard caps on greenhouse gases and air pollutant emissions from electrical power generating facilities. This will make a big difference in our emissions because electricity makes up almost 50 per cent of our province's greenhouse gas emissions. We are very serious about addressing climate change with clear actions. The emission caps we already had in place on power producers will help make Nova Scotia a cleaner and greener place for families, for visitors, businesses and others. We will ensure that Nova Scotia is no longer one of the most fossil fuel dependent provinces in Canada. I think that is a very clear statement and a strong message.
[Page 120]
Mr. Chairman, wetlands are also important in our landscape. They hold water back after storms and they help in preventing floods. They filter, they clean water and they are critical to habitats and rare endangered species. I am pleased to report that our government has invited Nova Scotians to comment on a draft for the new Wetland Conservation Policy. The draft policy highlights the important role wetlands play in Nova Scotia's landscape and the value to both human society and nature. This policy will commit us to manage Nova Scotia's wetlands. We will balance the need to keep wetlands safe and useful, with sustainable land use and economic development.
Our government aims to make Nova Scotia one of the cleanest and greenest environments in the world. That is why, in August, we had contributed funding for a new green building at the Nova Scotia Community College Waterfront Campus. I just want to take the time to move away from my notes, and I know that it may be still under construction but when it is open for the public's view, I encourage all members here today to encourage their constituents to go and see it. I was really impressed with the different forms of technology used there and again, simply, the light that is going through that particular building and all the green roofs, it really was a pleasure to stop and see that building. So I encourage you to get out and get the message out to your constituents and get some people there.
The Centre for the Built Environment will meet some of the highest standards and energy efficiency and sustainability. The $1.4 million grant came from ecoNova Scotia for Clean Air and Climate Change Fund, which is managed by the Departments of Environment and Energy.
The fund will help purchase and install equipment at the centre, including solar panels, geothermal heating, cooling systems and wind turbines. I have had the pleasure of touring that building with some of my colleagues here today, and believe me, I was simply impressed. Like I say, I encourage the public to go and visit it. To me - I was asked by one of the reporters what I thought of the building, and there was a little joke, one of my first questions in the House I used a prop and I'll never forget that learning experience - the building is the prop. I will pause there because I remember going to school and having show and tell, the building is showing and telling Nova Scotians that we can have a clean and greener environment. So the building does it for me. Anyway, I encourage everybody to go out and see this.
An environmental assessment helps us make the right decisions for environment protection and sustainability development. It evaluates the potential of environmental effects before major developments are allowed to be built. Environmental assessment designs are made with the help of the public and various government departments and agencies. On September 15th I decided to approve the Fundy tidal power demonstration project subject to strict conditions to protect the environment.
[Page 121]
I just want to stop there for a second. Because I know there were a number of media interests regarding the tidal power and, to me, there were a number of conditions in there. One of them was dealing with monitoring, another one was an advisory committee, the third one was to have the authority for the minister to stop the project at any time if there was any adverse effect. I think those conditions really capture the potential, to know that the potential is there in the Bay of Fundy, to understand that, and to do that in a cautious approach.
[4:15 p.m.]
I want to commend the staff for doing that, for getting those conditions in there because, first of all, the advisory committee needs to have academics. They have to also have fishermen from that area and I want to assure the members who are collected here today that I read the report from the fishermen in that area and I'm confident that this particular panel will address the issues that were raised by these fishermen and as a former fisherman, I know and understand their concerns.
I also was impressed with the design of the three projects. I think a fisherman will probably have a little bit more understanding and appreciation of those three designs. The three designs in the tidal power, I just want to point out that the first one was basically on the seabed. It was just several metres off the bed and fishermen are going to be particularly interested in migration of lobsters, something on that particular project design. The second one was similar to the first but it was 10 or 15 more metres off the seabed, and it makes a difference because the migration movement of lobsters is going to be different from herring that's swimming and moving in the water column. These are very important demonstration projects to answer all these questions.
The third one was higher in the water column and, to me, the individual who designed these is going to answer a lot of questions in this demonstration project. I think their homework was done to get a lot of these questions that will be evaluated by this particular panel and the other monitoring condition to monitor the effects of the possible vibrations, to have the cables laid and all that. I felt very confident that these advisory boards would see these conditions are going to be met, that the potential is there.
I think I've heard the mayor of Parrsboro, and I've heard other members across Nova Scotia - I pay attention to their comments regarding that - they talk about the potential. I want to pause there because a lot of people don't realize that the Bay of Fundy starts at the entrance to Georges Bank, 150 miles southwest of Cape Sable Island. Cape Sable Island is the other entrance point to the Bay of Fundy. It's quite a drive from Cape Sable Island, if you envision the horseshoe, Cape Sable Island, up along the French Shore, up around Parrsboro, and we go up to our neighbouring community New Brunswick, and we can drive down toward Grand Manan. The depth of the water, the depth and the tidal range in that particular Bay of Fundy, the potential there, I don't think any of us in this room can understand the volume of that particular energy source.
[Page 122]
I was thinking last night when I was speaking on this that I was taught as a young fisherman, we would go out handlining by ourselves, we would go early in the morning. There are four tides in a day. Every 24 hours there are four tides and we would go out and try to fish three of the tides. We would get an early morning tide and we were basically something like 16 hours or 18 hours on the ocean each day and we would try to get sleep in between the tides. One of the things that the old fishermen taught us was paying attention to the environment - so we'd anchor and we would be waiting for the tide to slack up so we could fish the next tide. This was important because that's when the fish bite.
The point I'm trying to make here is, you'd anchor and the boat and the engine would be in neutral and the shaft of that boat, which weighs thousands of pounds with a propeller on it and the force from the tide that's moving in the Bay of Fundy would create a noise, it would create the shaft turning freely. This was just free energy, free energy that's created by the Bay of Fundy and we knew when to get up to go fishing was when the shaft stopped turning. I can still hear that noise to this day.
If you can visualize from Cape Sable Island, around that horseshoe, right up to Grand Manan, that you can take a boat and you can go out four times a day in the height of that tide and you can stop and anchor, put the boat in gear, take the engine out of gear and you can hear the shaft turning. It is done by the tidal power in that Bay of Fundy that is being affected by the moon and the effect that has on the Bay of Fundy. That is one of the wonders of the world, as far as I'm concerned, to know that we have that potential.
I ask all of you, how many boats can anchor in the Bay of Fundy and listen to that shaft move? These three little demonstration projects here are aimed something like 1.5 kilometres by four or five kilometres. It's in the strongest currents, but just imagine the potential of that and for us to be at a stage when we want to live in a cleaner and greener environment, the potential - I don't think any of us can grasp that.
I think a lot of us are looking forward to the next 10 or 15 years just to see how that project turns out. I want to emphasize, before I move on here, that those are important questions and concerns regarding the fishing industry and I think that I feel confident that the advisory board - and I encourage members from all over Nova Scotia, I encourage you to take that back to your constituency and encourage members to be involved and engaged in that process and get on those particular advisory boards.
Our government aims to make Nova Scotia one of the cleanest and greenest environments in the world, that is why, in August, we contributed funding for a new green building in Nova Scotia Community College's Waterfront Campus. The Fundy Ocean Research Centre for Energy must develop a comprehensive environment monitoring program, which I talked about earlier. They must also establish an environmental effects advisory committee. The advisory committee must include both qualified academics and representatives from the fishing industry community. The committee will independently
[Page 123]
review the monitoring and information and the results. The committee will be struck before a device is in the water. The committee's terms of reference must be approved by the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
We recognize that the energy potential of Nova Scotia tides and we support the possibility of clean energy generation. We must make sure that we are cautious and careful as we move to develop this particular tidal energy. We must identify and remedy the possible harmful effects on fish, on whales, and on the unique and valuable Fundy environment.
In December we announced almost $900,000 in funding for projects that will help reduce greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions. This funding comes from the ecoNova Scotia for Clean Air and Climate Change fund. It supports municipalities, businesses and researchers. I had the pleasure of travelling to the communities in different parts of the province to announce almost $900,000 in funding for projects that will help reduce greenhouse gases and air pollutant emissions.
In Lunenburg I announced $85,000 for six projects along the South Shore. In Wolfville I announced $655,000 for five projects in the Annapolis Valley and on the Digby Shore. Our department also announced an additional $135,000 in ecoNova Scotia funding for five more clean air projects. Four of these projects are in the central region while one is in the northern region of our province. Some of the projects announced included new energy efficiency technology for the Town of Lunenburg that will run seven of its buildings, like the town hall and the Lunenburg auditorium, in a more environmentally friendly and most cost-efficient way. The projects will improve the lighting, insulation, and the building system and heating system operations. These improvements will help reduce greenhouse gases and the air pollutants that will result in a cleaner, greener community.
The Dayspring and District Fire Hall, also in the Municipality of the District of Lunenburg, will receive almost $9,000 for a solar demonstration project. The Town of Mahone Bay, Lockeport in Shelburne County, as well the Municipality of Shelburne, will receive more than $30,000 to conduct energy inventories and audits for the municipal infrastructure. The Town of Truro will receive $10,000 to conduct an energy audit of a municipal infrastructure. This will help the town better understand how it's using its energy and where the best opportunities exist for cutting its energy use and cost. A Truro development company will receive about $61,000 under the ecoNova Scotia Environmental Technology Program. This money will be used to design and install a large, storage-capacity, solar hot-water system.
The Town of Westville will receive about $44,000 for energy retrofit of its police and fire departments. The Town of Antigonish will receive $10,000 to conduct an energy inventory and audit. The Municipality of the County of Victoria, in Cape Breton, will receive about $8,000 for an energy inventory and audit. Also, the Town of Wolfville will receive more than $40,000 to help reduce its energy use. It is retrofitting the heating system at the
[Page 124]
Public Works Building and it's in the town hall, the fire station, and ambulance facility. This project will allow the town to run its buildings in a more environmentally friendly and cost-effective way. Acadian Seaplants Limited of Cornwallis will receive $250,000 for a sand and seaweed byproduct recovery project. West Nova Agro Commodities Limited in Lawrencetown will receive $162,000 for the development of a heat-recovery system for the grain-drying industry. The Municipality of the District of Digby will receive $190,000 for energy efficiency renovations to its municipal office buildings. The Municipality of the District of West Hants will receive $10,000 to conduct an energy inventory and audit of their municipal infrastructure.
[4:30 p.m.]
Through the ecoNova Scotia Fund we are creating a healthy and cleaner environment in the province, and again, Mr. Chairman, I want to just take the time to encourage my fellow colleagues who are around the table tonight to make their constituents aware of this particular program. There may be some applications out there in your respective constituencies and I would appreciate it if you would pass that on to the appropriate people.
Mr. Chairman, I'm very happy to report that Nova Scotians have a few new protected wilderness areas to enjoy near the Eastern Shore of the Halifax Regional Municipality. The designation of Ship Harbour Long Lake Wilderness Area helps protect the environment. It gives today's families a protected place to hike, kayak, canoe and enjoy nature in a unique and beautiful part of Nova Scotia. Again, it really moves me emotionally to know that we're not doing it for ourselves, to protect these areas, I think we're doing it for our grandchildren. They're the ones who are going to really appreciate that and I have to commend the government and I know there were a lot of people, and I include all governments, all Parties, all the people who were involved, and the work that went into Ship Harbour Long Lake, they need to be commended. I think that is something that our grandchildren are going to appreciate.
With the help and the support of ecotourism it will bring a variety of economic opportunities to this particular region. The wilderness area will also help to clean and keep the air clean. The forest and the wetlands are a natural carbon storage system. This wilderness area stores more than five million tons of carbon, the amount emitted by 950,000 cars in just one year. Ship Harbour Long Lake Wilderness Area is part of our government's commitment to protect at least 12 per cent of Nova Scotia's land mass by 2015.
A couple of weeks ago I attended the Council of Atlantic Environment Ministers meeting in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. I am happy to report that we discussed some important issues - cosmetic pesticides, climate change and solid waste management. On the point of cosmetic pesticides, I'm aware of the concerns regarding the unnecessary use and the misuse of pesticide products. Our government is reviewing the issue and will develop the most appropriate response to deal with these concerns. We are also looking at ways to
[Page 125]
co-operate with our Atlantic counterparts on addressing the issues. So as you can see, we've had a busy summer and we have much more in store.
Our business plan also gives you some insight into what we have been working on and what we plan to achieve in 2009-10. We have an aggressive business plan for 2009-10. It sets a path to achieve the objectives slated in the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. It is a business plan which will ensure our environment is valued, protected and enhanced in partnership with all Nova Scotians. We want Nova Scotia's future to include an environment that is healthy, well managed, and supports prosperity in communities.
Looking ahead, here are some of the highlights for my department's goals. We will consult with Nova Scotians in the coming months as we continue to develop the province's strategy for management of our water resources, such as our lakes, our streams, and our wetlands.
The draft strategy will be ready to be finalized in the new year. I know that some municipalities have had challenges in bringing their municipal water supplies to the target set by the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. We will continue to work with the municipalities to make sure that their treatment plants achieve full compliance with Nova Scotia's standards for drinking water, which is consistent with federal standards.
We will work with municipalities so that we can achieve at least primary treatment of their wastewater by 2017. The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment set the goal as part of the Canada-wide strategy. We plan to increase public safety by implementing changes to the water in wastewater facilities regulations and their public drinking water supplies regulations. These changes will mean that the regulations will now apply to licensed eating establishments, licensed daycares and commercial playgrounds, and tourist accommodations. We will also provide support for municipalities that seek wastewater rate increases through the Utility and Review Board.
Mr. Chairman, as I stated earlier, our government takes climate change very seriously. Finding out how to inventory and account for the greenhouse gas emissions from government buildings and operations is one of our priorities. We will also establish a climate change adaptation fund, expand web-based public education awareness programs, and launch a three-year adaptation research project with the three Maritime Provinces and the federal government to look at potential impacts on climate change on our coast and inland waters and identify what we need to do to prepare for the changing climate.
We will implement greenhouse gas emission regulations and air quality regulations that work together to meet the goals of the provincial climate change action plans. By next year, Nova Scotia will breathe cleaner air. Nitrogen oxide emissions will be reduced by 20 per cent from the year 2000 levels by 2009. That means less smog. Mercury emissions will
[Page 126]
go down by 70 per cent from the year 2001 levels by 2010. Sulphur dioxide emissions will be cut in half from 2001 levels, and that means less acid rain polluting our lakes.
My department will continue to help our government to meet renewable electricity targets. Our government will set a new, stringent target for renewable energy. One-quarter of Nova Scotia's electricity must come from renewable energy resources by 2015.
The Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act sets a goal to protect our wetlands. My department is on track to meet that goal with a policy to prevent net loss of wetlands in Nova Scotia. We will continue to work on regulations for contaminated sites. In doing that, we will support a framework to improve environmental protections while expanding the investment and redevelopment opportunities.
Brown fields can create green jobs, and the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act set challenging targets for solid waste management. The goal is to reduce the amount of solid waste generated down to 300 kilograms per person, per year, by 2015. Our department will keep working hard to meet that goal. We will coordinate more product stewardship, ensuring that the private sector manages and recycles the waste resources that they generate. We will also develop a plan to manage waste from construction and demolition activity.
