ARCHIVED - Environment Canada

Summary: This audit examines the extent to which each department implicated in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Environment Canada, Parks Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada) has met a selection of its specific economic, environmental and wildlife obligations. Environment Canada is generally compliant with its obligations under the Agreement.

Recommendation: One of the audit recommendations (3.46) implicates Environment Canada, among others, noting that departments should develop systems and processes to monitor their compliance with the Agreement's contracting provisions. (Environment Canada has not issued a contract relevant to Section 16 since the Inuvialuit Final Agreement was signed).

Government Response to Recommendation 3.46 - Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and Parks Canada.

• Agreed Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, in consultation with Treasury Board Secretariat and Public Works and Government Services Canada, will provide guidance to departments on the appropriate level of monitoring required to ensure compliance with this Agreement's and similar agreements' contracting provisions that are reflected in Treasury Board policy requirements.
• It is important to note that an interdepartmental working group has been established by Treasury Board Secretariat for the development of an amendment to the Treasury Board Contracting Policy which will update the process for government procurement in the context of comprehensive land claims agreements. The amendment will clarify departmental responsibilities for monitoring and reporting requirements of Crown procurements undertaken in regions covered by comprehensive land claims agreements, including the Inuvialuit Final Agreement.
• It should be noted that while some departments have systems to monitor departmental compliance with the specific contracting provisions in the Inuvialuit Final Agreement, not all departments do so on a systematic basis. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Parks Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and Environment Canada will develop or strengthen, where necessary, systems and procedures to meet any new monitoring and reporting requirements that may be established by the Treasury Board.
• In addition, the five audited departments will give full consideration to this recommendation as they review and where necessary, enhance current systems and procedures to monitor the awarding of contracts to the Inuvialuit that are not subject to public tender, when they are capable of supplying the goods and services on a reasonable basis. Work on processes governing federal procurement to include provisions for contracting in national parks is already under way, and will be developed to capture the same information for other comprehensive land claims agreements.

For more information on Chapter 3, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_oag_2007_3_e_23827.html

Summary: The audit evaluates government performance related to departmental sustainable development strategies in three areas: government wide direction for sustainable development strategies, action on strategy commitments and the quality of selected 2007-2009 strategies. The audit is critical of Environment Canada's performance as the lead department on sustainable development strategies over the past ten years.

Recommendation: The audit contains only one recommendation that the federal government should carry out a thorough documented review of its current approach to the preparation and use of sustainable development strategies and should act on the results. Its review should take into account the original expectations for sustainable development strategies as articulated in A Guide to Green Government (1995), lessons learned over the past four sustainable development strategy cycles, and stakeholder views on key challenges and opportunities for the future.

Departmental Response: Environment Canada, as the department assigned responsibility for coordinating sustainable development strategies in September 2005, agrees on the government's behalf with the recommendation. A review of the current approach to sustainable development strategies is timely and could draw on over a decade of experience with the current approach and a growing body of experience and best practices internationally with regard to sustainable development strategies. Environment Canada, in collaboration with other departments, will conduct a thorough review which will identify means to improve the government's approach to sustainable development.

For more information on Chapter 1, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_2007_1_e_23837.html

Summary: This chapter is a retrospective that studies past experience to identify opportunities for enhancing the petitions process. The chapter describes the nature of environmental petitions and the extent to which some of them may have influenced the federal management of environmental issues in Canada.

Mention of departments including Environment Canada is generally factual, neutral and for the most part occurs in the context of actions they are taking and have described in a response to a petition. Environment Canada is noted to be the most petitioned department in government and to have received over 170 petitions since the inception of the process in 1995. Environment Canada, Transport Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada are mentioned positively as being departments that have developed guidance to facilitate the development of petition responses within and among departments. The report concludes that through the work on the retrospective, the CESD has identified opportunities for enhancing the petitions process and confirming the importance of continuing current auditing and reporting practices. The report does not make any recommendation.

For more information on Chapter 2, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_2007_2_e_23838.html

Chapter 1-Chemicals Management-Substances Assessed under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

This Chapter examined the progress made by Environment Canada and Health Canada in managing risk assessments under Canadian Environmental Protection Act , including the status of the 69 priority substances. It also examined the departments' initiatives for addressing new risk assessment priorities out of the 23 000 substances on the Domestic Substances List.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• The federal government has made satisfactory progress since 2002 in responding to the Commissioner's findings and recommendations regarding the management of risk assessments of chemical substances that could be toxic.
• Risk assessments of priority substances that were underway in 2002 have been completed for the most part. However, the assessments of four of those substances have yet to be finalized - even though the departments have evidence that two of them are likely toxic and present risks to human health and the environment.
• Health Canada and Environment Canada identified 4 300 substances that needed further assessment and the departments have adjusted the risk assessment process based on lessons learned from previous evaluations, set clear objectives and timelines, identified priorities, and are taking steps to ensure that they will have enough resources to do the work.

