February 5, 2001 (3:20 p.m. EST) No. 16

CANADA REINTRODUCES LEGISLATION

TO PROTECT THE GREAT LAKES FROM BULK WATER REMOVALS

John Manley, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today reintroduced amendments to the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act (IBWTA). The amendments will prohibit the bulk removal of water from Canadian boundary waters, including the Great Lakes.

"These amendments will protect the Great Lakes from bulk water removal under federal law," said Minister Manley. "We are taking a decisive step to ensure that this critical freshwater resource is protected for future generations."

The prohibition on removals will apply principally to the Great Lakes and other boundary waters, such as the international sections of the St. Lawrence River and Lake of the Woods in Ontario and the St. Croix and Upper St. John rivers in New Brunswick. Separate from the prohibition, the amendments introduced today will also set in place a licensing regime for boundary waters projects such as dams, obstructions or other works.

Environment Minister David Anderson said, "Prohibiting the bulk removal of this vital natural resource protects the ecosystems and communities that depend upon a sustainable supply of water."

The reintroduction of the amendments to the IBWTA is the last step in a three-part strategy to prohibit bulk water removals from all Canadian water basins, announced in February 1999. Last year, the International Joint Commission (IJC), at the request of Canada and the United States, completed a study and released a report that concluded that the ecological integrity of the Great Lakes needs protection. The recommendations make it clear that removals and diversions of water from the Great Lakes basin represent a permanent loss of water, and must be managed differently from uses of water within the basin. The IBWTA amendments are consistent with the IJC's conclusions and recommendations. In addition, the Minister of the Environment has been working with the provinces and territories to ensure that all of Canada's freshwater resources are protected. All provinces have already put in place or are developing legislation or policies that accomplish this goal.

Canada's border with the United States is formed, crossed or straddled by more than 300 lakes and rivers. The International Boundary Waters Treaty Act was passed by Parliament in 1911. It implements the 1909 Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty, which establishes principles and procedures for preventing or settling disputes, particularly regarding the quantity and quality of boundary waters between Canada and the United States.

- 30 -

A backgrounder is attached.

For further information, media representatives may contact:

Jennifer Sloan

Director of Communications

Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs

(613) 995-1851

Media Relations Office

Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade

(613) 995-1874

Johanne Beaulieu

Press Secretary

Office of the Minister of the Environment

(819) 997-1441

This document is also available on the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade's Internet site:

http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca

Backgrounder

AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY WATERS TREATY ACT

Canadians are looking to all levels of government to take action to assure the long-term security and integrity of Canada's freshwater resources. As we pass into the 21st century, federal, provincial and territorial governments need to co-operate to ensure a coherent and effective policy that preserves freshwater resources. The reintroduction of amendments to the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act (IBWTA) reaffirms Canada's commitment to act within its jurisdiction to prohibit bulk water removal.

What do the amendments do?

The main element of the proposed amendments to the IBWTA is to prohibit bulk removal of boundary waters (i.e. those shared between Canada and the U.S.) out of their water basins. With these amendments, the Great Lakes and other boundary waters will now have protection from bulk removals under federal law. This is significant because the Great Lakes are of sufficient size to attract developers of bulk removal -- including for the purposes of export -- or diversion schemes. The federal government is taking action within its jurisdiction to ensure that these incomparable freshwater resources, which belong to all Canadians, are protected from exploitation and environmental damage caused by the bulk removal of water.

Under the 1909 Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty and the IBWTA, the federal government has jurisdiction over boundary waters, such as the Great Lakes, in order to fulfill Canada's obligation under the Treaty not to affect unilaterally the level and flow of waters on the U.S. side of the boundary. The amendments would give the Minister of Foreign Affairs the authority to:

• impose a prohibition on removals of boundary waters out of their water basins. Exceptions will be considered, such as ballast water, short-term humanitarian purposes and water used in the production of food or beverages (e.g. bottled water); and
• introduce a licensing system, separate from the prohibition, formalizing a 90-year-old process under which the federal government and the International Joint Commission (IJC) have examined and approved certain projects, such as dams and obstructions, under the provisions of the Treaty. The licensing system would not cover ordinary municipal, industrial or agricultural uses.

What about protecting all of Canada's water resources?

In February 1999, Canada announced a three-part strategy to prohibit the bulk removal of water out of all major Canadian water basins. Over the past two years there has been significant progress:

• Canada promised to take action within its jurisdiction by introducing the amendments to the IBWTA. This was done in November 1999. Today, the amendments have been reintroduced to the new session of Parliament.
• a proposal by the Minister of the Environment, in co-operation with the provinces and territories, to develop a Canada-wide accord to prohibit bulk water removals. This would apply to all waters. Each level of government would take appropriate action within its jurisdiction. All provinces have put into place or are developing legislation or regulations that accomplish this goal.
• Canada and the U.S. agreed to a joint reference to the IJC on consumptive uses, diversions and removals of Great Lakes waters, including for the purposes of export. The IJC's final report (Protection of the Waters of the Great Lakes, February 2000) concluded that the Great Lakes require protection, especially in the light of the uncertainties, pressures and cumulative impacts from removals, consumption, population and economic growth, and climate change. Recommendations for action to protect the ecological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin are directed by the IJC to all levels of government in Canada and the U.S. The IBWTA amendments are consistent with and supportive of the IJC's conclusions and recommendations.

Prohibition of bulk water removal out of water basins vs. an export ban: which is the better approach?

There is a consensus among Canadians that freshwater resources need protection from bulk removals. What is the best way of achieving this goal?

Prohibiting bulk water removal out of water basins is better than an export ban because it is more comprehensive, environmentally sound, respects constitutional responsibilities and is consistent with Canada's international trade obligations.

• Water is protected in its water basin, before the issue of exporting arises. This is an environmental protection measure of general application, aimed at preserving the integrity of ecosystems.
• Under the Canada-wide accord, each level of government has a responsibility and each level must take action. Canadian governments have full sovereignty over the management of water in its natural state, and in exercising this sovereignty are not constrained by trade agreements.
• Water is regulated in its natural state, before it has become a commercial good or a saleable commodity. This is consistent with Canada's international trade obligations.

An export ban may seem like a quick and simple solution. However, it does not focus on the environmental dimension, has possible constitutional limitations, and may be vulnerable to a trade challenge. An export ban would focus on water once it has become a good and therefore subject to international trade agreements. Because these agreements limit the ability of governments to control the export of goods, a ban on exports is likely to be contrary to Canada's international trade obligations. This contrasts sharply with the federal government's approach.