Report

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Ted Opitz led a Canadian delegation of two, including Mr. Dennis Bevington, to the meeting of the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region (the Standing Committee) held in Stockholm, Sweden, 14 February 2012. Accompanying the delegation was Mr. Tim Williams from the Parliamentary Information and Research Service of the Library of Parliament as advisor to the delegation. 

The Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region (CPAR) is a parliamentary body comprising delegations appointed by the national parliaments of the Arctic states (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, the United States of America) and the European Parliament. The conference also includes Permanent Participants representing Indigenous peoples, as well as observers. The conference meets every two years. The Ninth Conference was held in Brussels, Belgium, 13-15 September 2010.^[1]

The Conference adopts a statement with recommendations to the Arctic Council (AC) and to the governments of the eight Arctic states and the European Commission. The Standing Committee closely monitors how the governments implement the Conference Statement, and take new initiatives to further Arctic cooperation.

Between conferences, Arctic parliamentary cooperation is facilitated by the Standing Committee, which began its activities in 1994. The Conference and Standing Committee take initiatives to further Arctic cooperation, and act, in particular, as a parliamentary forum for issues relevant to the work of the AC. The Standing Committee takes part in the work of the Council as an observer.^[2]

MEETING SUMMARY

The agenda for the meeting and the draft minutes of the previous meeting held 27 September 2011, Syktyvkar, Russian Federation, were adopted.

A.   ECOSYSTEM – BASED MANAGEMENT IN THE ARCTIC REGION

Mr. Alf Håkon Hoel, Regional Director, Institute of Marine Research, Norway discussed the concept of ecosystem based management, how it is defined and how it is being addressed in the AC.

Ecosystem-based management (EBM) is regional holistic management as defined by scientifically defined ecosystem boundaries as opposed to those defined by political boundaries. It is an attempt to identify and monitor ecosystem components and impacts such as climate change, economic activities, pollution and alien species. While EBM is a work in progress, it is being built upon existing institutions and activities already taking place as an effort to reconcile multiple concerns. In the Arctic, 17 Large Marine Ecosystems have been identified.^[3]

Fundamentally EBM is a major information gathering exercise. Without ecosystem science there can be no ecosystem based management. Total impacts are assessed followed by identification of areas of concern which then must be subject to decision making. Though EBM concepts have been identified, implementation remains a challenge.

The AC has identified EBM as a priority, particularly since the 2004 Arctic Marine Strategic Plan.^[4] Best practices in EBM for marine ecosystems have been identified.^[5]  At the latest AC Ministerial meeting held May 2011 in Nuuk, Greenland, a decision was taken to form an expert group on EBM to advise on its application for the next Ministerial meeting in 2013.^[6]  Advice is being developed for marine, terrestrial coastal and near coastal environments. Canada is working on definitions/principles and identification of gaps and lessons learned.

Following questions from the Canadian delegation it was remarked that international cooperation for ecosystems that cross political boundaries was a challenge but that there were success stories such as the cooperation between Russia and Norway in the Barents Sea. More could be done on bilateral cooperation but there was a lack of funding. In addition, implementation at the AC was being coordinated across many of its working groups (for example Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme and Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response) as it touches on many areas.

B.   SWEDISH CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE ARCTIC COUNCIL – PROGRESS REPORT

Mr. Carl Bildt, Foreign Minister of Sweden and Chair of the AC updated the Committee on the work of the Swedish chairmanship.

In addition to the points raised in the minutes to the meeting (see Appendix), Mr. Bildt noted that the AC has been a success because it is characterised by pragmatic and low-level cooperation that avoids rhetoric and tensions. The inclusion of permanent participants was noted as extremely important to its success. Looking forward to accomplishments expected by the end of the chairmanship in 2013 (at which point Canada takes over as chair) he noted the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment,^[7] the Arctic Ocean Acidification project and a potential legal framework for protecting the marine environment.

A Canadian delegate noted the AC’s presence at the United Nations Climate Change Conference, Durban, South Africa 2011. He noted that it was important for countries with knowledge of the Arctic to give the issue of climate change a higher profile, particularly since he felt that communications diminishing the importance of climate change has had a negative impact on accomplishments and government policy.  Mr. Bildt responded by agreeing that the changes in the Arctic need to be highlighted.