Recommendation 1.19: Environment Canada and Health Canada should make publicly available the list of those substances that have been assessed as toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 but are not listed in Schedule 1 of the Act and are being risk managed outside the Act. The list should also include information on what controls are in place.

Environment Canada's Response: Environment Canada accepts this recommendation and will make such a list available in 2008 through the Government of Canada's Internet Website for the Chemicals Management Plan and the CEPA registry.

For more information on Chapter 1, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_01_e_30127.html

Chapter 3-Chemicals Management-Federal Contaminated Sites

This chapter examined the progress that four departments-Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, National Defence and Transport Canada-made in addressing selected findings and recommendations from the 2002 Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development Report. These departments are collectively responsible for approximately 89 percent of the contaminated sites under federal responsibility. The chapter also examined what Environment Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat did to provide central leadership in dealing with high-risk contaminated sites.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• Satisfactory progress in managing its contaminated sites including the development of a Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan with the objectives of effectively eliminating the financial liability associated with its contaminated sites by 2020 and reducing the risks to human health and the environment.
• The four departments audited are putting significant effort into managing their contaminated sites. They have cleaned up about 340 sites, and about 480 others are undergoing cleanup. During the audit, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat issued additional guidance to departments to help ensure that their planned actions are aligned with and will contribute to the federal objective of effectively eliminating the financial liability for known sites by 2020.
• New regulations requiring departments to take action on their petroleum storage tanks were proposed in 2007-four years later than promised. Although the proposed Regulations will require tanks found to be leaking to be withdrawn from service immediately, their full effect will not come into force until four years after the Regulations are put in place. Tanks considered to be at high risk of leaking could remain in service until then.

No recommendations are made in this chapter.

For more information on Chapter 3, visit: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_02_e_30128.html

Chapter 4-Ecosystems-Federal Protected Areas for Wildlife

This chapter examined the progress made by Environment Canada in implementing the recommendations and observations made in Chapter 1 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development 2001 Report on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Basin related to protected areas. However, because the department manages protected areas on a national basis, the audit examined the management of these areas from a national perspective.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• Environment Canada has made unsatisfactory progress in addressing CESD recommendations on national wildlife areas and migratory bird sanctuaries. These areas are at risk.
• Environment Canada has identified specific threats to each of its protected areas, but has not assessed whether conditions are improving or deteriorating at the sites, nor used the information collected to address threats on a priority basis.
• Environment Canada has developed a national strategy to guide the management of sites in its protected areas network, but the strategy is not being fully implemented.
• Environment Canada has not established explicit performance expectations against which progress can be assessed, and does not comprehensively monitor or regularly report on the condition and management of its network of protected areas.
• According to its own analyses, Environment Canada has allocated insufficient human and financial resources to address urgent needs or activities related to the maintenance of sites and enforcement of regulations in protected areas.

In addition to addressing issues related to the ecological integrity of protected areas, the report discusses and draws attention to weaknesses in the enforcement of regulations (paragraphs 4.35 to 4.37)

Recommendation 4.49: Environment Canada should systematically assess its national wildlife areas and migratory bird sanctuaries to determine whether they are meeting the Department's criteria for protected areas and fulfilling their intended purpose. Based on its assessments, the Department should undertake timely action to maintain, restore, or delist sites as appropriate.

Environment Canada's Response: Recommendation accepted. Environment Canada continues to implement measures to manage national wildlife areas and migratory bird sanctuaries. The Department has developed a strategic framework for the management of its network of 143 protected areas, and an operations manual that establishes policies and procedures for the effective management of these areas.

Environment Canada is currently undertaking a review of its protected areas in conserving wildlife and protecting migratory birds, their nests, eggs, and habitat. This review, to be completed in the summer of 2008, will also include consideration of more effective means of monitoring and reporting on the state of these areas, and will help to inform necessary actions, contingent on available resources. An action plan with timelines will then be prepared during 2008-2009 which will provide guidance for example on priorities for updated site management plans, site improvements and delisting. In addition, Environment Canada will also update five site management plans during 2008-2009. Full implementation of the action plan will be contingent upon available resources.