Additionally, we will strengthen programs to cut down on disposable products. My government is committed to protecting at least 12 per cent of the land base by 2015.
Mr. Chairman, with help from the Department of Natural Resources, my department will continue the planning and consulting work to designate three new wilderness areas and 15 nature reserves. We will also add 10 parcels of land to existing wilderness areas. We will keep supporting the efforts of the Nova Scotia Crown Share Land Legacy Trust, the Nature Conservancy of Canada and the Nova Scotia Nature Trust as we work to acquire land to protect and promote private land for conservation.
I will soon be announcing stronger and more effective guidelines for the management and use of biosolids by forestry and farmers and other users. These new regulations, or new guidelines, are based on the best possible science. To further protect the environment, we will use outreach and education to ensure domestic pesticide products are properly used. In year four we will deliver the Environmental Home Assessment Program and look for ways to expand it while we're living within our means.
Mr. Chairman, these are just the highlights of what we intend to accomplish. My department will continue to work to protect the health of our economy, the environment and the people of our province. We will protect and promote the province's natural heritage, it is a vital part of the long-term prosperity of our province. They will create jobs to keep families here so that they may enjoy a healthy, more prosperous life. We will do these things
[Page 127]
with the good support of a dedicated department staff and by fostering strong relationships with our environmental partners.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn my attention now to the department's 2009-10 budget highlights. Just before I do so I want to mention that this budget is based on one prepared by the previous government. Where possible, the department has reduced costs while continuing to provide environmental protection and a quality service. We all know that Nova Scotia cannot sustain our previous fiscal path. My government is committed to living within our means. That being said, we do have some highlights to share with you, even in a difficult budget year.
The first area is the ecoNova Scotia Clean Air and Climate Change fund. As mentioned earlier, ecoNova Scotia invests in projects that reduce greenhouse gas and air pollutants emissions, and creates opportunities for sustainable prosperity. The fund was created as a result of a $42.5 million allocation from the federal government in 2007. The final $17 million of that allocation will be committed in this fiscal year. The ecoNova Scotia's investments will help Nova Scotia to fulfill the actions identified in the province's Climate Change Action Plan. Those investments will help us meet goals established by the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. All Nova Scotians will benefit through the creation of a cleaner, greener economy.
Strategic investments in Nova Scotia business institutions and municipalities will take advantage of environmental opportunities. This will benefit local communities and the province as a whole. The ecoNova Scotia maximizes the investment and emission reduction projects for leveraging investments from other private and public resources.
[4:45 p.m.]
Mr. Chairman, $19 million has been earmarked for strategic projects such as research and development of tidal power; $7.5 million has been allocated to municipal programs, and $9.5 million to an environmental technology program. The rest helps us take advantage of other investment opportunities as they come up.
We want to ensure that Nova Scotians know about the ecoNova Scotia Clean Air and Climate Change fund. Please encourage your constituents to learn more and simply apply. The next round of applications must be in by January 31, 2010, and our staff are happy to help. Of course, most of these programs and initiatives require monitoring and compliance activities. That is why Nova Scotia Environment is completing the development of an active tracking system, or ATS. It will be managed by the Environmental Monitoring and Compliance Division of the department. The department will receive $165,000 to implement the tracking system.
[Page 128]
The ATS was established so that we can track what happens to complaints and incidents. It will help our staff better manage enforcement, inspection schedules, permits and approvals, boil-water orders, and many other department records. The ATS tracks all activities according to the provincial company records, Nova Scotia Business Registry and the Property Records Database, which enhances the quality, accuracy, and the types of reporting available.
My department aims to continually improve business and processes. The new ATS will help achieve this goal. This also addressed the recommendations in the 2007 Auditor General's Report on the Environmental Monitoring and Compliance Division.
The department has also received new funding for mitigating and adapting climate change. For this fiscal year, an additional $250,000 has been allocated to Nova Scotia's Environmental Climate Change Directorate to begin implementing key actions from the Climate Change Action Plan. This is a 25 per cent increase in the budget for this particular directory.
The overall objective of the Climate Change Action Plan is to reduce greenhouse gas production, produced in Nova Scotia, down to 10 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020. This is a goal established by the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act, and that plan will also prepare the province for the effects of a changing climate. Nova Scotia must make its contribution in mitigating the climate changes and also prepare for climate change that has already started.
Mr. Chairman, in the 21st Century we can expect warmer average temperatures, rising sea levels, and more intense storms. Nova Scotia is particularly vulnerable to these changes, most of our population lives along the coast, and much of our infrastructure is located close to or on the water. It wasn't engineered to design or withstand a higher frequency of extreme weather. Important sectors of our economy such as fishing, forestry, tourism are sensitive to climate change. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions will contribute to the worldwide effects to mitigate global warming. It will also help Nova Scotia further grow in a green economy. Nova Scotia municipalities and other agencies will benefit from funding in support to a better understanding in preparing for climate change risks that are starting to affect them.
Of the additional amount applied to the Environmental Climate Change Directorate, $50,000 will be devoted to climate change mitigation, with a focus on public engagement, and $200,000 will help fund adaptation to climate change. The department will receive $1.5 million, especially for acquisition of high-value conservation lands. The Land Acquisition Fund will help acquire and protect high-value conservation lands that contribute to the province's mainland protection goal, legally protecting 12 per cent of Nova Scotia's land by 2015 - a goal established by the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act.
[Page 129]
The priority will be to acquire critical high-value conservation lands in private inholdings inside or next to existing wilderness areas. More than 70 per cent of the province's land is privately owned. This includes many of the most important natural areas, habitat, endangered species, and places where Nova Scotians go to enjoy the outdoors.
Buying land protects important conservation lands and the integrity of protected wilderness areas. It also cuts the risk to private lands from development. All Nova Scotians benefit when our government buys important conservation lands. Protected areas also contribute to Nova Scotia's international image as a clean, green place to live, work, and invest. This helps attract new immigrants and foreign students who can come and put down their roots.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I believe healthy and vibrant communities are the foundation of this province and a centre to build a better life for Nova Scotians. I want to thank you for allowing me to share with you the important role my department plays in creating this better life for Nova Scotian families. I would be pleased, at this time, to take any questions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth East.
MR. ANDREW YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for his comments. Interestingly, I'm going to give him questions, but I'll comment that I actually have a fishing licence myself, for scallops. So I share your passion for the oceans and so forth, although mine is a scuba diving licence, but nonetheless I've certainly seen some of the things that you have seen.
I want to start by picking up on something that you said at the end. You mentioned money for the purchase of land, and this is something that we spoke about for quite some time yesterday with the Minister of Natural Resources. Could you tell me what your target sites are, what sites you're looking at for purchases?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Our target site is to acquire this land by 2015 - that's ultimately our target site. I think I actually paid attention in the House when you asked a question, I think you commented in the House that that was in the budget. I made note of that, that it was reflected right across Party lines. I've had a number of constituents, Nova Scotians, comment that that was a goal that they felt everybody was appreciative of.
To me, the money is set aside in our budget and there's a process that will be in place. I think the Minister of Natural Resources was asked that question last night and to me, to understand that there is money there and the importance of these wilderness areas and how - I think what impressed me was the Ship Harbour Long Lake group, of how different people or different groups that sometimes have different opinions, and I'm talking about the ATV groups or the forestry groups or eco-tourism, and how all these different groups can come
[Page 130]
to one table and come up with a recommendation of setting wilderness areas aside. I mean, I was totally impressed to see all of those different groups come together.
So I think that having this money allotted for this land, to preserve this land, is a good thing and I think we're going to have a lot of good comments on it. To me, there is a process that it needs to go through and we have to engage the public to identify them, and I think the selection process will work and we'll get the same results.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Minister, I don't disagree that the purchase of land to increase the public landholdings is a good idea, I certainly support that; however, your government has put quite a lot of money in this year's budget, which implies that they can spend it in this fiscal year. Yesterday, the Minister of Natural Resources was able to list some sites that he felt should be purchased, so I'm interested to know which sites you think should be purchased. I would like to hear your preferences.
MR. BELLIVEAU: To be asked a personal question of what I think is valuable and I can tell you, I go back to my earlier life experiences and I took the scuba diving course. I may not be at the same level as you are . . .
MR. YOUNGER: I'm glad to hear that.
MR. BELLIVEAU: . . . but I can appreciate going down and looking under the water and seeing for several metres and I appreciate, again, seeing how clear water can be off Cape Sable Island and I also know how clear it can be, and I've actually swam in the waters off Chester a few weeks ago. To me, it's not about what I think is the most important, I know there are other individuals out there across Nova Scotia who need to be engaged in this process and I think that selection process - I would appreciate whatever any particular committee would recommend.
I have canoed on lakes across Nova Scotia, I have been up and down the river systems, and I've been on the Atlantic Ocean, and whether it is an island off Cape Breton or Sable Island off our Halifax coast, or somewhere in the Parrsboro area - and I've hunted in the Parrsboro area, and I've hunted in Cape Breton, and I've hunted in a good number of places, so to me the process is to let Nova Scotians decide.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I'll move from there to the actual budget numbers for a couple of minutes. On Page 9.1, in the Nova Scotia Estimates Book - one of the main Budget Books, which basically is just the page that gives the overview of the total budget - you're showing a departmental budget this year of just over $44 million, which isn't all that different from the estimate for last year. However, the department actually only spent $27 million last year, so if we look at the actual versus the estimate for this year, you're looking at an almost $20 million increase in your departmental budget over what was actually spent last year and what is estimated for this year. Can you explain why that would be?
[Page 131]
MR. BELLIVEAU: That money is for the ecoNova Scotia fund, one of the programs that I talked about earlier and I can assure you that ecoNova Scotia - there are a lot of communities that are benefiting from that fund, that program. Like I said, I've been to Lunenburg and to Wolfville and I'm sure that our staff can get more of a detailed breakdown for you later, but that's the answer for that particular budget line.
MR. YOUNGER: I would agree that that fund is important. Was that fund not in last year's budget? I guess I'm trying to understand how only $27 million was spent last year because I thought that fund existed last year, as well, and maybe not to the same degree.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Yes, my understanding was that there was $18.8 million in there last year, it was just a cash flow number.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. On the next page of the budget - and don't worry, I'm not going to go through the budget page by page, I'm going to move on to some other things in a minute. (Laughter) The total funded staff - now again, it's not much different from what the estimate for the department was last year, 273 to 278, but your actual staff positions were 245 and you're estimating 278 this year. You did talk about looking for reductions in your address and I assume that some of those positions were positions that just didn't get filled. I'm wondering why you would move to fill those now when you were talking about trying to achieve reductions.
[5:00 p.m.]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Right now, a lot of that is due to vacancies. If there are jobs that are vacant, we can move that number around, but there is no actual loss of jobs, if that's what you're making reference to. It is just a natural turnover of different vacancies that are in the department.
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, Mr. Minister, I understand that is probably from vacancies, but I guess I'm asking the reverse. In your address, you talked about trying to look for some cost savings for this year and I'm just wondering why you would fill those vacancies, why not leave them vacant - maybe all of them can't be left vacant - but you're not only filling those, you're adding another three on top of that.
MR. BELLIVEAU: What you're highlighting is that there are certain vacancies there and we're not filling them. So actually it's a saving of $500,000 by not . . .
MR. YOUNGER: But your budget proposes to fill them this year, by the looks of things.
[Page 132]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Yes, there is $100,000 that's saved in non-travel. I'm sure I'm not being as clear as you want, but I can assure you that I'll get a breakdown on this and give it to you to be clearer.
MR. YOUNGER: I will wait to get a breakdown from your staff. I think where I'm going is that the estimate for last year was 273. Obviously some of those positions remained vacant, or became vacant, or something, so it only ended up being 245 actual positions that were funded, or there were 273 funded, but there were only 245 positions that were actually filled over the year, yet it would appear that all of those positions are going to be funded this year, again, plus an additional three.
I just wondered whether all of those vacancies needed to be funded. Certainly, I know there might be a very good reason for it, maybe there are areas that just aren't meeting their targets and they need to be filled. I just want to make sure that next year, when you're looking for $560-some-odd million to shave off the deficit, that you're going to have to go back and remove half of these positions again.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I understand your point, like I say, I know there's $100,000 in there that's just for non-travel, so that's something. We'll get clarification. I know that's not the clear answer that you want and I will ask my staff to get it broken down.
MR. YOUNGER: Okay, that's fine. I would like to move on to last year's Auditor General's Report for your department. Now, I respect the fact that you, obviously, weren't the minister then and it was under different government, but I guess it falls on your shoulders now to ensure the implementation of those recommendations. At the time, and I will just quote a small section from the summary, "The Division's policies and procedures for issuing approvals, inspections and enforcement are not adequate as implemented. We found instances where required procedures were not performed - approvals were issued without all documentation in place, required inspections were not completed, enforcement actions were inadequate to ensure compliance, and complaints were not followed up."
Much like you, I previously spent time on a municipal council and I dealt fairly frequently with cases like this that weren't followed up. I'm wondering, what is your department now doing to ensure that those situations don't happen again?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, these are very important questions and I can assure you that our department is acting on these particular recommendations.
MR. YOUNGER: Can you give me some detail about what you're doing to ensure that because that Auditor's General Report, when I read it, is pretty scathing in terms of management systems not being adequate and when it is adequate, it's not reliable or accurate, and that troubles me.
[Page 133]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, our Nova Scotia Department of Environment is implementing the recommendations by the auditor, these new procedures for file management and documentation, and is reviewing procedures for the verification of monitoring data by the industry. The Department of Environment has recently implemented an activity tracking system - a provincial database for tracking and inspection and compliance data. Those remarks were captured in my opening statement. I guess to answer your question, we're working at trying to fill the recommendations in that report.
MR. YOUNGER: Sorry, minister, are you confident in telling the committee that we're well on the way to resolving these issues and that this shouldn't be an ongoing problem anymore?
MR. BELLIVEAU: The quick answer is yes.
MR. YOUNGER: Okay, that works for me. You spent some time talking about the tidal project. Now, I certainly share your optimism for the potential of the Bay of Fundy. In fact, back in 1992, when I worked for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, I did some work on tidal power potential, although at that time everybody was still talking about dams, and we know the problems that those can cause. I am concerned, however, that even today the proponents of the test turbines are saying they could be in the water in a matter of weeks, yet I heard you saying in your remarks that the advisory panel and the terms of reference would be in place before they're in the water, which - that's a pretty short window of time. In fact, somebody I know who is interested in the advisory panel called the company involved, and they weren't even sure how the panel was going to get appointed.
It troubles me that they're talking about being in the water within weeks, and you're telling me - and I'm glad you're telling me in your opening remarks - that that turbine won't go in the water until there's an advisory panel, yet even some of the proponents involved don't seem to know where that's going or when that's going to be announced.
MR. BELLIVEAU: First of all, I appreciate your question today and I really appreciated your question in the House the other day, because these are important topics. I'll let you do the math on the questions regarding this around the meeting. I really think that we need to understand it, and to me the conditions are set there to protect this. The terms of reference for this particular committee must be approved by the Nova Scotia Department of Environment and the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. We already have a draft being reviewed by our staff on this particular committee. To me, the conditions are there for these things to be in place before they go in the water.