It was noted by another Canadian delegate that Arctic cooperation has a cascade effect into many areas. It was noted that a requirement for double hulled ships should be established. Mr. Bildt agreed that cooperation was important, and noted the search and rescue exercises occurring in the Barents region, that could be expanded to greater areas, as well as to other possibilities such as environmental cooperation.

C.   OIL GAS DEVELOPMENT IN THE ARCTIC

Mr. Lars-Otto Reiersen, Executive secretary of Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP, one of the AC working groups) discussed some of the past findings of the AMAP assessments, in particular the Oil and Gas Assessment^[8] as well as some of the future assessments that AMAP will complete for the AC. The key findings discussed are outlined in the minutes to the meeting (see Appendix).

Future assessments that AMAP will deliver in the 2013-2017 timeframe, the first two years of which Canada will be the chair of the AC, include:

•         ArcRisk - Arctic Health Risks: Impacts on health in the Arctic and Europe owing to climate induced changes in contaminant cycling (European Union funded);

•         Arctic Ocean Acidification;

•         Short Lived Climate Forcers reports – black carbon, ozone & methane; 

•         Climate assessments – several reports;

•         Oil and Gas, Persistent Organic Pollutants and Mercury follow up; and

•         Arctic Change Assessment.

The last of these was noted as being an integrated assessment that will be particularly pertinent to decision makers.

Mr. Ole Kristian Bjerkemo, Chair of Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR) then related the work of this AC working group. The EPPR working group examines and provides recommendations on oil spills, radionuclides and natural disasters. Considerable effort has been placed on oil spill prevention and response. Some products mentioned include the Arctic Shoreline Clean-up Assessment Technique (SCAT) Manual^[9] and the Field Guide for Oil Spill Response in Arctic Waters^[10] as well as the report on the Behaviour of Oil and Other Hazardous Substances in Arctic Waters.^[11]

The Nuuk Declaration had an important commitment regarding oil spills including the establishment of a task force to develop an international instrument on Arctic marine oil pollution prevention preparedness and response as well as requiring the EPPR to develop recommendations and/or best practices in the prevention of marine oil pollution.  The direction taken by EPPR regarding these efforts is outlined in the appended minutes of the meeting.

D.   CLIMATE CHANGE AND HLIMATE CHANGE AND HUMAN HEALTH

Ms. Birgitta Evengård, Professor of Infectious Diseases and Co-Chair of the Arctic Human Health Expert Group 2011-20 discussed the linkages between human health and climate change. Climate change may impact the health of humans through physical changes to the environment causing accidents, challenges to mental health as culture and lifestyles are impacted as well as changes to infectious diseases as the distribution of vectors change. Details of her discussion, with emphasis on disease, are outlined in the appended minutes of the meeting.

E.   10^th CONFERENCE OF PARLIAMENTARIANS OF THE ARCTIC REGION

Ms. Gudfridur Lilja Gretarsdottir, M.P. from Iceland, informed the Committee of the preparations for the next Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region (CPAR) which is to take place 5-7 September, 2012 in Akureyri, Iceland. 

The Secretariat noted that rapporteurs for the three topics had yet to be firmly identified with Canada still discussing the possibility.  Input into speakers for the conference would be sought.  The chair noted that, with so many young people in the Arctic, it would be important to give a voice to young people in Iceland, and so encouraged committee members to have youth as part of their delegations.

F.    ARCTIC GOVERNANCE IN AN EVOLVING ARCTIC REGION

This is a subject that was introduced to the Committee by Mr. Clifford Lincoln at Ottawa, Canada in 2010. A position paper has been developed by the Committee and discussed at length, particularly at the Iceland, SCPAR meeting in 2011. This will be the subject of discussion at the next CPAR in Iceland. The Committee was invited to comment further on the latest draft.  Greenland noted that the paper lacked a mention of people, particularly in the opening paragraphs, and suggested that there should be more focus on the human dimension of the Arctic in the paper.