For more information on Chapter 4, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_04_e_30130.html

Chapter 5-Ecosystems-Protection of Species at Risk

This chapter examined the progress made by Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Parks Canada in implementing recommendations made in Chapter 1 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development 2001 Report on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Basin concerning the development of inventories and the development and implementation of recovery strategies for species at risk. Because issues related to species at risk are managed on a national basis, this status report examined progress from a national perspective.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• Environment Canada has made unsatisfactory progress in responding to 2001 recommendations relating to the development of a comprehensive inventory and of recovery strategies for species at risk while Parks Canada has made satisfactory progress on this recommendation.
• The three departments made unsatisfactory progress in responding to the 2001 recommendation relating to the development of recovery strategies and the departments have not complied with specific deadline requirements established by the Species at Risk Act. As of June 2007, recovery strategies should have been completed for 228 species at risk, but as of that date, recovery strategies completed address only 55 of those species.
• Departments are also required under the Act to identify to the extent possible, critical habitat necessary for the survival or recovery of species at risk. As of June 2007, critical habitat had been identified for four of the 228 species at risk for which recovery strategies were due, and partially identified for twelve others.

No recommendations are made in this chapter.

For more information on Chapter 5, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_05_e_30131.html

Chapter 7-Ecosystems-Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes Basin

In 2001, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development conducted an audit and recommended that Environment Canada clarify its roles and responsibilities and those of its partners, and develop and implement plans to complete actions for delisting areas of concern with particular attention to remediating contaminated sediment and treating municipal sewage.

This chapter examines the progress made by Environment Canada on these issues since the 2001 audit.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• Environment Canada has made unsatisfactory progress on issues raised in the 2001 audit. The department has not ensured that criteria for delisting areas of concern are specified for each Canadian area of concern. While the Department has recently clarified some responsibilities, it still has not clearly specified who is responsible for carrying out all the required remedial actions, who will pay for those efforts and within what timelines the actions will be taken. Finally, it has not adequately assessed the extent to which each impairment in each Canadian area of concern has been restored and it has not reported progress to the International Joint Commission as it is required to do under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
• After more than 20 years, only 2 of Canada's original 17 areas of concern have been delisted-the latest in 2003.

Recommendation 7.36: In order to fulfill its commitments under the Great lakes Water Quality Agreement, Environment Canada on behalf of the federal government, should establish and finalize arrangements with all relevant partners to ensure they implement the initiatives necessary to remediate contaminated sediment and to adequately treat municipal wastewater in Canadian areas of concern.

Environment Canada's Response: Environment Canada accepts the recommendation; however it is noted that implementation of actions to fully respond to this recommendation is dependant upon the commitment of partners.

By April 2008, Environment Canada will develop project plans for eight of the nine areas of concern where sediment management is required in order to remediate and delist the site (Port Hope Harbour is being addressed by Natural Resources Canada under a separate program due to the radioactive nature of the sediment in that location).

Environment Canada will then negotiate funding partnerships with all relevant partners (Ontario, local governments and other stakeholders) on a case-by-case basis. Sediment remediation will be completed in seven of the eight areas of concern by April 2012. Sediment remediation will begin in Hamilton Harbour by 2009 and the project will require approximately 10 years to complete.

By July 2009 Environment Canada will complete a review of improvements to municipal wastewater treatment required to remediate and delist areas of concern. Environment Canada will then negotiate a formal commitment of intent by all relevant partners (Ontario, local governments) to seek funding for infrastructure improvements through established federal and provincial funding programs.

Recommendation 7.39: When specifying targets for restoring beneficial uses and delisting Canadian areas of concern, Environment Canada should clearly define all the necessary actions, including who is responsible for carrying them out, the cost-sharing arrangements, expected dates to complete those actions, and expectations for progress reporting.

Environment Canada's Response: Environment Canada accepts the recommendation; however it is noted that implementation of actions to fully respond to this recommendation is dependant upon the commitment of partners.

By July 2008, Environment Canada will clearly define all necessary actions to remediate and delist remaining areas of concern, including who is responsible for carrying them out. Environment Canada will then negotiate concurrence of all relevant partners (Ontario, local governments and other stakeholders) on a site-by-site basis as an addendum to existing remedial action plans.