I know that there's a lot of media attention around this, but they have to follow these particular guidelines or conditions. I look forward - and I can't remember the actual length of time for that question period, but we do have some time here to discuss this, and I want to reassure you that I'm deeply interested in that and making sure we do our due process. I
[Page 134]
would love to be accompanied by you and inspect that turbine. I think it - or the structure to hold that - is going to be built in the Dartmouth area, and I would love to visit that and I'd love for you to accompany me with that. I know the Fisheries and Aquaculture Critic from Digby-Annapolis is dealing with some health issues right now, and I look forward to having the opportunity to see how that structure is built and get a good sense of what is going on on that bottom.
I'm also interested in meeting the fishermen and the people who have some concerns with it and all the players that are in that and I do. I think you can appreciate that - you scuba dive. I don't have to tell you about why you have to use a weight belt and know the effects that tides can have. To me, there's a great potential but we have to do things right.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. I would certainly love to come with you when you go look at the turbine and so forth. I think you can probably understand, though, where my concern is, that it doesn't seem to be clear, if one of the people here in the room today wanted to go and apply to be on this committee or submit their name for consideration, it's still not clear and there are mixed messages as to how to do that. Then you have a company that's out there that probably with all good intentions is suggesting they could be in the water in the matter of weeks because they have to be in the water before the weather turns, otherwise they lose this season.
They know, obviously, that one of the terms and conditions is that you have to approve this committee, and rightly so, as it should be, but there just seems to be a bit of a disconnect here, in my view. They're talking about getting in the water as soon as possible, to be in there before the bad weather comes, and it makes it almost impossible to drop this turbine in place, yet we don't know who's going to be on this committee. It strikes me that the committee members should be there the day that this thing is going in the water so that they are there from day one and have perhaps already met.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, I appreciate the time to deal with this particular question because I feel there are a lot of people who want to understand it and I appreciate your question. To me, one of the conditions there, we have to get this crystal clear, is that there have to be qualified academics and there have to be qualified representatives from the fishing community. That has to be endorsed by our department and, to me - I know a number of people and I know those stakeholders would want to participate and have the qualified people on that. I think that will be accomplished. I can't see why it can't be and I would think, if I ever got the phone call, I would be delighted to bring those concerns and that expertise to that particular panel. So it's kind of an exciting time to know that the value of their input is going to play an important role in Nova Scotia, in this demonstration project.
MR. YOUNGER: I certainly am glad to hear you talk about the diversity of the panel and representing different interests because I think that's very important. So what happens then if the company submits the names to you too late for them to get - or let's say they
[Page 135]
submit them to you in two weeks, I don't know how long it's going to take your department to review those. But they're obviously talking about a tight window before they feel they could lose the winter season in getting that turbine in the water. What's being done to make sure that they actually - because, as I understand it, it's the company's job to submit names to you for that review panel, it's not the Department of Environment taking applications. So what's being done to ensure that they get this done as quickly as possible so that they don't miss a whole season of testing this turbine?
MR. BELLIVEAU: To me, again, the requirement by the company will have to ensure that these names come forward. I think that we need to take the time to get this right. I appreciate you talking about the window of time here, and the window of time that you're talking about may be November? I get a nod meaning yes.
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, I think they're talking, you know.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Yes, but I want to be very clear here that the window of time, if you're referring to November as the date, the window of time in November - I spent 38 years on the ocean and you're talking about November as a shutdown, as a window of time, that's when I started fishing, the end of November through to May. I know what the rigours of the Atlantic Ocean can do and the window of time can be anytime during the year.
You can get fine weather in the dead of February, you can get calm waters. So I don't think that - if anybody came and said you've got two weeks to meet a deadline, you're not going to impress me, or faze me, because I know that when you're dealing with the environment, you can have fine weather in February, you can have fine weather in January, you can have fine weather in April, and you could have inclement weather any time of the year. So I don't think the deadline for winter weather is going to have any effect on me. They need to address this issue and I don't think we're going to rush to meet certain deadlines.
[5:15 p.m.]
MR. YOUNGER: I'm glad to hear you say, minister, that you're not going to worry about their deadline. That certainly makes me somewhat happier although I do think that there probably are - I mean, I've been at sea at different times of the year and I agree with you that things can be done in the middle of December or January sometimes, but clearly it makes it much more difficult. We certainly saw that with the laying of gas pipelines and so forth where getting a sequence of clear days that - I know there are many fishermen who would go out on days that people putting in a turbine might not be willing to go out on, because fishermen are some of the toughest people I know, who will go out on days that I would never go out on.
I mean, if I understand it correctly, the company is going to recommend names to you for this committee. Why isn't it being done in reverse, the Department of Environment
[Page 136]
accepting applications, and then you making the decision as to who should be on this? I know you're ultimately signing off on it, but why are you not taking the applications?
MR. BELLIVEAU: This is one of the conditions that was in the agreement that the builders of this force would do this. I don't think it would be appropriate for Environment to go out and select these individuals. I think that the proponents of this particular project need to do this and I would encourage the academics, and I would encourage the fishing industry, to put forward qualified personnel who would have the respect to address the mandate of this particular advisory committee and I think that can be achieved.
I have noticed working groups dealing with the fisheries and they are very high level. These people are very experienced and very knowledgeable of the environment. I guess I go back to one of my earlier quotes, to have this kind of top-heavy with the fishing industry, I go back to a biblical quote. The disciples, the majority of the disciples were fishermen. So the majority of the people on these particular committees should be fishermen.
We're dealing with that environment and, like you say, I really respect that there are professional fishermen out there who can ask these questions and get the right personnel, and I think that these people will come forward. I also think that there are academics across Nova Scotia who would be deeply interested in being on this demonstration project. I think it's very important to Nova Scotians and I think - and I'm quite serious here - that our grandchildren will probably reflect, and go back in Hansard, come to this moment in time and review what we're saying here. Probably 50 or 100 years down the road they'll reflect on how we engaged in this process and we're having this discussion here, today. Our fathers fought for the freedom to have this open dialogue, engaging with different parties, and we're doing this in the best interest of all Nova Scotians.
I appreciate my father going across the ocean 11 times in the Second World War, in a military situation, to give us this freedom that we can exchange and make life better for today's families. To know the importance of this demonstration project and the cautionary approach, and to have an opportunity for the fishermen and the academics to sit on this board, I can't think of anything better in our world that we can give to the people who want to make the right decision.
MR. YOUNGER: I think, minister, we probably both agree that - and the Tories aren't here at the moment, but if they were, I'm sure they would agree as well - the potential for tidal power, and the opportunities there, are very great. I guess I'll just leave it with having the record reflect that I think that in terms of transparency and the optics of it, you may very well end up with a very balanced, fair and transparent committee, but I think that had the committee been appointed by the Department of Environment - and I realize the environmental assessment has been approved, so you can't go back and change this now - but I think in the future, if that committee had been appointed by the Department of Environment, the optics to the public would have been that it is an arm's-length committee and will give fair
[Page 137]
recommendations and balanced recommendations versus - it's almost like having the fox guard the henhouse in a way. I don't want to suggest for a second that this company would do anything untoward; in fact, I'm very excited about their process, but I just think that in the future that is a better way to go.
I think that the optics of it are not good because if you do end up with a group, whether it's a tourism group or a fishing group or whoever, that doesn't like the recommendations of that committee, the response from them is almost certainly going to be, well, the committee was appointed by the company and therefore the decision was already made. Just before I move on, I would just suggest that - and I know you can't change it going back, but I don't know if you wanted to comment further on that before I move on.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I do appreciate and I do want to spend some more time because I think that what we need to underline here is that this is a demonstration project. Before there's any commercial project we will have to have the benefit of this particular demonstration. I think it's important if we can see where we can improve in a commercial venture, then the full project will have to go - if there's a commercial project - through a thorough environmental assessment and there is other research being done by other groups.
I think the importance here is not to forget that this is a demonstration project. If we can go out and find ways of improving on the selection committee then we'll learn from, not only what's in the water, but we'll learn from this whole process. I think it's an exciting time and I think that a lot of Nova Scotians will be looking forward to the outcome of this particular project.
MR. YOUNGER: I'll move on at the moment. I might come back to the tidal stuff later but we don't want you here until midnight. I think the honourable members across the floor here probably don't want to be here until midnight, too, because the Minister of Economic and Rural Development just had a look of fear. We'll carpool home together, I guess, because we don't live too far away from one another.
I wanted to move on to biosolids, you did mention that in your remarks and I'm wondering what you're - if I understood correctly from your remarks, you were talking about coming forward with either regulations or legislation, I wasn't sure which it would be regarding the application of biosolids. What direction are you leaning towards going in that regard?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you for that particular question. I've had an opportunity in the last four months to review some of these particular topics and first of all, again, as being someone who works with nature, biosolids are an organic resource. It is nutrient-rich material that enriches the soil and helps crops and trees grow. The harmful bacteria and contaminants are reduced through a treatment process. We are acting to better manage biosolids so that they
[Page 138]
can be properly used on land as they are across all Nova Scotia and across Canada, and I also want to point out, across the United States and other countries.
We are working with the help of today's farmers and foresters and others who benefit from using this organic resource and we are protecting Nova Scotia's environment in the process. I understand the importance of this and, again, these are resources that are there and I think we have to manage them in the proper manner so that we're protecting the environment and we're protecting Nova Scotians and we're also giving the people who use this particular product a safe product that can be used to benefit their particular crops or whatever.
MR. YOUNGER: I think probably in your four months, and maybe you knew this before, there are obviously different classes of biosolids from A, B, C, and certainly in the States they have exceptional quality. I don't know if we actually recognize exceptional quality here. One of the problems, in my view, with the debate on biosolids has been the fact that people, including some politicians, view all biosolids as the same thing.
Now, obviously, we used biosolids to some extent on farmland in Nova Scotia for hundreds of years whether it's manure, which is effectively a biosolid, all the way up to, well, I guess what HRM is trucking out of town now, which is almost the same as wine by the time it's treated. So do you anticipate that any regulations you are going to bring in will differentiate between the classes of biosolids and how they would be handled?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, I want to thank you for this question and to me the regulations or the process is that, you know, we only approve the highest class biosolids there are. So there's the process, and this is what I want to emphasize, this product that's being used is one of the highest grade, Class A, that you can use. Actually we're improving this particular product by putting it through a process and meeting these high levels, or high standards, so that we actually use this organic material to benefit farmers. To me that is the part, that we are actually improving this product.
MR. YOUNGER: It strikes me, though, that there is a difference between the types, and I know I heard you say we're only using top quality, I'm not sure that's accurate because there are biosolids being applied to farms that are not of the same grade of biosolid, they're not the same thing that's coming out of the Aerotech plant where it's fully treated and dried and turned into a soil supplement. Not all the biosolids being applied to farms in Nova Scotia are at that level.
So there are different grades of biosolids being applied. Although I think this was a Class C one that isn't used anymore, we only saw that a few years ago near Truro where someone decided they should spray what was effectively almost raw septic sludge on a field, and that seems to have framed the debate around biosolids. Clearly there needs to be a
[Page 139]
differentiation between the types of biosolids, it's something the farmers need, but where is that line going to be for your government?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Yes, the point I think you're trying to make is that there are, in my understanding, two classes. Class A, there's no restriction, which is used on farmlands; and the second, with restrictions, which is not used on farmlands. The highest quality biosolids meet strict chemical and biological qualities' standards. Our guidelines and revisions ensure these strict standards and any biosolids that do not meet these high standards cannot be applied to the farmlands in Nova Scotia. I think there is a misconception out there, when you see people talk about these being applied on farmlands across Nova Scotia, these are an improvement to a product - being clear and having the information and the science that will back this up, that this is an organic material that's being used across Canada and the United States and it meets these high standards.
MR. YOUNGER: I don't disagree with you, minister, that there's a lot of benefit, especially in the highest grades of biosolids being used, and I also don't disagree with you that there's a lot of misinformation that has been framed around this issue, particularly from some high-profile incidents. There has been a request and, in fact, we've heard in the past members of your own caucus suggest that there should be notification of neighbouring properties before biosolids are applied. Is your government considering mandating that sort of thing?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, again, we're looking at the new guidelines, which will include an approval for more testing, and there will be more focus on a higher quality through this particular testing. Any low quality of these biosolids will not be used on farmlands. We're looking at these guidelines, and I understand your point, but I can assure you that it's only the highest grade that's being used on particular farmlands across Nova Scotia.
[5:30 p.m.]
MR. YOUNGER: Do I take that as an answer that you don't think there's a need for notification of neighbouring properties?
MR. BELLIVEAU: That's something that we're taking under review and until we get those guidelines, there's an opportunity to engage - we're having discussions with our staff and with different people across Nova Scotia but we're looking towards having these new guidelines to predict what actually is going to be in that. I hear your concerns and we'll consider that as we approach these new guidelines.
MR. YOUNGER: In terms of the last element on that is the trucking of biosolids and it's a little bit of a different issue. There are regulations for trucking almost every kind of material you can think of but there doesn't appear to be too many around processed biosolids. We've already seen one company in Nova Scotia have to stop trucking it because of
[Page 140]
respiratory illnesses with their drivers, where they were not trucking it in enclosed trucks. Obviously the problem with not trucking it in an enclosed truck is that if you have the powdered form of biosolids, which is produced at the Aerotech Business Park plant, it can get in the cab and everything. It's no different than, I guess, if you worked in a coal mine, you end up with a respiratory problem. When you review these guidelines and look at regulations, are you considering anything around the trucking of biosolids?
MR. BELLIVEAU: The new guidelines, we're looking at all these possibilities and that's one of the reasons we're engaged in today and to bring those concerns forward. Again, we want to improve upon the guidelines and my understanding - and I'm not familiar with all the trucking applications but I know that the load has to be secured, it has to be properly covered and all that has to be contained regardless of what you're trucking, whether it's herring or whatever. I think there are requirements there but I can assure you we'll look at that, we'll note that you've raised that issue and we'll move forward.
MR. YOUNGER: At this point, that's all I really ask, that it be looked at when you're reviewing those guidelines. Personally I'm not sure where the answer lies, or where the correct guideline is but I would ask that that at least be looked at and considered and when you come back with those guidelines, either you have included something or explain why it isn't included.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, Mr. Chairman, our focus is on the quality of the biosolids. Again, these questions cross departments and you talk about transportation, transportation is not in our department so, I mean, you're raising a question that flows back and forth to whether it's the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal or whoever. You're raising an important point and I will consider it, but I also want you to know that our focus is on quality and improving that product. It's a safe product of the highest quality that goes on farmlands.
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, I agree, it probably falls under a few departments. It probably falls under the Department of Labour and Workforce Development, as well, in terms of occupational health and safety guidelines.
I'm going to move on to landfills. I recently had a meeting with HRM's solid waste team. I don't know if you've had a chance to meet with the regional chairmen yet, but one of the things that they're concerned about is in the environmental sustainability goals, and in the Act there are requirements, very good requirements, to further reduce the amount of waste going into landfills and increase the amount that's diverted. However, in looking at them - particularly in HRM - they've made the determination that those goals are probably not reachable without either a significant financial investment in technology, which they have no money to do, and maybe even more so a significant investment in innovation. They're not even convinced the technology exists to achieve those goals at this point.
