TOPIC 

Environmental contamination in the vicinity of the dock in Fort Chipewyan 

DATE AND TIME 

Thursday, December 5, 2024 (3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.)  

LOCATION 

TBC 

OVERVIEW 

TRAN is beginning a study on the Fort Chipewyan contaminated dock on December 3, 2024. The adopted motion calls for two full meetings on the study with witnesses to include: the Minister of Transport, the Minister of Indigenous Services the Minister of the Environment, and local First Nations.  

  • December 3, 2024: Study on the issue of environmental contamination in the vicinity of the dock in Fort Chipewyan. Witnesses:  Mandy Olsgard, Senior Toxicologist (by videoconference); Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Chief Allan Adam; Fort Chipewyan Métis Nation Kendrick Cardinal, President, Board of Directors; Mikisew Cree First Nation  Chief Billy-Joe Tuccaro (by videoconference).  

  • December 5, 2024: Study on the issue of environmental contamination in the vicinity of the dock in Fort Chipewyan. Witnesses: Minister of Transport and TC, ISC and ECCC officials. 

TC: 

Arun Thangaraj, Deputy Minister 

Stephanie Hebert, ADM Programs 

Ross Ezzerin, Director General  

ISC: 

Jennifer Wheatley, Assistant Deputy Minister 

Nelson Barbosa, Director General 

Jennifer Mercer. Director            

ECCC: 

TBC 

MOTION 

The motion to initiate this study was adopted by the committee on November 21, 2024. The motion was moved by MP Stéphane Lauzon (LPC, Argenteuil – La Petite-Nation) and subsequently adopted with an amendment proposed by MP Taylor Bachrach (NDP, Skeena – Bulkley Valley). The text of the adopted motion can be found below. 

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study regarding environmental contamination in the vicinity of the Transport Canada-owned dock in Fort Chipewyan, Alberta and the risks it poses to the health and safety of local Indigenous communities; 

That the committee dedicate four hours of testimony to the topic; 

That the committee invite the following witnesses to testify: 

- Mikisew Crew First Nation Chief, Billy-Joe Tuccaro, Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Chief, Allan Adam, and Fort Chipewyan Cree Metis Nation President, Kendrick Cardinal; 

- The Minister of Transport; Minister of Indigenous Services; and Minister of Environment; 

- Independent experts including Mandy Olsgard, toxicological advisor for the affected Indigenous communities; 

- Officials from Transport Canada, Environment Canada and Indigenous Services Canada; 

And that, following the conclusion of the study, the committee communicate its findings and recommendations in a letter to the Government of Canada, and request an official response thereto. 

 
PARLIAMENTARY ANALYSIS – HOUSE OF COMMONS 

TRAN Study: Environmental contamination in the vicinity of a Transport Canada-owned dock in Fort Chipewyan, Alberta 

Prior to the adoption of this motion, the general subject matter of soil contamination and water quality near Fort Chipewyan and their relation to the health of local Indigenous communities has attracted some attention in various fora in parliament (see below) and in the media.  

At the October 3, 2024 TRAN meeting, the Conservative critic for Transport Philip Lawrence (Northumberland-Peterborough South, ON) moved a motion for the committee to request that Transport Canada provide all documents since 2017 relating to the Fort Chipewyan dock. The motion was adopted and the department is in the process of compiling documents.   

A motion relating to the Fort Chipewyan issue was also raised by MP Taylor Bachrach at the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development (ENVI) on October 21, calling for the ENVI committee to study the issue if TRAN did not agree to conduct its own study. 

The general issue of contaminated sites has been the subject of interest at other parliamentary committees:  

  • The Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development studied the issue of Contaminated Sites in the North, as part of its study of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development’s 2024 Spring Reports (Report 1).   

  • Transport Canada officials appeared on May 2, 2024.   

  • The Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources also studied the issue of Contaminated Sites in the North, as part of its study of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development’s 2024 Spring Reports.   