Due to the nature of the projects and the limitations of funding partners, cost-sharing arrangements for remedial actions in areas of concern are negotiated on a project-by-project basis. Terms and conditions of Environment Canada's Great Lakes Sustainability Fund stipulate a maximum of one third federal funding for projects for the remediation of areas of concern. Similar cost-sharing arrangements requirements are in place as part of Infrastructure Canada funding programs, whereby the amount of federal funding provided to an infrastructure project is generally matched by that provided by provincial and local or regional governments. Beyond this cost-sharing provision, as part of Infrastructure Canada funding programs, the maximum federal funding amount to be provided to the project is also specified thereby limiting the amount of the federal contribution to the project should cost overruns occur.

Expected dates for completion of actions leading to the remediation and delisting of areas of concern are included in the 2007-2010 Canada-Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin. The current agreement commits Canada and Ontario to completing all actions in four areas of concern by 2010. In negotiations of future agreements, Environment Canada will advocate for greater specificity in the timeframe in which remedial actions will be completed across all areas of concern.

Environment Canada will work with the Province of Ontario to ensure biennial public progress reports required under the 2007-2010 Canada-Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem regularly report progress and status of all Canadian and shared Canada-U.S. areas of concern.

For more information on Chapter 7, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_07_e_30133.html

Chapter 8-Management Tools and Government Commitments-International Environmental Agreements

This chapter examined the federal government's management of international agreements to assess the progress it has made since 2004. More particularly, it examined 20 international environmental agreements (Annex I) in four departments-Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada and Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada for the availability and clarity of the information about the agreements' objectives; the means established to meet the objectives; the current targets; and the reporting on progress.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• The government has made unsatisfactory progress in providing a complete and understandable picture of the results expected from Canada's international environmental agreements (IEA). While Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada generally make available information on Canada's obligations under the agreements, they provide less information on the programs and means in place to meet the obligations, expected achievements and results.
• The government has made unsatisfactory progress in planning, monitoring and reporting on the extent to which Canada is meeting its commitments from the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002. While the government has followed the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development approach to monitoring and reporting, it still has no longer-term plan for ensuring that it will be in a position to report significant progress on its commitments.
• The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) is mentioned in the context of past CESD audits which reported in 2005 that Canada still had not developed an action plan to deliver results on Canada's WSSD commitments.

Recommendation 8.27: As lead departments responsible for international environmental agreements, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada and Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada should provide Parliament and Canadians with complete, understandable, and current information on objectives, means, expected results and results.

Environment Canada's Response: Environment Canada accepts the recommendation. Environment Canada has various reporting methods, ranging from annual departmental performance reviews, reports on plans and priorities and regular updating of Environment Canada's international engagements posted on public websites to monitor and convey progress achieved.

In response to the CESD's 2008 Report Chapter 8 recommendation, Environment Canada will use the Report on Plans and Priorities, the Departmental Performance Report and other Environment Canada websites to ensure information on Environment Canada-led international environmental agreements' objectives, means, anticipated results and results achieved are transparently and effectively reported to Parliament and to Canadians:

Report on Plans and Priorities

• Environment Canada produces an annual Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) that provides parliamentarians and Canadians with a summary of the Department's plans and priorities for the next three years.
• Information on Environment Canada's IEA activities, plans and priorities to be highlighted in the RPP.

Departmental Performance Report

• Environment Canada produces an annual Departmental Performance Report (DPR) that provides parliamentarians and Canadians with a strategic overview of the Department's performance and achievements in the past fiscal year.
• Information on Environment Canada's IEA results achieved against the expected results to be highlighted in the DPR.

Websites

• Environment Canada regularly reports and updates IEA progress on respective Environment Canada's branch public websites, where appropriate, on IEA progress.

• The Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement - 2006 Progress Report can be viewed at: www.ec.gc.ca/cleanair-airpur/default.asp?lang=En&n=83930AC3-1 along with previous progress reports.

• Further, the Canadian Biodiversity Information Network (www.cbin.ec.gc.ca/) includes information on Environment Canada's participation at international meetings, anticipated achievements and programmatic policies.

In addition, Environment Canada's International Affairs website is also in the process of being updated. Environment Canada will use the CESD's Chapter 8 recommendation where applicable. (Environment Canada's Branch Website update March 2009, International Affairs Branch International Website March 2008)

For more information on Chapter 8, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_08_e_30134.html

Chapter 9-Management Tools and Government Commitments-Strategic Environmental Assessment

In 1990, a cabinet directive made the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) the federal government's main tool for considering the impact of proposed policies and programs on the environment. Further, in 2004, public reporting became mandatory whenever a detailed SEA is completed.

