David Arnot, Saskatchewan. I live in Treaty 6 territory.

Thank you to all the witnesses for coming today. It’s just very helpful. I have one broad question for all three witnesses: Could this act be improved in any way? No act is perfect. Are there things that are not in the act that you would like to see and that you think we should consider here in terms of an amendment to the act? Is there anything missing? Do you want to push the boundaries a little bit?

Specifically, we have heard from Dr. Lem about the impact that the Rouge National Urban Park had on her life. What criteria is used to identify the creation of a national urban park? Is the Rouge National Urban Park a model for the rest of Canada? How many are there? I know there are none in Saskatchewan.

Similarly, about the expansion of parks, I am happy to see that the Grasslands National Park in Saskatchewan is included in this work. What are the criteria for expanding an existing park? How does that work? What are the plans, generally, for the expansion of other parks and then duplicating something like the Rouge National Urban Park in other provinces and territories?

Can you remember that question, and ask it?

On that exact point, Dr. Lem, could you please follow up your comments with a note — a memorandum — in writing about those two amendments you just suggested?

Dr. Lem: I would be happy to.

Thank you, minister.

Thank you, minister, for coming today, and congratulations on bringing forward another uncontroversial bill to the Senate.

I asked a dangerous question of some of the witnesses in the previous panel, and that was: Is there anything that could be improved in this bill? I got a very compelling answer, and I want to put it forward to you now because I’m thinking of making an amendment to the bill, in fact, based on what I heard.

Dr. Lem advised that section 32, the mitigation of environmental damage, could be improved. There is a duty that the superintendent “may” report. She wants to change it to “shall,” making it a strong, positive duty on the officers. I support that. I’m going to look into it further, but more importantly, she had an advisement to create a citizen enforcement mechanism in clause 32, which would create what I would call an extramural environmental officer. It would engage the citizens who are close to and in the vicinity of the park and know the park in actually enforcing anything they saw as being potential pollution of the park. That’s the second thing that I would bring up. I would like to know the answer to that. Would you support that if we put that forward?

Second, I commend you for expanding the Grasslands National Park in Saskatchewan. We did hear about the Rouge National Urban Park. Is that a model for the rest of Canada?

You have six urban national parks that you are hoping to bring into the network soon. Is there an urban national park plan for Saskatchewan? If not, why not? What’s the criteria that you use when you identify, acquire and integrate new parks into the existing national park mechanism, urban parks.

Yes.

What stage is it at? I know it takes a long time to plan these things — maybe years — but I’m just wondering what stage it’s at.

I support that, and I’ll do what I can to ensure Saskatchewan gets an urban national park.