[Page 141]
I'm wondering, is your department prepared to put money into supporting municipalities on achieving those goals or, at the least, supporting Nova Scotia-based innovation to help municipalities achieve those goals?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, again, that goes back to our initial presentation. We will build on Nova Scotia's current successes in waste management for the development of a renewable solid waste resource strategy, and the strategy will focus on achieving the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act - a target of no more than 300 kilograms per person, per year, by 2015.
If I could, Mr. Chairman, I just want to again - life experiences. When you go back 15 years before I came to council in Barrington, the attitude around household waste and diverting that from C&D, I remember going by the dump and seeing a smoke plume every day of my life. To understand people's attitude when you talk about entering a recycling program, to be around that council table, and to know that particular issue is going to dominate council chambers for the next seven years, it's quite an experience.
If you can remember that smoke plume of that dump that you've travelled by for 25 or 30 years, and to know that if you introduced a program about taking household waste and reducing that by 50 per cent or more of that landfill, I would think people would question that, and that's how we were basically introduced to that program. We were faced with those challenges, as all Nova Scotians were, and we sat down and we had great discussions through the UNSM, we had discussions through municipal and regional councils, saying this is going to be something good for Nova Scotians.
The attitude started to change then, okay, how are we going to do this, and we're going to come up with a three-bag system. We're going to have one for organics, we're going to have a blue bag for the paper, and we're going to have the green bag. To introduce that program, I think there was a lot of fear and a lot of concern around the council table, and all across Nova Scotia, about how we can convert 50 per cent of our waste from these landfills. This was only a few years ago and, to me, that attitude of wanting a cleaner and greener environment was evident then and it's more evident today. I watched that, I watched that around the council table, how attitudes can change.
You get into the recycling, you go to schools, and the children are writing essays about wanting a cleaner environment. They want to get involved and they want these collection systems in their schools. They want the three-bag system, and people started doing it. I've sat and watched those numbers come in. Basically we were converting 30 per cent and all of a sudden we were up over 55 per cent. To watch that go on for the seven years or nine years that I was on council was a really eye-opening experience and, to me, people's attitudes about the environment are changing. They want this cleaner and greener environment.
[Page 142]
To me, the challenge is going to your landfill and saying, can we reduce the paper products that are going in there, or the plastics, or the plastic cardboard, and to talk with entrepreneurs who have an opportunity to say I've got a job for that, I can find out something I can build out of that product. I can possibly make some kind of a wood pellet, or I can create some kind of a fuel that we can burn, and we can create some green jobs.
When you look at that C&D landfill now, versus 15 years ago, they're recycling all the wood that's in it, they bring in a large industrial pulverizer and they literally put in all the wood, the pallets, or whatever you have left over, they mulch it up, and people are coming there and paying the municipality to use the good product on their golf courses, they're using it around their homes. So to me there's an opportunity to look back 15 years and how we were doing things, and now to look and see how we have an opportunity to create green jobs and make life cleaner and greener. We're going through this transition, and I think we're at a very interesting time in history and people's attitudes have changed towards the environment. We're benefiting from the results of that and I'm very privileged to be in a position to take that goal further.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I don't doubt for a minute that attitudes have changed. I don't doubt for a minute that people want to do this, but that's not really where I'm getting at with my question. The issue is that there is a goal. I mean you read right there that it says by 2015 you want to reduce the amount of garbage going to landfills, which I think is a good goal, I completely support that goal, but Halifax Regional Municipality, for example, which either is the top or almost the top diversion in the province, has said that they have researched this extensively and they have no ability to meet that goal by 2015 without a substantial financial investment in new technology and help from the province.
So the question is, it's five years from now that we want to have this change and Jim Bauld, the manager of Solid Waste Resources, stopped me in a panic on the street the other day outside the Legislature saying, listen, somebody has got to do something here. They need to help not only HRM, but if they need to help HRM, I guarantee you they need to help Truro, Yarmouth and Shelburne because they're not going to meet those goals because they are pulling out the newspaper, the cardboard, the fine paper, the metals, the plastic. All of those things are being pulled out. They're pulling out some things they don't even have a market for at the moment, like fine paper that they're storing in a warehouse because they can't sell it and yet they're going to be asked to pull out even more, and they support that, but they don't have the resources to do it and they don't have the ability to do it. They don't have the money to do it and they don't feel the technology is there to do it.
So the question is, what is your department - this is going to fall within your mandate, you guys are here for four years anyway, and so this is going to be within your mandate that this will have to be in place. I assume you're not going to call an election next year with a majority government. That has to be in place. If you look - and I'll use the HRM example because I know it best, they have a garbage collection system and sorting system that people
[Page 143]
come from all over the world to tour because it's considered one of the leading ones in the world and they would love to do better. Almost weekly they were running tours at some point for people from Europe to see how it's done and that took years and years.
Now, there's only five years for them to reduce this per-person amount going to the landfill and they want to do it. You're right, you're absolutely right when you say that people want to do it, because they want to do it, they're just saying we can't do it at the moment because the technology isn't there, the resource is there and the province isn't putting any money into helping people come up with the technology to make it happen.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, like I say, I tried to show those life experiences to give you a little flavour of what people can do. I know that some of these goals are a challenge, but I want to highlight that Nova Scotia Environment has completed consultations with the key stakeholders to get their input on how Nova Scotia can meet the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act. We've done that. We're also looking to meet with the regional chairmen of the solid waste group coming up later this Fall. So I anticipate that we'll be having those concerns raised in front of us, but I was just trying to impress upon you that if you go back just a short time, 15 years ago, when you talked about reducing the landfill, or household waste, and converting that from those dumps, you have the same attitude and what I'm trying to get across here . . .
MR. YOUNGER: But there were investments in technology at the time to make that happen.
[5:45 p.m.]
MR. BELLIVEAU: The point is that these are aggressive goals but we are going to be meeting with these regional chairs and I look forward to being engaged in that discussion. We'll move forward from there.
MR. YOUNGER: I guess where I would move from there is to the e-waste program because the e-waste program strikes me as an example of what could happen on this 300 kilograms. Now I had the pleasure as the chair of the energy and environment committee for the city previously to tour e-waste disposal facilities where they take apart hard drives and computers out in Alberta, where they're probably, ironically enough, the leaders in it in Canada, at the moment anyway.
It's my understanding - and please correct me if I'm wrong - that at the moment, even though we are collecting e-waste, computers and such - that is not being handled here in Nova Scotia, it's not being disassembled here in Nova Scotia, is that correct?
MR. BELLIVEAU: My understanding is that they are being disassembled here in Nova Scotia. I'm glad you brought that up because that's one of those success stories that is
[Page 144]
flying under everybody's radar and nobody is picking that up. To me, the Atlantic Canada Electronics Stewardship Program is an environmental and economic success story for Nova Scotia. With the launch of Phase II of the program, Nova Scotia is the most comprehensive electronics stewardship program in North America.
I think that, again, this is another example, when you have these success stories - like we just talked about the recycling waste from a landfill - they don't make the daily news. They're not on the front page as the good, warm and fuzzy stories, but they are success stories of taking a product and recycling it. We were in Newfoundland and Labrador several weeks ago and one of the questions by the reporters was talking about electronic waste. We're leaders when it comes to programs like that. We talked about the landfill and the waste reduction and we're leaders. Again, they're not going to be the caption that headlines tomorrow but they are success stories that all Nova Scotians need to share.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, if the items that are being collected are being disassembled in Nova Scotia, which is good news to hear, where is that being done?
MR. BELLIVEAU: The two locations - and there are a number of collection positions across Nova Scotia - the two sites are Elmsdale and Dartmouth. I don't know exactly where you live but . . .
MR. YOUNGER: Probably Dartmouth North.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Probably an industrial park, I'm assuming there but, again, you're making the point for me. If this location is in your area, and basically you're unaware of it, the success story - I mean, to me that's obvious. Here is a very successful program, the particular dismantling site is basically on your doorstep and because of lack of the coverage of it, I think there's the lesson.
Again, we've got these success stories in how we can recycle waste and maybe we don't get the same coverage as Tiger Woods winning $10 million and the trophy last week.
MR. YOUNGER: I think we all know good news never gets the press, does it? It's always the bad news. I look forward to going to see those sites, having seen them out West as well.
I only have two minutes left and I will quickly try to squeeze this question in and hopefully you'll be able to answer it. This will lead into what I talk about later when I come back. Batteries in hybrid cars have to be replaced and that ultimately is an e-waste, and I'm wondering, what plans does the province have for recycling and/or disposal of those, because in most jurisdictions they are considered hazardous waste?
[Page 145]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, the batteries for the hybrid cars, I think the technology is a bit out there, so we actually haven't got anything that we're aware of yet. But I can assure you that may be something that is coming down the road. But I don't pass too many hybrid cars with batteries.
MR. YOUNGER: Not yet.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I know there are some out there with the golf carts, I'm very familiar with them, there are a few around, I've seen them. That's something that we'll be looking into, but we haven't really been involved in that as of yet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to thank the member for Dartmouth East and I would like to say to the minister, do you need a five-minute break?
MR. BELLIVEAU: I think we would appreciate a five-minute comfort break.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, could we keep it to five minutes, please? Thank you very much, and then we will be ready to proceed with an hour with the Progressive Conservatives.
[5:51 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]
[5:58 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I call the Subcommittee on Supply back to order. The Progressive Conservatives now have one hour.
The honourable member for Yarmouth.
HON. RICHARD HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I'm very pleased to be here in estimates to try to get some clarity to some questions. I listened intensely to the minister's comments and I can assure the minister and members that there are parts of his comments that I agree with but there are lots that I disagree with. I would just like to get clarity in some of the areas that I have concerns with, my constituents have concerns with, and our caucus in general has concerns with.
But before I ask my first question, I also want to let the minister know that he has a very, very dedicated staff and they're doing a great job for the Province of Nova Scotia and for Nova Scotians. Some of the staff, over the years, I have agreed with and disagreed with and I'm sure I will continue to do so in the future, as other members, I am sure, will. But there are issues that have come to the attention of myself, as chair of the Progressive Conservative caucus, and I will be bringing it to the minister's attention. My first question to the minister is, I would like to have his definition of a wetland.
[Page 146]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Thank you very much. If you're asking me what my definition of a wetland is, as a former fisherman, I think I can speak of a wetland as basically, first of all, you need water - somewhere you're going to have water running through it. I think there is a different description, you can talk about marshes and I'm very familiar with marshlands around our coastline of Nova Scotia, and I spent a good time basically duck hunting and enjoying all of the recreational activities around the marshes. I was also somewhat of a hunter. I can tell you that you have bogs and you have swamps and you have low-lying areas that use a kind of sponge effect on our land, that soaks up the water as it runs from the higher ridges off the lands across Nova Scotia.
[6:00 p.m.]
There is a different variety of wetlands across Nova Scotia and you can see meadows, I think there are meadows that have the long grass, and I recall walking across them at different times of the season and enjoying the flow of brown grass waving in the wind, and also walking across that same bog in the wintertime when it was frozen and appreciating the added attraction that you have. So to me there is a combination - a good variety of wetlands across Nova Scotia.
You're talking about the importance of, if you want to get this broken down into the watersheds that we're familiar with - and I know the member for Yarmouth would be very familiar with the Tusket River watershed. So wetlands and watersheds, I think they're all integral parts of that same question. They come in a variety of examples from swamps and bogs to our coastal communities, and they are all part of our environment. To me there is a wide range in there and, again, I'm not the qualified person to give you a true definition of a bog land or a wetland, but one of the things we can do is, we can provide you with our discussion paper and the draft guidelines and we will welcome your comments regarding this consultation process.
Your question was what my definition of a wetland is, and I think I can probably speak for the next hour on what I feel a wetland is. (Laughter) To me, I think it captures some of the things that I just mentioned. So that's my understanding of a wetland.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister - there are natural wetlands. Do you believe there are man-made wetlands?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, I think when you ask me that question, of man-made, I think about when I was a young man back in 1967 and there was a World Expo in Montreal. I remember at the time it wasn't important to me, but they were looking for a place to put this pavilion called the World Expo, and they built the land and they built it inside a river system. So I think if you look around the world, yes, we could probably build them, but they are a natural occurrence across our province. So I guess the answer is yes. Man has built lands, and I think one of our classic examples is the World Expo that I remember, in my memory bank.
[Page 147]
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, if there was a man-made area by TIR, for example - Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal - that created a wetland, and it was having a negative effect on a development or something, what would be your view of that? How would you look at the economy? How would you look at this if it was a man-made wetland?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, when you give me a hypothetical situation, first of all I have to go out and I want to go back; for instance, if we look back to my ancestors, the Acadians, they basically went in and captured the land and they used the dike system to create lands from wetlands. So there is another example. If you give me a hypothetical situation, I think you need to go out and do an evaluation of all the information regarding that. So, to just give you an example, you would have to have all the information in front of you before you can make a decision on a hypothetical question.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, where you are the Minister of Environment and we should protect our environment, I was wondering if the minister would take a drive with me and see an area right here in HRM. We'll take one vehicle and I will even supply the vehicle and the gas, and I'll show you a man-made wetland that is having a negative impact on a community and a development in HRM. I was wondering if the minister would go out and visit this site and give me his view of the area?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, I can assure the member that I don't mind driving or walking and I know that you're a pilot, I'll even - and I'm just being humorous here - but I'll . . .
MR. HURLBURT: You will fly with me? (Laughter)
MR. BELLIVEAU: I would ride with you and I'm hoping and I can't resist this, but I'm hoping you would have dinner with me. But on a serious note, I understand your question and I would be more than willing to, and I appreciate that you know that the House is in session and our time frame, but I would be more than willing to meet with the member opposite and to view any situation or violation. Again, I've said this before and I've said to different members, that if there is a violation that is happening across Nova Scotia, I ask people to give me the coordinates, give me the information and I will do and act on my job and I take my job very seriously. So, I look forward to taking the tour or visiting the site with you.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for that response. I will take him up on that and I will set it up so that my schedule can meet your schedule and I'll even buy coffee on the trip.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to go now to protected wilderness areas. The minister in his opening comments said that they were going to be expanding wilderness areas and I think he said in his remarks, creating two new ones. Is that true?
[Page 148]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Yes, again thank you, I'm delighted that you brought this up because the commitment for 12 per cent of our land mass across Nova Scotia is a great goal to achieve. The one most recent, Long Lake Ship Harbour, again, I've been around and involved with different groups with diverse backgrounds and people with strong viewpoints. I've engaged in that process for a number of years and I know that the consultation process of this particular Long Lake Ship Harbour Wilderness Area, there were a lot of different interest groups that had consulted for a number of years and put their recommendations forward. I was impressed to see the variety of groups on that and how they could come together to achieve that and protect that wilderness area. So, there's a lot of commitment out there.
The question was asked earlier about protecting wilderness areas and I would be very blunt and frank, I think that the commitment that our government has made on this and the previous government, I don't exclude them, I know there was work done by all Parties and I appreciate that. I also appreciate all the work of these different interest groups. It is not about us. It is not about the people in this room today. I know that we will all have an opportunity to enjoy the recreational use of that area, but it is about our grandchildren and the next generation.
I said earlier that people are going to look back and reflect on this particular time in society and all the governments had this vision of protecting this wilderness area and I think it is going to be a great accomplishment and an opportunity for our grandchildren to reflect back and say that these particular groups in society had a vision of protecting this area and they did the right thing.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the words of the minister but he never even came anywhere answering my question. So I'll go back at it again. Would the minister please tell this committee the areas that you are thinking of expanding and - I'm sorry, was it two new areas you're looking at for the Province of Nova Scotia? I think that's what I heard in your opening comments.
MR. BELLIVEAU: We are currently looking at other possible areas, and I think you have to appreciate that I had this similar question before, and I think there's a process that we have to go through. The money that was allotted and the same question was asked last evening in this same room of the $70 million that was in this particular budget. The Minister of Natural Resources summed it up well, I think, that when you're buying land there's not a lot of money, so there has to be a process in place where you have different interest groups that go out and evaluate the land masses out there that are possibly for sale. It's up to that particular committee to identify them and allow that process to work, to make sure you get the best value for the dollars that are allotted.
[Page 149]
I think we have to respect that and give the process an opportunity to go out and do this work. To me, again, the success story is the Long Lake Wilderness Area that has just been identified. That system works, and I think we have to allow that process to move forward.
MR. HURLBURT: I thought we were getting off on a good foot here, but I am not going to leave this alone until I get an answer. Where are you looking at? I'm not asking you to be point-blank, but I'm asking you in a broad term, where are you looking at creating new wilderness areas and where are you looking at expanding? That's a very simple question and I think the committee deserves an answer.
MR. BELLIVEAU: The simple answer is we're looking in Nova Scotia.
MR. HURLBURT: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that answer. She's going off the rails fast.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, we are willing to get a report soon from the forestry and environment groups and we'll look at their recommendations. This is a process that's in place. The short answer is, these areas are across Nova Scotia and there are many of them. To identify, to sit here and speculate is not the proper time and place. There are no decisions yet, and we have to allow for that process to move forward.
Again, I go back to the Long Lake Ship Harbour exercise. There are so many people that are so proud of that exercise and so happy that that took place and the involvement they had in it. That is a success story. That's what we should be talking about today, is the accomplishment, the success of those groups getting together and the benefit of how pleased they are. I've had a lot of comments about how all the effort that's gone into that and how pleased they are with the outcome. If you visualize doing this a number of times and allowing an opportunity to go through that same process, you're going to have that same pleasure, that same satisfaction.
It's not up to the minister here to make that selection. To me, the process works and we need to allow that process to move forward and to work in the best interests of all Nova Scotians.
MR. HURLBURT: The minister's opening comments made it very clear that they were looking at two new wilderness areas and they're looking at expansions. We'll get down to one closer to home. Is your department looking at expanding the Tobeatic Wilderness Area?
[6:15 p.m.]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, again, Mr. Chairman, you know, we will not designate any area without consultation. All these sites, any sites across Nova Scotia, I repeat, there's a process that has to go forward, and I can point you back to the one I just talked about, the
[Page 150]
Silver Lake area. To me that's a success story, and that's the way the process needs to unfold. I'm sure, if you go across our province, there's some beautiful wilderness areas that we all would love to identify and, again, we have a certain amount of money, and with that process in place, the right decisions will be made and our grandchildren will benefit from that and they'll appreciate us taking the time to get it right.
MR. HURLBURT: Would the minister give us clarity on the process, then? Where he will not answer the question, would he give us clarity on the process?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it. I can answer the question in different ways, but I can tell you there's a process in place and, you know, I think people, where these areas have been designated wilderness areas, are very proud of that process. There's a lot of good stories about how people can come from different backgrounds; they have different views on their appreciation, their recreation value of particular protected areas, and when you get all those different opinions at a table and when that process works and you come up with a recommendation and you actually get the hug from these different groups - they literally hug each other, knowing that they have accomplished something that they all appreciate - this is a success story.
I think that you can ask a question as many times as you want to, the point is that this process works and people are very proud of these areas that have been designated. The point is that it works and the communities are appreciating them. We have a lot of areas across Nova Scotia that have to go through this process, and these people will make the right recommendations and all Nova Scotians will benefit from it.
MR. HURLBURT: Well, Mr. Chairman, he keeps talking about the process. Would he give clarity to this table of what the process is? Are you having dialogue within communities? Are you going to go in and just expropriate the land? What is the intention, minister, of how you're dealing, and if you are expanding the wilderness area, what is the process? That's what I'm asking, and I'm not getting one iota of clarity to that question.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I've spent . . .
MR. HURLBURT: Maybe you have it over there, maybe they could answer it. They seem to have all the answers over there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The minister has the floor.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I've spent, like I say, a lifetime on water and I know sometimes when you make a decision to go in a certain direction you have to feel confident and you have to be really sure that you are making the right decision. The right decision is that we will not designate any area without consultation. There is a process in place. I described it very well. I had described how people across Nova Scotia from various
[Page 151]
groups have come together and talked about the Long Lake Wilderness Area, and that is a success story.
I can go on at great lengths of how those people have worked for years to identify that area. They are very well appreciative of that protected designation as we speak, and this system works. That is a great model to move forward, and to me, the consultation process - regardless of what area you're talking about across Nova Scotia, I think we all can identify some areas that may be in there that may want to be identified. So allow that process to work and, again, we'll just watch the success stories with whatever recommendations come forward when we have this consultation with Nova Scotians.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I'll go at this by another angle. Will the minister tell the committee, are you having dialogue with the mining industry, for example? Are you having dialogue with the forestry industry prior to even looking at any of these areas?
MR. BELLIVEAU: We're consulting with all stakeholders. Again, I go back to the initial one we just talked about, that all stakeholders are involved in this process, from all walks of life, from all different interests that are competing for the use of this particular designated protected area. They're all involved there and they're all at the table. This is what's important when you live in a society like ours, that everybody's views are considered and they all have an opportunity to be engaged and to have comments on something that's important to them.
MR. HURLBURT: Where there's a management agreement in the wilderness areas and there are restrictions on it with motorized vehicles over land, what's the view of the minister on this policy?
MR. BELLIVEAU: My view is that we have to take all considerations of all the different groups and I don't make any decision unless I have gathered all the information. If you're asking a hypothetical question, first of all you have to find out what you're dealing with. If you're talking about ATV groups or Trans Canada Trail for snowmobiles and all that, I think you have to go out and ask the question in that light. If you're talking about having a Canada-wide snowmobile trail, that's a different question than if you were talking about going into protected areas.
So you have to gather the information, understand what you're trying to address, what you're trying to accomplish and move forward from there. The question is a general question and I'll leave it at that.
MR. HURLBURT: The Tobeatic, ATVs are not allowed in the Tobeatic Wilderness Area. Would you agree with that minister?
[Page 152]
MR. BELLIVEAU: ATV use is generally prohibited in all wilderness areas, including Scatarie Island and Hay Island. Although it may be permitted by a minister in specific circumstances outlined in the legislation.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I could take the minister for a nice long walk any Sunday he wants in the Tobeatic, that I've been going into with my grandfather since I was just a child. We now do not allow the general public to go in the Tobeatic with a motorized vehicle but we allow Natural Resources enforcement people in there - I can take you through some of the bogs that they're tearing up.
I ask the question, is it fair for Nova Scotians that they are not allowed but yet we have government people going in there and ruining the area.
MR. BELLIVEAU: These particular situations you're talking about, the enforcement part of it, are going in there for protection and compliance in making sure people are not abusing it. Again, if you have certain concerns, I would love for you to identify them and bring that particular issue to me.
These are certain conditions and they're very remote, if I can use that term, but if you sense these enforcement vehicles are destroying the property, I think that needs to be brought to the respective department's attention and we will deal with it. There are very rare cases of these improvements or conditions.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I disagree with the last part of the minister's reply. There are citizens from our end of the province who have witnessed this, and we have pictures and proof of this. I think that if it's fair for one Nova Scotian, it's fair for all Nova Scotians. I will be bringing this to the minister's attention and maybe we can deal with it at a later date.
This place and people who have for generations been using the Tobeatic, they've been literally kicked off the land and been cut apart - it's just total disrespect for generations. A former warden for the Department of Natural Resources and then-Department of Lands and Forests, Mr. Gray - they had a camp in the Tobeatic for three to five generations and they had a love for that area and I think that we should have respect for him. That's why I asked my original question about expansions of the Tobeatic, and I'm not getting any direction of where the minister's thought process is on that. I will tell him that I think that the people of those communities deserve to have a public meeting if your department is even thinking of expanding that Tobeatic.
I know that the minister knows very well what I'm talking of. His riding abuts the Tobeatic and a lot of his citizens use that area, a lot of the citizens from the minister's riding. I'm asking the minister, if your department is even looking at expanding that Tobeatic, would you commit to a public meeting with the citizens of the area?
[Page 153]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, back in my comments, I take you back that any area there has to be a process of consultation dealing with any of these areas, and I'm very familiar with the Tobeatic. I can probably recite - I think there's 270-odd camps - not in the Tobeatic, but there were 70-odd camps in there. Up in the tri-counties, and I think the member for Yarmouth knows what I'm talking about, there's a good number of the campsites surrounding the Tobeatic. I'm very familiar with the recreational use of lands, I'm very familiar with the people that actually had campsites in the Tobeatic. I can assure the member, any of these lands that people are valuing, there's a consultation process to go forward. I mean, there is going to be an opportunity for the public to be involved in that.
I know the importance of recreational use when it comes to camping and hunting, and that is part of our culture. Believe me, when I drive back and forth to Halifax on a weekly trip and from now on when I see a car stopped alongside the road, a lot of people, a lot of motorists would think that that person probably had bad luck and the car broke down. I know and I visualize that there are a bunch of hunters that are probably within the legal limits of our road or back to a camp somewhere enjoying the recreational use of our land that we appreciate. They are hunters and we see it on a seasonal basis, especially as we move back and forth from Halifax, that there are a lot of people out there across Nova Scotia, in the thousands, that enjoy the recreational use of our lands and our hunting seasons. I understand the member opposite's appreciation of the Tobeatic, I understand the appreciation of the hunting industry, and I can tell you that any time this issue will be brought up there will be consultation and the public will be involved.
MR. HURLBURT: That's the comment I wanted to hear - your last comments were the comments I wanted to hear, that the public and the community have been good stewards of that property, as you are well aware, for years and years and generations. They deserve to have the respect of your department if you're looking at even thinking of expanding the Tobeatic. I thank you for the comments and your final remarks on that, that you will consult and the public will have an opportunity to speak on it. I would like to know what the department's view is on Buy Back Nova Scotia of the J.D. Irving lands in southwest Nova Scotia?
[6:30 p.m.]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I can tell you that the Department of Natural Resources is taking the lead on this. I mean that question needs to be directed toward the minister in that department.
MR. HURLBURT: I thought it was in the estimates, $81 million. The minister is saying $70 million for the land acquisition for the province. Whatever the number is, is the Department of Environment having any involvement in the purchasing of the land, then?
[Page 154]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, yes, we work with the Department of Natural Resources. We work with them on that particular thing, but they are taking the lead on that initiative.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister, the minister I'm sure is aware of Electric City up in back of Weymouth there, and the citizens have been very concerned about the province acquiring that property. There are other numbers, I forget how many pieces there are around waterways up there that they wanted to make sure were purchased by the province and maintained by the province for the general use of Nova Scotians. So I just wanted to make sure that the minister is aware of that, and I'm sure he is, and his department, but I hope that they're having good dialogue with Natural Resources as we move ahead with the Buy Back Nova Scotia property.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you framing that in a question or looking for a comment?
MR. HURLBURT: Well, I want to make sure that the minister is aware of Electric City, and I think there were four different lakes, and maybe the minister has the information, I'm not sure, that he could share here this evening if possible?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, I'm certainly aware of the location that you're talking about, and I know the value and the people who enjoy that particular area, but I want to just also highlight that we'll bring your concerns or your comments to the Minister of Natural Resources. I understand your concerns, and they will be brought forward. I've made note of these and our staff will make sure that those comments are passed on to the minister.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I'll move now to one that should get some activity going. As the minister is well aware, in January 2010 the Minister of Energy for the Province of Nova Scotia and the Minister of Natural Resources for Canada have to come to a mutual agreement of where we're going to be moving with Georges Bank. I would like to know what the minister's views are, and his department's, of Georges Bank?
MR. BELLIVEAU: My views on Georges Bank - I think I can start off simply by saying that I spent time talking about tidal power earlier and I think I can spend equal time about the importance of Georges Bank. It's one of the most productive ecological systems in the world. It's on the entrance of the Bay of Fundy and it's a very good growth area for a lot of fish. It's a breeding ground for whales and right down to the small, different larvae, and all the stuff that's in the ecosystem. To me, the importance of it to southwest Nova Scotia is immense.
I don't think I have to tell the member for Yarmouth the importance of that. It is a driving force. It is the economic engine of the tri-counties, if not Nova Scotia, of the fishing industry. I know the importance of it very well and all the dollars that are generated from that, on a year-round basis I might add, and so to me the importance of that - I can tell the member
[Page 155]
for Yarmouth that I've met with the group called NoRigs 3 coalition. I've had a discussion with them and I assured them that I would be bringing their concerns and the importance of that to our caucus table. I've been involved in fishing for a number of years and I do not have to reflect on that. So to me it's a no-brainer that that is a very valuable resource out there and I continue to take that message forward on behalf of my constituents and I take that to our Cabinet Table, I take it to our caucus table, and I'll continue to do that.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, does the minister agree that the people who will be impacted by Georges Bank, regardless of which way it goes, the people who will be impacted the most are the people in the tri-county area?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, I think all Nova Scotians will be impacted.
MR. HURLBURT: Absolutely, but the most.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I don't know where the question is leading but if you're talking about the loss of fishing, if the impact will be, not only in Nova Scotia but the New England States, our neighbours to the south, that they enjoy a good portion. In fact, a good portion of that belongs to the United States. I can take you back to when that dispute was evolving through our court system, the world courts, and the historical involvement. I remember my uncle basically giving testimony about the importance of Georges Bank. So all Nova Scotia benefits from Georges Bank and our great friend, the United States, controls the biggest portion of it and there's a fishing fleet that shares the same values from that fishing ground. So to me, it's more the importance of that and the value of who it's going to affect, is a very broad-reaching answer. It's going to affect all of Nova Scotia and it's going to affect the New England community of the United States.
MR. HURLBURT: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think the ones who would have the biggest impact would be the people of southwest Nova Scotia and I really believe that the people of southwest Nova Scotia deserve to have all the information at their fingertips and I believe that the people of southwest Nova Scotia have a right to have a say in what's going to happen on Georges Bank. I believe that, I don't think Halifax has all the answers and with all due respect to your staff, you have very intelligent staff, but I think the people of southwest Nova Scotia deserve to have the information, minister, and Ottawa and Halifax should not be dictating.
We should have the information, have a panel, and give all the information to southwest Nova Scotia so they know the impacts on the environment, the impacts either way on the fisheries and to the oil industry. It should be an open and broad discussion so all people - and I sure hope that the minister will take this message back and that we can keep on having these community meetings and having the information for the people of our communities who deserve to have that information so that they can make a wise and sound decision based on the science.
[Page 156]
MR. CHAIRMAN: And the question?