  • Transport Canada officials appeared on October 22, 2024. 

  • The Standing Committee on National Defence (NDDN) had recently been hearing testimony on contaminated sites in the vicinity of Canadian Armed Forces infrastructure. 

Previous TRAN reports: 

Since the start of the 44th Parliament, TRAN has not adopted any reports specifically related to contamination in the vicinity of infrastructure owned and operated by Transport Canada.  

Questions, Statements, and Debates in the House on Fort Chipewyan 

  1. Question Period: 

October 8, 2024 – Lori Idlout (Nunavut, NU, NDP) 

Question: Uqaqtittiji, the Liberals are actively refusing reconciliation and evading their obligations required in the honour the Crown. 

The government knew for seven years that “the big dock” in Fort Chipewyan is contaminated with cancer-causing substances, and for seven years it covered it up. Rightfully, families are now worried about their children's health and whether they will lose them to cancer. 

When will the government uphold the honour of the Crown and work with first nations to ensure their health and safety? 

Response: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for raising this important point. Safety is my top priority as Minister of Transport. I hear and understand the concerns from first nations communities. It is crucial that remote northern and indigenous communities have access to the safe and reliable connectivity that they need. I will continue to work with the Minister of Indigenous Services on this very important matter. 

October 4, 2024 – Philip Lawrence (Northumberland – Peterborough South, ON, CPC) 

Question: Madam Speaker, according to media reports, the Liberal government has covered up the contamination of a Transport Canada dock operated in northern Albertan indigenous communities. “The big dock”, as it is referred to, is known as a community hub. It is where couples go for a walk, where people fish and where kids go to play and swim. Did the government really cover up the contamination of this dock, yes or no? 

Response: Madam Speaker, I want to say that safety is my top priority as Minister of Transport. I hear and understand the concerns from the first nations communities. It is absolutely crucial for remote, northern and indigenous communities to have access to the safe and reliable connectivity that they need. I will work with them to ensure that the operations at the facility are being carried out safely. The work is ahead of us, and we will make sure that we are on top of it. 
 

  1. House Debates 

November 21, 2024 - Philip Lawrence (Northumberland – Peterborough South, ON, CPC) Adjournment Proceedings – The Environment 

The dock is a community hub. It is where people go for a walk on a nice summer day in northern Alberta. It is where children, including of course indigenous children, swim and play. It is where a young couple might go for a walk to talk about the day and to enjoy each other's company. 

In this picturesque surrounding there is trouble, though, and here is the challenge. Recently, just this year actually, the indigenous communities contracted an environmental firm to look at the water in and around the dock to see what the condition of it was. What it found was extremely troubling: The water was contaminated with above-legal limits of toxins, including arsenic, mercury, iron and hydrocarbons. Many of these are carcinogens that can and do cause cancer in people. Keep in mind that young couples, fishers and indigenous children swim in this contaminated water. 

Of course, that in itself is extremely troubling, but let us add a couple more facts. The dock is owned by the federal government, by Transport Canada. The really difficult and challenging part is that, according to the consultant's report, Transport Canada knew about the contamination in 2017. 

… 

First, they want to meet with the Minister of Transport. Second, they want the dock repaired and brought up to code. They of course want the site remediated, meaning the removal of the toxins. They want to dredge a canal to the channel to Lake Athabasca for boat access. They want a temporary dock, further testing to be conducted along the waterfront and for any and all documents to be made available. 

I will add that I did ask at the transport committee, and received unanimous consent, to get all documents and correspondence relating to the big dock from Transport Canada, but we still, nearly a month later, have not received a single document. As the Prime Minister said, and quite frankly I agree with him, there is no relationship more important for the federal government than that with the first nations, so I am hoping we get a substantive response. 

… 

Will the government commit to remediating the site? Will it commit to bringing the dock up to code? Will it commit to doing further testing? Can the government do something to make residents aware of the potential contamination? 