This chapter examined progress made in implementing strategic environmental assessments since 2004.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• Progress in addressing the 2004 audit observations and recommendations has been unsatisfactory. Despite improvements evident in some areas, there are weaknesses in accountability and transparency-areas fundamental to good management. The CESD found no evidence that a mechanism exists to hold departments and agencies to account when they do not appropriately apply the directive. Nor did the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development find that the Privy Council Office challenged departments and agencies on their application of the directive when they have submitted proposals to Cabinet.
• Of the departments that the CESD reexamined that rated poorly in their last audit, the Canadian International Development Agency and Fisheries and Oceans Canada have made satisfactory progress in developing and implementing SEA management systems while Health Canada's progress has been unsatisfactory.

The audit makes specific observations on several named departments. Environment Canada was included in the audit but is not specifically identified in the context of the findings.

No recommendations are made in this chapter.

For more information on Chapter 9,visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_09_e_30135.html

Chapter 10-Management Tools and Government Commitments-Greening of Government Operations

This chapter examines the progress made by the government to green its operations.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• The government's progress towards providing guidance on greening operations to departments preparing sustainable development strategies has been unsatisfactory. The government-wide targets for departments to use were either non-specific, reiterated previous objectives, or were left open to interpretation and departments were not required to use them.
• The government has placed a lot of emphasis on its new commodity management approach to procurement. Given the time elapsed since this new approach was put in place, the CESD found that Public Works and Government Services Canada is making satisfactory progress in greening the commodities examined.
• The principal focus of this audit is Public Works and Government Services Canada, and two recommendations are made to Public Works and Government Services Canada in this chapter. One implicates Environment Canada.

Recommendation 10.51: Public Works and Government Services Canada, in consultation with the Treasury Board Secretariat, Environment Canada and other departments and agencies as appropriate, should revisit the authorities, roles, responsibilities and capacities for greening government operations, with a view to clarifying the leadership and responsibility for

• the provision of central direction and guidance on greening government operations for sustainable development strategies;
• the establishment of meaningful and aggressive government-wide targets for greening government operations; and
• the development of a government-wide strategy for monitoring and reporting on greening government operations.

One recommendation in this chapter is made to Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) that includes Environment Canada in a consultative capacity. PWGSC' response is as follows:

Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), on behalf of responsible departments and agencies, agrees with the recommendation. Building on past successes, PWGSC, in consultation with the Treasury Board Secretariat, Environment Canada and other departments and agencies as appropriate, will work to clarify authorities, roles, responsibilities and capacities around greening government operations with a view to clarifying the leadership and responsibility for

• providing central direction and guidance on greening government operations, included in the context of sustainable development strategies;
• developing benchmarks and meaningful and aggressive government-wide targets for greening government operations; and,
• establishing performance measures and a government-wide strategy for monitoring and reporting.

This will draw on over a decade of experience and be informed by international best practices on greening government operations. Clarification of authorities, roles, responsibilities and capacities will be completed by March 2008.

This response has been developed in consultation with the Treasury Board Secretariat and Environment Canada.

For more information on Chapter 10, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_10_e_30136.html

Chapter 12-Previous Audits of Responses to Environmental Petitions-Listing of Species at Risk

This is an audit of a response made to an environmental petition. The chapter sought to determine whether Environment Canada had made progress in addressing the development of guidelines for listing species at risk.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found:

• Progress is unsatisfactory. Environment Canada has not finalized guidelines for dealing with cases in which the Minister does not follow the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada advice to recommend adding a species to the List of Wildlife Species at Risk. Although the Department has drafted guidelines, these are not publicly available, have changed over time, and are not applied consistently or systematically. In the meantime, 20 species have not been listed for federal protection for socio-economic reasons, and due to a requirement for additional consultation with the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board.

Recommendation 12.11: Environment Canada should ensure that the draft guidelines for making recommendations to list species at risk are finalized, made publicly available, and implemented.

Environment Canada's Response: Recommendation accepted. Guidelines for the listing/delisting of wildlife species under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) were approved in principle in September 2006 by the Deputy Heads Steering Committee for Species at Risk (Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Parks Canada) and together with federal regulatory policy have guided subsequent decisions.

Due to evolving legislative and policy frameworks in provinces and territories, and the implications of this for SARA, the National Framework for Species at Risk Conservation (NFSARC) was developed and endorsed by the Canadian Council of Resource Deputy Ministers in September 2007. As a result, the guidelines for listing/delisting are being reviewed for consistency. Once this federal review is complete, the guidelines will be made public.