MR. HURLBURT: I ask the minister if he would take that back to his Cabinet Table and to his colleagues to make sure that that process keeps moving ahead?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I can assure you that I have already relayed that message to our caucus. I think it's a given that with my past experience and, you know, I'm a strong believer in going out and getting the best science and having this information produced in a very open and transparent manner. I think that I can assure the people of Nova Scotia, in the tri-counties and my constituents that that message - the importance of Georges Bank, the ecosystem around that, I can probably recite the different depths of water from Georges Bank to the upper Bay of Fundy. You don't want to hear that, but I can assure you that the people in Ottawa, the people around our caucus table, are going to know the value and the importance of that ecosystem on Georges Bank.
It's always important to know that you have the best interests of the fishing industry and our coastal communities at heart when you go into that particular setting, whether it's a caucus table or whether it's the House that we're in today. I assure the people who elected me, I assure the people across Nova Scotia, and that was in our speech - not our speech but in the Speech from the Throne - that we would actually hold DFO in Ottawa accountable on decisions about our fishing industry. I take that line very seriously, and I can tell the members here today that I'm committed to doing that. I think that we can spend the rest of time talking about Georges Bank, and if you want to, I encourage you to do that, but I can assure you that the message of the importance of that ecosystem is going to be brought forcefully to our Party.
If there's a question raised in the House - I've got to stop here and pause, because one of the issues of our industry right now, and the honourable member for Yarmouth would know, is that the lobster industry is going through a very difficult economic time. I'll leave that for the member for Yarmouth to probably pose a question. There was a fisheries lobster package that was introduced a few weeks ago by the Honourable Gail Shea in Ottawa concerning the lobster industry. There's very little media attention on that issue, and I look forward to having a question regarding that. When that question is posed to me, I'm going to bring the message very forcefully to the federal member in Ottawa. I already have, but again, I know the importance of that industry. I also know the importance of Georges Bank, and I will not take a backseat, and I'll reflect that every time I have an opportunity to get to talk about the industry. Thank you.
MR. HURLBURT: Mr. Chairman, I'm sure the minister knows that my mother hails from Cape Island, and I'm very proud of my background, but I was born and brought up in Yarmouth and we are a fishing community also. I'm going to do what I have to do to protect the fisheries in our community, but I still firmly believe in my drawing the line in the sand that the people of southwest Nova Scotia deserve to have all the information and to have public
[Page 157]
meetings and to have input into Georges Bank. We'll leave that one at that and we'll move on, but I do thank the minister for his comments on it.
Your department - would you just give me an overview of your department's mandate? Is your department supposed to be reactive to the environment or proactive to the environment?
MR. BELLIVEAU: We have certain regulations that are in place to basically give everybody an idea of what you can and cannot do. To me, the question was, I think we're proactive. Again, if the member is talking about something that we cannot deal with, if there is a violation out there, to me there is proactive - telling people when I go into a place like this, a public forum, and people bring up a scenario of a possible violation, I ask them to give me the coordinates, give me the situation, give me a picture or something. To me, that's very proactive, and tell them that if there is a violation out there, we'll work on that.
All our inspectors are out there doing their job on a daily basis, and I think that we probably live in one of the cleanest and greenest environments in Canada and a lot of the things we've talked about earlier tonight is taking a leadership role on the environment. That's being very proactive.
[6:45 p.m.]
You may not want to hear the speech about household waste or e-waste, but to me those are all about being proactive. When you go to other provinces and you talk about your landfills and the e-waste, they're kind of looking at you saying how can you be this successful? That's proactive.
There are a number of cases I could point to and it's very rewarding when you have 270 staff that's committed to making life better for Nova Scotians and they're committed when they come to the job, they're enthused, they're eager and they want to participate in this on a daily basis. That is being proactive.
Again I reflect on my fishing days. If you were going to be successful you were proactive. If you got somebody that didn't want to participate, didn't want to work, usually they were not very successful. I can tell you that I'm surrounded by very professional staff and we take this job very seriously, so I would say the answer to your question is the environmental group, this department, is proactive.
MR. HURLBURT: If an individual spills a litre of oil, they could be charged by your department for an environmental issue. If you're doing an infill in an area and if you do not have your environmental booms up - not saying that there's going to be any spillage into a waterway or anything, but if they do not have their environmental booms up and their spill fences and all that, they can be shut down. Am I correct on that?
[Page 158]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Again, if certain projects are not meeting certain regulations, yes we can step in there, the minister has the authority to step in when there this a violation of the Environmental Act. Yes, there are certain times you can step in.
MR. HURLBURT: If a homeowner's septic is not operating properly and it's polluting a waterway, can they be charged?
MR. BELLIVEAU: First of all there has to be an investigation. We would have to go out and if there's a point of source of contamination, then there would be a violation and there would be charges put in place. These particular scenarios that you are presenting to me have to be investigated and the proper procedure will move forward. If there's a violation, then there will be a charge.
MR. HURLBURT: I know the minister knows where I'm going, if he would trust my skills as a pilot, I would love to take him for a ride and show him in back of Havelock, the mink ranches that are up there that are polluting our waterways. We know that. Every citizen that has visited the area - there's one lake up there that is totally, totally polluted and it will never come back in our life span or our children's or our grandchildren's life span.
I'm pleading with the minister again. We have a potential issue at Sloans Lake in Yarmouth County and I don't know why we can not be proactive until that environmental study is done on the Carleton waterway, to know where the pollution is coming from. I know you're a very intelligent man and I know that if you saw this with your own eyes, you would agree there's an issue here. I'm not pointing my finger, but I'm telling you there's a very, very important issue here. I do not want to have a negative effect on the fur farming industry, but I want to protect our waterways and our environment in my community.
My people have pleaded on this issue and everybody's turning their backs on us. Would the minister give us some guidance of what to do and I could report back to our citizens as to what we should be doing in our community?
MR. BELLIVEAU: I appreciate the question and I'm going to take some time to answer this question. First of all, I'll take you up on your pilot venture. But there is only one condition though. I'm going to ask you to think about it, but we have to have dinner after.
MR. HURLBURT: Yes, at your place.
MR. BELLIVEAU: But I want to take some time, Mr. Chairman. I think, with all due respect, we have been very proactive on this particular issue. I just want to highlight that we take water quality very seriously and I'm pleased to report that our staff has completed water sampling at Sloans Lake in Yarmouth and the Clyde River site in Shelburne. The samples will provide important baseline data and the baseline data will help us assess whether any effects develop in that watercourse. So the corrective actions have been taken or may be taken.
[Page 159]
As well, the operators of the proposed mink ranches at Sloans Lake and Clyde River, have agreed to participate in a monitoring program to help prevent adverse effects. Our department staff will continue to work with stakeholders and Nova Scotia Agriculture to address any source of contamination to these water systems that may result from mink farms.
The algae blooms in the water are caused by a rise in the level of nutrients. That rise can have a variety of causes. We need to rely on the monitoring and science to address the contributing factors to this problem. It is important that we recognize that good science will provide us with a fair and balanced response to this issue.
Nova Scotia Agriculture assists farmers and can help in the prevention of a potential contamination, through the Environmental Farm Plan program and the Manure Management Guidelines.
The Municipality of Yarmouth, as the member opposite is very familiar with, has bylaws that regulate the placement of these facilities in relation to watercourses. Our department continues to work with the Tusket River Environmental Protection Association, which plays an important role in representing the Tusket River watershed community.
I just want to add, to understand that we have gone in there and there was - if I could back up to last March, if I'm correct, there was water sampling done in the Tusket River area. It was inconclusive. When this issue was brought to my attention, and I met with the member for Yarmouth in my very first days of being appointed, we committed then that we would take an aggressive, proactive approach to monitoring and we are doing that monitoring now to get that baseline information. So, to me, we are addressing this issue in the appropriate manner and we are committed to having a monitoring program in place to protect these water courses.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would mention that there would be four minutes left for the member for Yarmouth.
MR. HURLBURT: I would like to inform my colleague that I will not be sharing my time with him.
Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister, I appreciate your department taking the samples, but after that lake gets polluted it would be too late. You can take all the samples prior to the ranch going there. But if we do not know where the pollutants are coming from, yet, I'm thinking of being proactive.
I know there are members of your caucus that heckle and go on, because I stand up for the people in my community, well I'll tell you, when I have an outcry from people who have a concern about their environment and their waterways, I'll stand up any day of the week, as I know the minister will, as anybody in this House of Assembly should. We should be standing up for our people and their concerns. They have a deep concern, minister. What
[Page 160]
you're telling me, I guess tonight, is your hands are tied and there is nothing you can do to help the citizens out, outside of taking the water samples that you have taken already?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I can tell the member opposite that I'm more than willing to travel in his airplane and observe the surrounding areas. I'm very familiar with the watershed area.
I'm also committed to doing what we can do within our department. We have been very aggressive. I've made the commitment that our staff is to go out and do a monitoring program, and I want to highlight that to pinpoint the sources. This is information that can be gathered, and we're all there wanting to protect our environment and do the appropriate thing. I intend, as I've done from day one, to take this job very seriously, and we will continue to work with the member for Yarmouth, we will continue to work with our neighbouring departments, and we will do the best thing in the interests of what is good for Nova Scotians. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member for Yarmouth, you have about one and a half minutes.
MR. HURLBURT: Thank you. Then in my closing remarks I will make this very clear: this is an NDP budget, not, as the minister stated earlier, a Progressive Conservative budget. If it was, we wouldn't be borrowing to pay the mortgage for a year out. We would take money and put it into public transit.
Mr. Minister, do you have a program that could help small rural communities for public transit, i.e. the Shelburnes or the Yarmouths of our province? Have you looked at the heat boxes for 18-wheelers, so that they don't have to run their engines all night and they could have their heat boxes to help clean up our environment? There are a number of initiatives that we could have instead of borrowing the money and paying the mortgage a year out. I think we could take that $300 million and invest it more wisely to help clean up our environment, more than we're doing right now. Maybe the minister has some initiatives on the way that we're not aware of, but those are just a couple of little examples that we could be looking at.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has expired and we will now return to the Liberal caucus.
The honourable member for Dartmouth East.
MR. ANDREW YOUNGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I think you just gave me a promotion, so I appreciate that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Actually, I've been told by the former Speaker that we should refer to all members in this forum as honourable members.
[Page 161]
MR. YOUNGER: Well, there you go, things you learn. Mr. Minister, I unfortunately don't have an airplane that I can offer to take you up in, but hopefully we can still get through these questions. I want to go back to the e-waste program. The nice thing about having an hour break is that you get to go and check things out. So I did a little bit of looking into this.
First of all, we talked about the good news and the bad news, and I should let you know, just for your own information, you might want to update your department's Web site. Your department's Web site doesn't make any mention of either the facility in Elmsdale or Dartmouth and, in fact, when you check for a list of all facilities - and obviously it is not listed in the drop-offs, because it is not a drop-off location - it is not listed. When you check on the Frequently Asked Questions page, where it says "What happens to the waste?", it just says it's dealt with in accordance with these guidelines and sends you to a link to a national organization. So that might be a good place to start - we talked earlier about not getting the message out. I know sometimes Web sites can get overwhelming, but I think that might be a good place to start.
I have some concerns that came out when I looked at this and I was able to find out a little bit of information on the Elmsdale and Dartmouth site, and I think I am going to accept that you or your staff may have misunderstood my question. I was referring to the actual recycling of the products in Nova Scotia. In fact, according to the information that I was able to find on the Dartmouth and Elmsdale plant, they don't do any recycling there at all. They're basically transfer stations where they do some disassembly, but the material from the Elmsdale plant is sent to Quebec and the material from the Burnside plant is sent to Toronto, where it is then recycled. Actually, where it is further disassembled and then recycled.
[7:00 p.m.]
So the significance of that is that that means the costs that Nova Scotians are paying for the e-waste program is significantly higher than many other provinces in Canada, and I have a list of the fees charged. So I guess I'll go back to that original question now that I've explained it a little bit better, because that may have been my fault that I didn't explain it better earlier.
There was talk when this was first announced, and I understand you weren't the minister at the time, but there was talk that we would be trying to move toward encouraging that industry here and the use and the recycling of those materials here. I know for a fact that at least some of those materials can actually be used here, especially some of the metals for our smelters, and there is a foundry down in Lunenburg that's indicated that they could use some of those metals. So what is your department planning to do to try to encourage as much reuse of that material as possible in Nova Scotia?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, first of all there were a series of questions in there, and you talked about our Web site. I can confirm that is always a work in progress - and this
[Page 162]
is the good part of these exchanges - and that we are working to upgrade that Web site. There are always ways of improvement, and I appreciate you bringing that to our attention.
You talked about the location of parts that are e-waste and the Dartmouth area, I mean these certain places where components are taken apart and shipped away to central Canada or wherever. Can we improve on that recycling? There is always room for improvement. You have a success story, and I think a lot of other provinces will look at that right now and agree that it is very successful. Sometimes, when you have that confidence and you're a success, you say, well, maybe we have reached a level where there is no need, but there is always a need for improvement. I just go back to - I think I made reference to this earlier - Mr. Tiger Woods, one of the best golfers there is now on our planet. One of his main goals is to improve. I don't know if that is a good example or not, but I think it is a fairly good example. We have a success story when we're dealing with e-waste, and to me there is always room for improvement.
As part of the ACES improvement plan, all processes are required to meet strict environment and OHS standards. These standards prohibit export of scrap and hazardous materials to developing nations. Material is tracked and audited to the end processor. E-waste is currently being sent to FCM Recycling in Elmsdale and Sims Recycling Solutions in Brampton, Ontario. A new process, eCycle, has recently been established in Dartmouth, and it is expected that they will begin processing material in the next few months. I mean, these are processes that are evolving as we speak. I think we all recognize across the Maritimes that this is a success story, and can we keep more parts here? Can we recycle better? I'm sure we can. I think Nova Scotians - again, I've made a number of examples from our land waste - we are the leaders. Back to Tiger Woods again, Tiger Woods is committed to improving, and I think Nova Scotia is probably setting that same example. We are a success and we are always open to comments and working on improving that. So that is just a part of our heritage, I guess.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I agree that what we have is a success, but I think - and I think I've heard you say this - there is more we can look at doing and hope to do. One of the things that concerns me when I look at the Elmsdale plant, for example, according to the reports that I was able to get off, they don't, for example, disassemble computer monitors at all. They ship those as boxes of monitors, I think that is the one that goes to Quebec, one of them goes to Quebec and one of them goes to Toronto. My concern with that is that when I've heard about these programs, before getting into the Legislature, and having toured the facilities in Alberta where this is done, there isn't much left once they have disassembled, when they talk about disassembly, it is truly disassembled right down to the last little bits and pieces. Then most of those bits and pieces are used in the province.
Now, granted, Alberta is larger than we are and so forth, but I'm just wondering what action your department - it's all fine and good to say that we want to get there and we want to do that, but what action is your department taking to take us to that point and to improve
[Page 163]
the situation? I don't expect for a minute that we will be able to do everything, but there's certainly a lot that we can do.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, like I say, this is a project in process here. We're always out there looking for new opportunities on how we can do things better and how we can improve on it, but there is always a combination of dealing with the economy and the environment and there has to be a balance there. To me, if we reflect back over 10 years ago, those jobs weren't there. It is always good to know that these success stories exist and we're taking a leadership role. Can we improve on it? Can we do better? Sure, we can. In Nova Scotia we have that attitude when it comes to recycling and having a clean environment. I think we will continue to move down that path.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to hear you say that we want to move forward but one of the challenges with this program, and your Party has talked a lot about how to support today's families and how to reduce costs for today's families. Yet, report after report shows that Nova Scotia's fees are higher than comparable programs anywhere in the country, largely because, and I'm looking at a list right here, the economies of scale and the access to final processing in those provinces, yet there are people in this province who have expressed interest in using some of those materials that aren't getting access to them because we're choosing to ship them to Montreal or Toronto. So, those are opportunities that the department can take care of now and should result in a reduction of the upfront charge to people when they buy electronics.
It's a statement but I guess I'm looking for a response in terms of - I have to assume that the minister, like me, would like to see the fees reduced, but the fees have to cover the cost of the program. If we know that one of the drivers of the cost is that they are shipping this material out of province when there are people in the province who have expressed an interest to use some of the material, if it is fully disassembled, then what are we doing to move in that direction? I know it is not done now, and that's okay and I accept that, and I know we're going to try to do better. I've heard you say that these are good ideas and we want to move forward, but what I want to know is what is your department going to do, what concrete action is your department going to take to move us in that direction? It may take five years but what are we going to do?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Honourable member, you're talking about the recycling fees, and as the result of a recent report looking at ways of more accurately reflecting the cost of managing the recycling program - the environmental handling fees, the charges at the time of purchase of electronics collected by the Atlantic Canada Electronics Stewardship, ACES, under Phase 1 of the program - changed on August 1, 2009. The success of the electronic stewardship program is due to good government regulations - the electronic recycling program operated by ACES and the cellphone recycling program operated by CWTA, the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association, and the fees, Mr. Chairman, went down.
[Page 164]
MR. YOUNGER: In fact, Mr. Minister, that's not entirely correct. From the remainder from that statement from ACES, there was a $10 increase on the environmental handling fee on televisions and monitors. In fact, the increases were in the categories that I just indicated are not being taken apart here and are just being thrown into bins and shipped to Toronto and Montreal without disassembly. So while I accept the fact that there were certain items that did go down, the items where I just previously pointed out where we could make the most difference are the ones where, in fact, the fees went up on August 1st.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The question with your statement?
MR. YOUNGER: I think the minister has to respond to that, because he just suggested that the fees went all down when, in fact, some did go down but the ones that we're referring to in terms of monitors went up.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I think the honourable member is referring to one of the particular groups that went up. The majority went down. So the overall outcome is that the fees went down. You can interpret it the way you want, but the overall event is that most of these recyclable e-waste went down. We're always out there working and trying to improve on the services and, again, this is a success story. You can pick one item out and just say, well, the cellphone fees went up, but if you're doing 15 or 20 other applications, the overall performance is that the fees actually went down.
MR. YOUNGER: As the Clerk would say in the House, I think we will leave it to a disagreement among members, if that's okay. The point, I think, remains the same. I think I hear you agreeing that there is merit in working toward trying to improve the program. I think I heard you say that, and that's really the important part of this; I think the fees in all those categories can go down and we can support more local industry and more green jobs that you talked about earlier and I talked about earlier in the House, if we can get more of this done in Nova Scotia instead of shipping everything out West. We spend a lot of time shipping things out West in a lot of industries, and I think we have opportunities here in Nova Scotia to create some good jobs for people across the province. So I will move on, because I think we agree on the substance, if not necessarily the details.
You mentioned us being a leader, and I do tend to agree to a certain extent, but one of the things we talked about before my time elapsed earlier was the challenges that municipalities are having in reaching 300 kilograms of waste per person by 2015. I know we talked a lot about what could be challenged, but while I was looking for this other stuff I came across a report that says that we've started going in the wrong direction. In 2000, we were down to 357 kilograms per person, which was actually very, very close to the 300 that we want to get to. But in 2007, we were up to 477 kilograms per person, which is almost a 33 per cent increase per person in the amount of waste that reaches a landfill.
[Page 165]
So I'm troubled by the fact that, instead of going in the right direction and reducing waste, we seem to be going in the wrong direction if we tie that with the comments that I was mentioning earlier - that the HRM has indicated, and other municipalities as well, where they feel they are going to have difficulty reaching that 300 kilograms. I guess I want to go back to my original question from before the interruption. What is the Department of Environment willing to do? What steps are they willing to put in place to assist municipalities and, of course, the public in ultimately achieving that 300 kilogram target, which I think is a good target?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Well, first of all, Mr. Chairman, we're doing a strategy that will be out in early 2010. I understand your point that these are aggressive goals. I'm concerned about that, but I think, again, that if we see - you know, one of the things that probably impresses me the most is how the consumer has made this change, and it's a gradual change. When I walk into the store to pick up my groceries or whatever, the first thing I do is forget my cloth bag - and everybody puts their hand up on that one - but I'm in that league right now, that I forget to pick up my cloth bag that's basically out there in the backseat and somebody's going to have to move them over. Society has moved into that and as you go to the corner store and you look at how the consumers are getting into that habit of taking these cloth bags and using less plastic. There's where our society's moving and we're making that transition as we speak.
[7:15 p.m.]
I watch how many people are actually involved in purchasing products and how many people are taking plastic bags out and how many people are using the cloth bags. There's an attitude, there's a change of perception of how we're dealing with keeping our environment cleaner and that's going on as we speak. Every time I go to the grocery store, the number of people using these non-disposable bags, or not the plastic bags, is increasing. I mean, the evidence is right there.
Again, I appreciate your concern and I think we need to consult with the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities. My understanding is that there will be a conference in early November and I know, honourable member, you may attend. I always look forward to attending them and I think that we can always have a good discussion with those individuals. We'll have an opportunity to see how we can improve things and meet this particular goal.
MR. YOUNGER: I agree with you on the plastic bags and I join the rest of the crowd that realizes I have all my groceries and I get to the check-out line and sometimes realize that I've forgotten them in the car, which is an immensely frustrating experience. That, in fact, points to why this issue troubles me even more because you take a look at plastic garbage bags, people are using fewer and fewer plastic garbage bags. I look around my neighbourhood and people have their green compost bins out, they may not be composting everything they should but they're composting a lot of it. They have their newspapers out for recycling, they
[Page 166]
have the cans in the blue bag and yet, despite that happening over a period of nine years, our per-person waste has increased by 33 per cent, the garbage portion, so there's a disconnect there somewhere.
I agree with you, people are thinking about this and they're saying, this is what we need to do, and I'm one of those people. One of the mandates when I set up my constituency office was to make sure that it is almost a zero-waste constituency office, not quite, but it's very close. In fact, we're almost a zero-paper constituency office to a certain extent, which is very challenging with the amount of paper that this government, well every government sends around, that's not meant to be NDP.
It troubles me that we're doing all these really good things as members of the public, yet our waste is still increased by 33 per cent, so how are we going to solve that?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I get the experience of going in and forgetting the cloth bag. I think it costs me 39 cents every time I make that mistake. I end up buying a new cloth bag. I have a little humourous side to me and I always - I'm learning fast though.
You're talking about how we can improve on that and one of the things is, as consumers, I think we need to start demanding less packaging in a way of dealing with how we buy products. I've gone into the store myself and if you get a couple of items just for a quick snack or whatever, one of the questions is now, do you need a bag? If you don't have your cloth bag with you, you can just put them in your arms. I think the consumer's attitude is changing. They're asking for less packaging, these are some of the ways that we can improve on that. This is a project in progress here and I think that we are taking this leadership role, we're going to have these discussions, and these are good discussions because there are actually going to be some good comments come out of this on how we can improve on a system that we're actually taking a leadership role.
I look forward to having these discussions and we can identify certain areas where we can improve on it. I think that packaging overall is one where, somewhere, the consumer will probably demand in the next short time.
MR. YOUNGER: The thing with plastic shopping bags, I think they're awful, and very quickly I'll tell you that I worked in Africa for a bit of time and they were everywhere. You saw them everywhere. The thing here is they're recyclable. So they're probably not - at least I hope a very small percentage of that is part of our 477 kilograms per person. If it's not, we have a bigger issue because it means that people don't realize they can recycle plastic bags. You did bring up the issue of packaging and it is something that has bothered me for a long time. You just need to go buy a computer mouse, or a small cable, or a little dongle and it comes in those ridiculous clamshell plastic containers. So I share your frustration on packaging. Are you prepared to consider legislation that would look at packaging requirements or reduce the amount of packaging?
[Page 167]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, you're talking about packaging, I think that's one of the issues the Ministers of Environment will be talking about, it will be on the agenda in late October, mid-October. That's one of the agenda items. To me, and again I'll just go back to some of my experiences, even if you get a coffee table, whatever, you get it in a nice cardboard box. I've done this many times. I get it out and I look at it with the instructions. I always have fun with that and I always try to read the French version, I look at the pictures and have some fun with it. The point I'm trying to get to is, regardless if it's a coffee table or whatever, after you have fun putting it together for your home, in that surrounding, you're going to enjoy that. But if you look at the box you just took that out of, with all the Styrofoam, all the plastic, all the different containers, it seems to me you've got more in the box after you took the coffee table out than you started with.
I think the point I'm trying to make here is that the packaging is something that society can learn to do with less and maybe there are ways of improving, and that's one of the things that the ministers at this ministers' conference will be discussing, that particular topic.
MR. YOUNGER: I will look forward to the results of the meeting of the Ministers of Environment and what comes out of that in that area - understanding you can't answer that now - but I do hope it's something you will look at and, as you said earlier, I do understand that, obviously, you've only had this portfolio for 100 days and it makes it difficult to answer for some of the things that have gone on in the past, but I'm primarily concerned about the future, as I think you are, and so I do hope that you'll take some of these suggestions forward and consider them.
I'm going to move on from solid waste, I don't know if there was anything you wanted to add, if the deputy minister had some stuff there? All right, okay. I would like to briefly talk about Halifax Harbour Solutions Project. I do understand that there is an element to - and I want to talk about the problems they've had and I do understand that a lot of this is federal and related to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. However, it's my understanding that your department has either initiated or considered initiating investigations in terms of the sewer gas in the Barrington Street area and around the failed plant. I wonder if you can tell me what, if any, action your department has taken or what involvement your department is having in relation to the current situation?
MR. BELLIVEAU: The question I believe is regarding the sewer gas, am I correct? Our staff has investigated that and I can tell you that there's no human concern or no health concerns regarding that. There's ongoing monitoring, we're monitoring that particular situation and we'll continue to work with the Halifax Regional Municipality.
MR. YOUNGER: It seemed to me - and maybe this is wrong, maybe this is just the way it was reported in the news - but there was story after story about sewer gas and people were concerned. It wasn't until just a few weeks ago it seems that the Department of
[Page 168]
Environment suddenly went down and decided they were going to do tests. Is that the way it happened or has the department been doing tests throughout the summer?
MR. BELLIVEAU: My understanding is that HRM was doing tests. We were monitoring that and we looked into it after that was brought to our attention. It's an ongoing exercise.
The plan itself has provincial approval to construct and commission a plant which allows for testing of that system. There are a lot of systems in there, are you familiar with the outfall?
MR. YOUNGER: I've been through the plant.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I'm sure you don't want to go through all that, but I think you can appreciate the magnitude of that project. There has to be certain testing and flows that have to be changed, and I'm not an engineer, but I understand there has to be a time for that to happen and I think that we're working with HRM to monitor that situation as we speak.
MR. YOUNGER: I've been through the plant a number of times in my previous incarnation in politics and so I know the plant better than I really want to and have seen all the pictures and had all the detail as it malfunctioned. Luckily, I was not on council when they approved the design, so I can't take the blame for that.
There was something you said that bothers me a little bit, and it's not something I would cast blame on you or any of your staff for, but it's something that I'm going to ask you to look at changing in the future, and that is when you said that when it was brought to your attention - you'd followed the HRM tests and HRM was only doing above ground tests - when it was brought to your department's attention, then you went and did the tests which I think were the underground tests, where the higher levels were. Maybe it was the other way around. I'm not sure who did the underground ones and who did the above ground ones.
When I had to deal with potholes at HRM what frustrated me immensely was staff who would drive around and go over potholes day after day and not report them to Public Works. So, there would be a pothole somewhere forever and then all of a sudden the public would go berserk about it and it had been there forever and staff were driving over it and it never got reported. So, I would like to think - and I know you have a lot of really good people in your department who I've dealt with before - but I would like to think there would be some kind of reporting mechanism in your department that it's not just complaint driven, that if somebody sees something, or says I think we better find out what's going on here, that they would twig to that earlier on. I think in this case it was CBC news suddenly got reports and then asked the Department of Environment to comment on the reports.
[Page 169]
I think we have to be more proactive in government and it will make people a lot happier. Your constituents will be happier and so will mine. Is that fair?
MR. BELLIVEAU: To the honourable member, I just want to clarify a point here regarding the odour. We did not do the testing that we were talking about. That was done by HRM, so I just wanted to be clear on that.
MR. YOUNGER: My understanding was, and maybe I understood this incorrectly because this is what happens when you get the information from the news, HRM was doing either above ground or below ground testing only. I don't remember which one but then when CBC came to the department asking for comment, it was realized whichever test wasn't being done should be done and that's when you got involved. I thought you guys did that second bit of testing, is that not accurate?
Did you order that testing? I see you're nodding no so that's okay, but was it your department that ordered that second bit of testing then? I'm trying to just understand how that happened.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I think you're raising a very technical point here and I'm going to suggest to the honourable member that we get clarification from staff. You're asking a very technical question and I want to ensure you have the right answer, so I suggest that we sit down in the future and we'll have staff do some research on this, and I want to make sure you get the correct answer so I'd appreciate it if you could accept that.
[7:30 p.m.]
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, that's satisfactory to me. Maybe your staff can just get me some information about what timeline there is and what happened. To be clear, it's not that I think your department did anything wrong in this, I'm just looking for - is there a way that we can be more proactive in the future? This is inevitably going to happen again, which leads me to my next point on sewage treatment plants, you'll be happy to know not in HRM.
In your opening remarks you talked about helping municipalities get to - all municipalities, I assume - get to primary treatment by 2017, it was referenced in your remarks. I assume that is for waste water treatment; 2017 is seven years from now; primary treatment is, in my view, not a whole lot better than just basically putting a big mesh screen in front of it and getting the floatables out. Although it does an awful lot to improve the look of the water, it doesn't do very much to improve the actual quality of the water in most cases, in my experience. HRM should be secondary but they went for advanced primary because at least then the water is sterilized before going out. Why are you not requiring or helping municipalities go to at least advanced primary and possibly higher?
[Page 170]
When I looked at the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Guidelines, it seemed more to me that they were going to at least secondary treatment and that's why HRM now is trying to find money to go to secondary, to meet those guidelines.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, first of all this particular goal is something that we're trying to achieve to a national standard. The honourable member may want to know that there are 128 municipal wastewater treatment facilities in Nova Scotia to date, 90 per cent provide at least primary treatment. Our government is actively working with the other 10 per cent of municipalities to obtain the necessary infrastructure upgrades in order to meet the expected targets.
I just want to add, again, these issues are very dear to my heart because I know that these facilities - and I can point to the Digby area - I can tell you that when I get a chance to meet with the ministers this late October, that to me there is infrastructure money that could be going toward projects like this. I'll be championing that cause because I know that the clam harvesters in the Digby area depend on having the processing treatment facility have the higher upgrade. To me, that's a priority, to get that infrastructure in place to make the corrective measures. It is going to help the environment but it's also going to help an industry relying on safe and clean water in a water column that goes out in our oceans.