June 6, 2024 – (Francis Scarpaleggia, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC, LPC)  

Government Orders – First Nations Clean Water Act (C-61) 

I first became aware of the issue of source water about 10 years ago when I sat on the environment committee. It was a minority Conservative government at the time, and we undertook a study of the impact of the oil sands on the Athabasca Watershed. There were concerns downstream from the oil sands operations, basically in Fort Chipewyan, that the drinking water was being contaminated by the oil sands industry. That, in itself, is a source water problem and a source water issue. 

How do we protect source water so that first nations can have confidence in their drinking water? How do we protect source water when a lot of the source water is in provincial jurisdiction and a province is managing economic development in its jurisdiction? How do we get the province to co-operate with the federal government and first nations to protect the source water? As a matter of fact, the whole issue of source water and the oil sands came up again at the environment committee when we were studying the leaks and spills at the Kearl tailings pond. Again, the first nation in Fort Chipewyan is very concerned about how the oil sands and how this particular spill could be impacting the first nation's source water downstream. 

… 

Madam Speaker, I will go back to the issue of source water and what I was saying before in my speech about the community of Fort Chipewyan. The community is concerned in terms of the quality of its water and the impact that water might be having on the health of members of the community. 

Alberta Health Services has the data to be able to do a longitudinal study of cancer rates in Fort Chipewyan. It was recommended by the environment committee many years ago that it be done, yet it has not been done. How should we go about getting the Alberta government to do that? If it will not do it, is there a way for the federal government to do it? 

May 15, 2023 – (Charlie Angus, Timmins – James Bay, ON, NDP) 

Government Orders – Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act (S-5) 

Madam Speaker, I find it really interesting that the government deliberately excluded the tailings ponds in the Athabasca from review, because we know that just prior to the illegal tailings pond leak at Imperial Oil, the environment minister was scheduled to allow a massive release of the toxic chemicals that are in that contaminated water into the Athabasca River system. 

We know from speaking with Fort Chipewyan and the Mikisew Cree that they suffer high levels of cancer. We are dealing with ammonia, lead, mercury, benzene and other contaminants, and yet the environment minister was more than willing to let this be released into the Athabasca River. These are tailings ponds that are 2.6 times the size of the city of Vancouver and are growing every day. When is the government going to actually deal with the massive level of water contamination coming out of the oil sands projects? 

  1. Related Written Questions: 

Q-3167 — Laurel Collins (Victoria, BC, NDP) — With regard to the government’s actions surrounding the Transport Canada dock at Fort Chipewyan: (a) prior to September 2024, what steps were underway to deal with the contaminated site; (b) on what date did the government become aware that the site was contaminated; (c) on what dates did the government order testing of the contaminated site; (d) what guidelines exist within the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat on releasing information about contaminated sites; (e) what investigations are currently underway within Transport Canada and Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat on why these guidelines were not followed; (f) what other federally-contaminated sites exist in the Peace Athabasca region that have not been included in the Inventory of federal contaminated sites; (g) by what date does the government plan to have the site cleaned up; (h) how much money has the government allocated to the site cleanup; (i) by what date does the government plan to replace the dock infrastructure; and (j) how much money has been allocated to the dock infrastructure replacement project? 

*A response to Q-3167 is currently being prepared by the department for tabling at a future date* 

Previous TRAN Follow-ups: 

Following the appearance of the Minister of Transport and senior TC officials at TRAN on October 10, 2024, to discuss the breakdown of a VIA Rail train in Quebec on August 31, 2024, officials committed to providing the committee with additional information: 

  1. A written response detailing the frequency at which VIA Rail notifies Transport Canada of delays that will exceed three hours. 

  2. Copies of the Minister of Transport’s letters of expectations sent to the Chair of VIA Rail’s Board of Directors. 

These responses were shared with the committee on November 21, 2024. 