As of November 2007, 389 species assessed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) have been listed under SARA. Twenty species have not yet been listed. Environment Canada has responsibility for six of these and subsequent to meeting the Act's consultation obligations, is endeavoring to bring these forward for consideration in late 2008 or 2009.

Environment Canada is aware of the status of species, whether listed or not, based on data from a shared database populated by the responsible species manager (from either a province, a territory, Environment Canada or Fisheries and Oceans Canada) which is the prime data base for the COSEWIC follow-up reviews. This approach is an effective use of resources and reflects the shared responsibility for wildlife, consistent with the 2007 National Framework for Species at Risk Conservation.

For more information on Chapter 12, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_12_e_30138.html

Chapter 14-Previous Audits of Responses to Environmental Petitions-Genetically Engineered Fish

This is an audit of a response made to an environmental petition. The chapter sought to determine whether Fisheries and Oceans Canada had made progress in developing regulations and a policy framework on genetically engineered fish.

The audit found that:

• Fisheries and Oceans Canada had made unsatisfactory progress. Since the establishment of the 1993 Federal Biotechnology Regulatory Framework the department has made frequent commitments to develop regulations for transgenic aquatic organisms and although regulations are under development, the department has not yet put any regulations in place.
• In 2001 in response to a petition, Fisheries and Oceans Canada committed to developing regulations under the Fisheries Act for aquatic organisms with novel traits, including genetically engineered fish. In 2004, in response to an audit, Fisheries and Oceans Canada indicated that it would develop a policy on transgenic aquatic organisms by the end of 2005. The department no longer intends to develop a policy, as it now recognizes that the Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999 (CEPA 1999) including the New Substances Notification Regulations (Organisms) achieves the department's intended policy objective. Fisheries and Oceans Canada officials informed the CESD that the 2004 commitment to develop a policy was made without a full understanding of the applicable CEPA 1999 provisions.
• The New Substances Notifications Regulations (Organisms) under CEPA 1999 prescribe the information that must be provided to Environment Canada prior to the proposed import to or manufacture in Canada of a new organism that is an animate product of biotechnology. Under the contained research and development exemption (under these regulations, research and development organisms are not required to undergo the same notification and risk assessment process. While researchers and developers are still required to meet the containment provisions, some weaknesses exist, including an incomplete knowledge of research and development activities because proponents are not required to disclose that they are conducting research; and there is no mandatory reporting of an accidental release (although such a breach is subject to Environment Canada's compliance and enforcement policy once Environment Canada becomes aware of the breach).
• Environment Canada and Health Canada has, with Fisheries and Oceans Canada begun to consult with the regulated community about changes to the New Substances Notification Regulations (Organisms). The first phase of the consultations will conclude in 2008, although no timeline for the revision of the regulations was provided.
• Until the New Substances Notications Regulations (Organisms) are amended, the CESD contends that Fisheries and Oceans Canada should proceed to regulate.

Accordingly, one recommendation is made to Fisheries and Oceans Canada in this audit.

For more information on Chapter 14, visit: www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/aud_ch_cesd_200803_14_e_30140.html

The audit objectives were to determine the extent of movement of public servants between the public service and ministers' offices, and whether the staffing requirements of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA), Public Service Employment Regulations, Public Service Commission of Canada (PSC) policies and other applicable legislation were met for appointments of public servants returning from ministers' offices. Another objective was to assess the risk to political impartiality.

The audit was limited to organizations subject to the PSEA and focused on persons who had been public servants before they went to work in ministers' offices and who returned from ministers' offices to the federal public service during the period from April 1990 to September 2006. As well, the audit focused on public service staffing actions with an elevated risk to political impartiality. Not included in the scope of this audit were ministers' exempt staffs who had not been public servants before starting in the minister's office and who therefore were entering the public service for the first time.

Environment Canada was one of the audited entities covered by the audit. The PSC identified two cases of inappropriate movement between the Minister's office and the public service involving individuals deployed into positions at Environment Canada.

One recommendation is made to the Treasury Board Secretariat to develop a policy governing the movement of public servants between the public service and minister's offices to ensure that these moves are undertaken in a fair and transparent manner, upholding the principle of political impartiality and are effectively monitored.

For more information on this audit, visit: www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/adt-vrf/rprt/2007/mbmo-mecm/index-eng.htm