To me these are very important issues. Again, they're very aggressive goals and the municipalities are also seeing the benefit of working in the right direction and they are. To improve on that is a good goal to set, and again, it's not only the municipality that's going to benefit, the example that I just showed you is that the fishing industries dealing with the clam harvesters are probably just as important as promoting the successful outcome of that wastewater management system.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I agree that primary is better than nothing, there's no question about that. My concern though is - I guess it's two-fold - one, you get these plants up to primary, are they going to have the capability to go to secondary or tertiary treatment? Is that going to be a requirement? The second part of that question is, it has been widely reported, and I know at HRM we got notification from the federal government at the time saying that the federal government was going to come out with their regulations requiring everybody to be secondary treatment.
I just don't understand why you would help all these municipalities go to primary treatment when the federal government, within a year or two after that, might be requiring everybody to go to secondary treatment. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I want to assure you that we're working with the federal government and the municipalities to attain this goal, but the established cost of implementing this strategy is $10 to $13 billion nationally over 30 years. Nova Scotia's cost is estimated at over $600 million, expected to be shared between municipalities, the province and federal
[Page 171]
government. There is currently no commitment to funding from the Government of Canada for this strategy and the signing of the strategy does not obligate the province to any funding at this time.
These are all important programs but to know that we have 80 or 90 per cent on-line now, to know where we're moving, it comes back to a leadership role. All of Nova Scotia is buying into the concept that we want a cleaner and greener Nova Scotia. So all the things we talked about tonight is a reflection on us taking the environment very seriously. I think that is evident in all the different situations that we brought forward tonight and all the exchanges, that we're all committed regardless of our political lines. I think we all share that desire, that we are going to have a good clean healthy environment. It's good to know that there are programs and there are people committed regardless of whether you're at the municipal level or the federal level or the provincial level. We're all there, we share the environment and it's something we want to pass on to our children and our grandchildren.
MR. YOUNGER: I don't disagree with what you're saying, but my concern is - and you pointed right at it - is a leadership role. It's going to be expensive, the federal government needs to put money in if they want to implement this strategy. There's absolutely no question, you have my 100 per cent support on that.
But, if we are going to take a leadership role and we know this is coming down the line, that there will be a requirement for a minimum secondary level treatment, then why would we be trying to get these 10 per cent that are not - see, the direction I would recommend, with respect Mr. Minister, is to say all right this is going to cost money. I agree, let's go after some infrastructure money. If there's only 10 per cent that have no treatment at all, why would we not try to get that 10 per cent to secondary treatment so we don't need to worry about them in a few years when the federal government says they have to. Then we come up with a plan to get the rest of them up to secondary in time for whenever those federal guidelines come.
It seems to me as if we are planning and funding something that will be obsolete, potentially, by the time it opens. That's frustrating. Are you willing, at all, to look at the idea of going to secondary treatment for that 10 per cent, or trying to help look at that, at least as an option?
MR. BELLIVEAU: To the honourable member, we have agreed to the national standard and we will go beyond that target of the Act. There is a commitment there. These are aggressive targets, but I think the co-operation between the municipalities and the people who run these facilities - they are committed to what I described earlier. We're committed to having this environment and taking a leadership role in doing the right thing. We've agreed to this national standard and I think these goals can be achieved.
[Page 172]
MR. YOUNGER: I appreciate that and I'll move on to another subject. I will say the feeling by many is, these are coming quick. I know HRM has already started looking at how they can convert their new plants - three of which really aren't on-line fully now - to secondary treatment right away. They already have people doing design work on that to meet those standards because they figure they're coming pretty soon. I know that last year, to the previous government, they had submitted a funding request, probably to the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, it wouldn't have gone to your department, to help them do that.
It was on their infrastructure list they sent to Ottawa. I think we're going to have to be very, very mindful of that, because if we plan for primary treatment, we're planning for obsolescence. But I hear you saying you're going to work to the national regulations, and I accept that, and I certainly look forward to working with you. I would encourage your department to at least consider, if there's only 10 per cent that have nothing, let's start them at secondary and then there's 10 per cent we don't have to worry about. It's going to cost money, but it's going to save you money in the long run. It would be cheaper to do it now than when they all come knocking - all 128 come knocking at your door looking for money - because I guarantee you they're all coming looking for money. You know that, you were on a council, and councils always come to the province looking for money.
I wanted to move on to talk a little bit about pesticides, and you mentioned that in your opening remarks. There are two schools of thought as to how to go in this direction. We've seen a number of provinces ban the sale of cosmetic pesticides and then we've seen in other cases people advocate for simply giving municipalities the power, like HRM has now, to ban their use. What direction are you inclined to go?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, the pesticides, I believe that we had part of that question yesterday in the House, if I remember . . .
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, I think we started it yesterday.
MR. BELLIVEAU: But in Nova Scotia we are only permitted to use the products deemed safe to use by Health Canada and we ensure Nova Scotia will apply for the products, or particularly the professionals, the commercial part of that are trained, and we have an interdepartmental team looking at these issues to advise government on the responsible use of these projects, and we are working to ensure that Nova Scotia pesticide management policy is focused on the health and the safety of all Nova Scotians.
I just want to add that I also had the privilege of being in Newfoundland and Labrador and this topic was raised there, and I can assure you that we shared a good discussion on this topic and I also know that New Brunswick has introduced legislation and I think P.E.I. is basically interested in following in their footsteps. This issue is on our radar - if I can use that terminology - with our department, and we are looking forward to a regional approach on this
[Page 173]
particular topic. I'm also well aware of UNSM and I know that there's a ministers' conference and I look forward to hearing some feedback on the topic from them in the early months of November. So we're very aware of this topic, it's something that we're dealing with, it's on our radar screen, and we like the idea of having a regional approach.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member for Dartmouth East, I would like to point out you have 15 minutes remaining in your time.
MR. YOUNGER: I think a regional approach makes sense. We're not a huge region and I think that probably does make sense.
The Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations yesterday said - and I'm not exactly quoting, I'm paraphrasing here - before she said actually we should talk to the Minister of Environment because you're taking the lead, which I think probably makes sense as well, that it sounded like there was legislation coming this Fall, that your government may introduce a bill this Fall, and I guess maybe she didn't mean quite that early or not, but I'm really interested to know whether the direction you're going is to do a provincial ban on the sale, whatever the details are of that, or whether you're just looking at amending the Municipal Government Act and saying to municipalities do what you want?
I'm assuming - and assuming is always a dangerous thing to do - but if you were going to amend the Municipal Government Act, it would still be with the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. The fact that they're sending it to you suggests to me that you're going the other route and going to ban the sale of cosmetic pesticides which probably makes more sense, in all honesty.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think the "or" in that was the question.
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, yes. I could raise my voice at the end of each one to make it sound like a question if that would help.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm sure, like me, you don't have to raise your voice.
[7:45 p.m.]
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, to the honourable member, I think that this topic kind of crosses a lot of departments within our government. Health and Promotion is one of them, Environment as you're well aware, and to me, first of all, there has been no decision yet and we're looking at all these particular options and, like I say, the benefit of having, just a few weeks ago, to sit down and discuss the different options that New Brunswick was involved in and to listen to their concerns and also to listen to the members from P.E.I., and to have my counterpart from Newfoundland and Labrador be involved in that discussion, I think I came away from that with it being a rewarding experience to know that all these issues
[Page 174]
that we could be facing in Nova Scotia, we had an opportunity to have that information presented to us, and I can assure you that with our staff and myself that we are going to take that information and we're going to make the appropriate decision at the right time, and I think we're going to do it in the best interests of all Nova Scotians.
MR. YOUNGER: Have no fear, the Opposition will give you plenty of opinions on whether they think it's the appropriate decision when the legislation comes in, I have no doubt - as will the public.
This is a decision that I hope your government won't allow to go too long before coming to a resolution on, whatever way you choose to go, even if it's we're not going to do anything - like whatever the decision is, because this has been circling for years with municipalities and there are issues. In my view, Mr. Chairman, there are issues that are going to have to be resolved by either regulation or legislation, and some of those include, and I'm just going to throw them out here so that you can think - you don't necessarily have to answer these right now, but so that they can at least be on your radar screen.
In some provinces the sale is banned except for agricultural purposes, which obviously makes sense. Agricultural use is different; however, as a resident, you can walk into any agricultural supplier and buy malathion - you can't buy diazinon any more, but you can buy the things right off the shelf, so it doesn't really make any difference, especially if you live somewhere like Wolfville where they want to ban cosmetic pesticides. I understand that's one of the municipalities, yet obviously they're not too far away from some agricultural supply places, so you end up with the same situation that you do in HRM where you can drive to Elmsdale and pick up whatever pesticide you want and come back and put it on your lawn, even though Home Depot and Kent and most places this year have started to either reduce or eliminate the sale of them.
The second side to that is in Halifax, for example, they had fire ants this year, and you still need a way to deal with the fire ants and ant infestations, or whatever else it is - chinch bug, it doesn't matter so much because it's a lawn, right, but some of the things that are health and safety issues still have to be able to be dealt with. So I would encourage you to look at that and as we unfortunately became an embarrassment on national television with Marketplace - I don't know if you saw the item on Marketplace or not, they showed the fact that HRM's ban was rather meaningless because there's no way to test for it.
If you don't ban the sale, just a ban that's sort of a feel good measure, I think you need to make a decision which way you go and so when you're looking at a regional approach - and this I guess would be my question, have you discussed with the other ministers the idea of having what is, effectively, harmonized regulations between those four provinces?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the member opposite for bringing his concerns. To me this shows good examples of this very complex issue. One of the words that
[Page 175]
I overlooked to have in there in my discussions was "harmonization" and I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to include that, and to me it's to have that harmonization in this regional approach.
To me, there was a good exercise of the points that you just brought up earlier in your statement, those issues of the complexity of how you can have neighbouring municipalities and neighbouring provinces, they were all discussed at the Newfoundland and Labrador meeting. I understand that clearly, and I also appreciate that when you take the time to understand the complexity of an issue and you take the time to understand different regional viewpoints and you go through the exercise, I feel very confident that you make the right decision in the end. So we're going through that exercise and we're hearing how complex this particular regulation can be and I think, again, that we'll do the right thing and I look forward to going through this and working through this.
MR. YOUNGER: I figure I probably only have about eight minutes left?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Six, but we'll give you seven.
MR. YOUNGER: That's okay, I'll be the last one for tonight because we'll be at the adjournment I guess, so I don't want to get into a big topic. One of the things I want to ask you about is you talked about lake water quality and water quality, and I know you heard the member for Yarmouth talk about mink farms, but that's not the direction I'm going - the concern I have is there doesn't appear to be a comprehensive lake water quality testing program in the Department of Environment, which is intriguing to me.
I know there are some municipalities that do their own, although it's actually not in their mandate to do it - they do it in the absence of the Department of Environment doing it - but when you go into a lake, whether it's one of these ones down near a mink ranch or its Lake Ainslie, it doesn't matter where it is, but your department gets a complaint about lake quality and it appears to me you don't have baseline testing for the lakes in Nova Scotia to compare to so that makes it, in my view, unless there's a major environmental disaster, almost impossible to detect trends over time, either where lakes are getting healthier, which can happen, or where they're getting worse. I'm wondering whether anybody in your department is looking at that - I know it can't be implemented overnight because it's expensive - or whether you might be looking at a sampling of lakes across the province to do something like that?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out that our department is developing a comprehensive Water Resources Management Strategy to protect our lakes, our streams, and other water resources for the health and the wealth of all Nova Scotians. The water strategy is being prepared through a collaborative effort involving 13 government departments and consultations with Nova Scotians. The development of the water strategy is
[Page 176]
one of the environmental goals of the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act that is scheduled to be released by 2010.
We'll certainly bring your comments regarding this topic - and you're raising some interesting points about lake systems - into this process. So I thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member for Dartmouth East, you have four minutes left.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that there are probably others who have submitted similar comments to the Water Resources Management Strategy study because, if I'm not mistaken, that process has been going on for a couple of years now - well, it seems like a couple of years, maybe it hasn't been that long.
I can't underestimate the importance of that because it is almost impossible - even the situation that the member for Yarmouth was talking about when I came in, minks near Yarmouth, your department really doesn't know. They know that the baseline is wrong, but they don't know what the lake was in its natural state or in its pre-development state - obviously it would be hard to find too many lakes that are in pre-development state now, but there's no baseline to measure it against.
It's almost impossible, I think, for you as minister to go to Yarmouth tomorrow or next week and say that the lake is this much worse or in fact it's not as bad as you think it is, because you don't really know what it was before. That sort of baseline testing I think is going to be very, very important on a go-forward basis and I do hope it's included in that, or something along those lines is included. I don't for a second think you're going to be able to test every lake in the province because you're going to need a huge budget increase to do it, but I think it's something you have to look at.
MR. BELLIVEAU: Mr. Chairman, again, this is a very interesting question. I just want to point out that the capacity to do this is the challenge to live within our means. I also want to point out that we are doing a baseline test for the Sloans Lake and the Clyde River area. We talked about the proposed mink ranches, so we know going in what the baseline of the water quality is before any project even gets started.
That will be important to the residents in that particular area. I think the people there will appreciate that and the people on both sides of that question, the people building those projects are in favour of that - they want to know that information.
Can we expand on this? It's certainly going to be a challenge to do this across Nova Scotia, but I think we're showing that there is a need for this particular information. In those two situations, I think that is going to be important to the residents who live in that community and also the people who are trying to develop their project.
[Page 177]
It's an excellent topic and I think there will be some good work done and I look forward to hearing from them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member for Dartmouth East, an opportunity for one last question and, hopefully, time for an answer.
MR. YOUNGER: My last question would be - I'm going to give you a cheap solution to achieving this in some cases.
In HRM they started requiring, in development agreements for subdivisions near a lake, they now have to do baseline testing before they even build something, and in that case the developers pay the cost. This won't solve all the ones, but you could easily amend the Municipal Government Act, you could actually amend the Act to require municipalities to include that in development agreements, which would eliminate the cost, but it says, listen, if you want to build there you're responsible for the lake.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has just about expired. Mr. Minister, you've been here for a long time and you've been very brave, you even agreed to go on a flight with an Opposition member and I think that is, indeed, the bravest part - perhaps you should have a parachute with you. Are you prepared to go for another two hours or four?
MR. BELLIVEAU: Tonight?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you like some closing remarks? Our time has expired.
MR. BELLIVEAU: I'm missing the point here. Are you asking - I thought we conclude at 8:00 p.m., but I thought we would continue on tomorrow morning - are we continuing on tomorrow morning? I need clarification on what you're asking me here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I'm looking for advice from you, Mr. Minister, on where we go from here. I have not been approached by either caucus, but I certainly assume that the Progressive Conservatives have more questions and also I understand the Liberal caucus does have more as well. (Interruption)
Yes, the Progressive Conservatives do have more questions, so we are just going to adjourn at this time until tomorrow morning. We thank you all for your time, for your input, and some very good exchanges.
[The subcommittee adjourned at 7:59 p.m.]