Following the appearance of senior TC officials at TRAN on June 13, 2024, to discuss the Competition Act and air travel in northern, rural, and remote communities in Canada, officials committed to providing the committee with additional information: 

  1. Information on Transport Canada’s decision to approve the Baldwin East aerodrome in the town of Georgina despite significant concerns raised by the community regarding the dumping of contaminated fill on protected wetlands. 

  2. A full list of completed, ongoing, and confirmed future National Trade Corridor Fund-funded projects focused on improving connectivity and affordability in the airline industry in northern, rural, and remote areas in Canada. 

  3. A detailed response on how the air sector has changes as a result of the deregulation process, including detail on how ticket prices and service consistency have changed since the 1980s with a focus on rural and remote communities. 

  4. Information on Transport Canada’s ongoing collaboration with industry stakeholders on a study of possible alternative materials, including aluminum, for northern runway infrastructure. 

These responses were shared with the committee on September 11, 2024. 

TRAN has recently presented three reports to the House of Commons, requesting government responses: 

  1. Report 18 – Issues and Opportunities: High Frequency Rail in the Toronto to Quebec City Corridor 

  2. Report 19 – The Erie Lake Connector: A Project in the Best Interest of the Public? 

  3. Report 20 – The Role of McKinsey and Company in the Creation and the Beginnings of the Canada Infrastructure Bank 

Upcoming TRAN studies:  

The committee has adopted motions to undertake future studies on the transportation of dangerous goods by rail, safety concerns related to the operation of small towing vessels on Canada’s west coast, and the role of the transportation sector on the tourism industry in Canada.  

TRAN is expected to complete and present its draft report on the Accessible Transportation for Persons with Disabilities study before Parliament adjourns in December 2024.  

Private Members’ Business 

M-119 – April 15, 2024 on Per- and Polyfluorinated Substances (PFAS) – Laurel Collins (Victoria, BC, NDP) Introduced, but it has not been debated during this Parliament.   


Annex A - Rounds of questioning 

  • Five minutes are allotted for the opening statement.  

  • Questioning of witnesses:  

  • First round: six minutes for the first questioner of each party as follows: Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Bloc Québécois, New Democratic Party. 

  • For the second, and subsequent rounds, the order and time for questioning is as follows: 

  • Conservative Party, five minutes 

  • Liberal Party, five minutes 

  • Bloc Québécois, two and a half (2.5) minutes 

  • New Democratic Party, two and a half (2.5) minutes 

  • The total time allocated per round of questioning includes the member’s questions and the witness’ responses. There is no time limit on responses from witnesses; however, succinct answers are preferred.  

Annex B – About TRAN  

The Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities (TRAN) was reconvened on December 16, 2021, following the opening of the 44th Parliament.   

The committee can study any aspect of the management and operations of Transport Canada and Infrastructure Canada, as well as any legislation, programs or policy areas administered by the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Infrastructure. Recent studies have focused on issues such as the regulation of recreational boating on Canada’s waterways, the VIA Rail train breakdown on August 31, 2024, competition in the airline industry, accessibility issues in the transportation sector, and the proposed high frequency rail project. The committee also undertook an extensive study of Bill C-33, Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada Act, spanning 15 meetings in Fall 2023.  

The scope of issues related to transport, infrastructure and communities is quite broad and includes:  

  • federal programs and policies for air, rail, road and marine transportation;  

  • federal infrastructure funding such as the New Building Canada Fund, and the Gateways and Border Crossing Fund;  

  • Crown corporations (e.g., VIA Rail Canada Inc., pilotage authorities and the Jacques Cartier and Champlain Bridges Incorporated), administrative tribunals and agencies (i.e., Transportation Appeal Tribunal and the Canadian Transportation Agency), and shared governance organizations (e.g., port and airport authorities) within the Transport and Infrastructure ministers’ portfolios; and  

  • a range of issues affecting productivity and quality of life in Canadian cities and communities (e.g., traffic congestion and community infrastructure).  

Date modified: