The New Democratic Party would like to thank all who appeared before or submitted written briefs to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development during the Committee’s study of a National Conservation Plan.

While we agree with some of the Committee Report, there are significant areas where we have concerns.  Unfortunately, given an imposed page restriction, we are only able to articulate some of those in this report.

New Democrats believe in sustainable development as set out by the Brundtland Commission: development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”[i].  New Democrats believe a National Conservation Plan must take an ecosystems approach to conservation, which not only meets domestic and international targets but strives to exceed them, which incorporates monitoring and follow-up, respects and embraces Aboriginal traditional knowledge, which consults and includes all Canadians in its development and implementation, and which engages the public in sharing in its benefits and successes.

The Committee report fails to recognize the important contributions of science and scientists, and of environmental groups, aboriginal groups, and communities.  The Conservative Government’s suspicion and vilification of the role of some of these key stakeholders in advocating for the greater good over development at all costs has created substantial rifts in the democratic fabric that underpins sound policy and decision making in Canada, and efforts should be made to restore the mutual trust and respect between all stakeholders and decision makers. All Canadians must be included in developing a National Conservation Plan.  Working together would be a positive step, and we should actively pursue a comprehensive plan to develop an inclusive process.

Furthermore, recent government cuts to funding to the Canadian Environmental Network, which facilitated low-cost, effective consultation, outreach, and coordination to over 640 groups across Canada, as well as to provincial networks on behalf of the government of Canada were shortsighted and ill-advised. The CEN could provide valuable assistance in both the development of a National Conservation Plan and in the implementation and delivery of regional initiatives. New Democrats recommend that funding to the CEN be restored.

The Committee report stresses the need to “balance” the environment with the economy. However, New Democrats do not believe it is balanced or wise over the long-term to only protect the environment when it is profitable to do so.  New Democrats do not believe that unbridled development that sacrifices endangered species, clean air and water, and healthy ecosystems and people is sustainable for future generations.  A conservation plan should protect the environment, and a clean environment supports a healthy economy.  Unfortunately, instead of seeking resources to build this balanced approach, the Conservative government has shut down the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, which was in the best position to provide exactly this kind of advice to the government.  New Democrats recommend that funding to the NRTEE be restored.

The Committee report emphasizes public private partnerships to fund conservation activities; New Democrats believe the federal government has a leadership role in providing predictable, ongoing funding for the commitments it has made.  We also believe in the polluter-pay principle, which would put the onus on the polluter to pay to restore degraded habitat and for conservation efforts which minimize their activities.

As a result of the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, the global community developed the Convention on Biological Diversity, with Canada one of the first nations to sign on.  Under Article 8, Canada committed to:

• Regulate or manage biological resources important for the conservation of biological diversity whether within or outside protected areas, with a view to ensuring their conservation and sustainable use;
• Promote the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings;…(and)
• Develop or maintain necessary legislation and/or other regulatory provisions for the protection of threatened species and populations.

It is ironic that this report is being tabled just as the global community comes together for the 20^th anniversary of the Rio Summit, and just as the Conservative government, through its omnibus budget bill, is radically undermining some of Canada’s most important existing environmental legislation. It is radically reducing environmental assessments, gutting the Fisheries Act and stripping habitat protection from all but a few species of fish.  Furthermore, this Committee never reported on its statutory review of the Species at Risk Act, conducted in the last Parliament, in spite of this government’s failure to properly implement the legislation.

Many witnesses, including Nature Quebec, underscored the importance of strong environmental law and regulation in Canada.  They recommended the Government should: both “Maintain and reinforce environmental regulations and evaluation processes to ensure that biodiversity conservation objectives are addressed.”[ii]

Witnesses urged the government to adhere to the Aichi Targets under the Convention on Biological Diversity, stressing the importance not just of meeting the targets, but of exceeding them.  New Democrats strongly support incorporate this approach on all of the targets, not just target 11, in the National Conservation Plan. 

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, New Democrats believe that Canada needs a strong regulatory approach to conservation that sets out clear priorities and rules, with sufficient monitoring and enforcement, thereby eliminating uncertainty for everyone.  As one witness succinctly put it,

“An NCP must be developed within a strong regulatory framework that protects Canada’s species, habitats and incents conservation as part of doing business in this country. Without legally binding commitments, a national conservation plan would lack accountability[iii].