G.   STATUS OF THE WORK OF SCPAR

Each delegation provided an overview of developments in their respective countries in relation to the Arctic. A detailed summary of these presentations is provided in the minutes of the meeting appended to this report.

The Canadian delegation noted that the North is fundamental to the psyche of Canadians. The four pillars of Canada’s Northern Strategy were reiterated.  Emphasis is being place on health issues and sovereignty. It was thought that work is progressing towards Canada’s submission on extending its polar continental shelf and the small disputes still existing with the United States in the Beaufort and with Denmark were being amicably resolved.

The National Energy Board Report on the Arctic Offshore Drilling Review^[12] was noted particularly in that it upholds the difficult to achieve requirement of same-season relief well drilling capability (or suitable alternative). There have been a large number of leases that will be able to go ahead but need a risk assessment.  The Beaufort Regional Environmental Assessment was mentioned.^[13] As a response to oil and gas development it was perhaps not as broad as ecosystem based management but it could be seen to be one of the activities that could be built upon by EBM.

Climate change is obvious. A presentation by Dr. David Barber to parliamentarians^[14] made it clear that the extent, thickness and durability of multiyear ice were all being drastically affected. This year has been one of the warmest winters in the North with very intense storms that have affected communication and transport systems. The changes are not simply to temperature.

With respect to human health, the caribou herds upon which people depend are being affected by climate which has affected feeding as well as their energetics, the result of increased insect harassment. The ban on Caribou hunting in the North West Territories was very difficult and shows that climate change is causing governments to make very complicated and difficult decisions in areas as important as food stocks.

A visit to the United Kingdom by the delegate enabled him to be given a presentation by the UK Environmental Audit Committee on their work on the Arctic. The results of this study may be of interest from a third party “disinterested” point of view.  International interest is increasing in the Arctic, particularly as manifest in comments by the Chinese embassy in Canada that China may seek Canadian support for China’s application for observer status at the AC.

It was concluded that parliamentary cooperation in the Arctic was necessary to ensure that things were done right, in the interest of the Arctic.

H.   SWEDISH POLAR RESEARCH

In advance of the Committee’s visit to the Swedish Polar Research Secretariat the day after the meeting, Mr. Björn Dahlbäck, Director-General, of the Secretariat introduced the members to Swedish Polar research.

Research takes place at both poles on such diverse areas as marine geology and the sea bottom, permafrost and the carbon cycle, marine chemistry and oceanography, meteorology and atmosphere, space and glaciology as well as on the human dimensions of the Arctic. There are two Arctic research stations, one at Abisko and the other at Tarfala. Though they are Swedish, there is a great deal of international cooperation that occurs with over 500 international visits and 10 000 guest nights at the stations.

I.      NEXT MEETINGS OF SCPAR IN 2012

The intention is to have an informal meeting of SCPAR at the International Polar Year Conference in Montreal (From Knowledge to Action), 22-27 April, 2012.^[15] This will give the opportunity to present the Committee’s work on Arctic Governance. In addition three other meetings of the Committee will occur in 2012 as outlined in the appended minutes.

SITE VISIT SWEDISH POLAR RESEARCH SECRETARIAT

The Swedish Polar Research Secretariat^[16] facilitates polar research at its stations in the Arctic and Antarctic as well as on its icebreaker Oden. The Secretariat is located in the same building as the Swedish Academy of Sciences, where the Nobel Prizes in the sciences are decided. The Committee visited the secretariat where two scientists presented work, one on modelling ice sheet dynamics under the influence of global warming and the other on ancient genetic changes to animals during the ice ages. It was noted that ice sheet dynamics are exceedingly complicated, making it impossible to make detailed predictions with any confidence regarding what may happen on large scales.  Regarding animal diversity in the ice ages it was noted that, in the cases studied, the animals did not move with the ice sheets, but different geographical and genetic populations of the same species dominated as the conditions favoured them. This may have implications for species management as climate changes, particularly regarding wildlife corridors versus the protection of geographically marginal but genetically distinct populations of a species.

 

Respectfully submitted,