The consultations on Bill 20 establishing the Blue Fund, which took place in parliamentary committee this week, were marked by what can be described as differences of opinion between the Minister of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks, Benoit Charette, and the municipal world represented by the Union of Quebec Municipalities (UMQ) and the Quebec Federation of Municipalities (FQM).
Both the UMQ and the FQM have demanded that a good part of the Blue Fund be earmarked for the municipalities. The president of the UMQ, Martin Damphousse, argued that municipalities have a major role to play in terms of drinking water supply and development. FQM President Jacques Demers pointed out that small municipalities do not have sufficient financial resources to undertake the major infrastructure works essential for waste water, for example, or to repair the dams they have the responsibility.
Benoit Charette replied to the UMQ that the Blue Fund will not give priority to municipalities. We must get rid of the reflex of seeking to “protect our personal interests, but think collectively”, he argued. Strange response from the Minister: it is as if the municipalities, this local government, did not have the responsibility of defending the collective interests of their population.
During his visit to COP15 last December in Montreal, François Legault announced the creation of the Blue Fund, which would be endowed with up to 150 million per year for five years. This fund will be financed in part by water royalties, but the bulk of its envelope, or 100 million per year, comes from the Quebec state, a sum provided for in the last Girard budget.
With Bill 20 also come two regulations. The first aims to raise the starvation charges imposed on industries for their water consumption. Bottlers will pay more than big industry. Overall, water royalties will increase from 3 million to 30 million per year, which is comparable with the Ontario system. The second regulation will lift the trade secret that weighs on water consumption. The Minister of the Environment will make public next year the quantities of water withdrawn by the industry, an essential piece of data to know if the exploitation of the resource is sustainable.
On paper, the Blue Fund casts a wide net. It will be able to finance the control and prevention of floods, the conservation of aquatic ecosystems as well as any activity linked to “the sustainable, equitable and efficient use of water resources”. Protection, restoration and enhancement are on the menu. The law affirms the collective nature of the resource and promotes better “governance” of water. Its knowledge acquisition and technological innovation component is important, as is public awareness and education.
The Minister’s parsimony can no doubt be explained by the fact that the sums allocated to the Blue Fund do not correspond to the scale of the task. And although the water royalties are multiplied by ten – it must be said that they were insignificant –, they amount initially to only a quarter of the investments.
We have no doubt that the Blue Fund will do useful work. But what is 150 million a year at best to control flooding or restore rivers and lakes affected by pollution and premature aging? According to a study commissioned by the Caucus of local municipalities of the UMQ, the fight against invasive alien species in bodies of water alone would cost 114 million per year. While being a source of shoreline erosion and pollution, motorized pleasure boating is the main vector for the transmission of these harmful species. Navigation is the responsibility of the federal government, which presides in this matter over a sovereign laissez-faire on our fragile lakes, the municipalities cannot regulate this activity which threatens, in many cases, aquatic ecosystems.
Bill 20 and the Blue Fund it gave birth to ignore the major issues that affect water quality. This is the case with the discharge of wastewater by municipalities during heavy and sudden rains, phenomena that are expected to occur more often due to global warming. There is also, in agriculture, the pork sector and the intensive cultivation of corn and soybeans which is closely associated with it, sources of massive pollution of our waterways. But neither Bill 20 nor the minister talk about that: it is true that it is not a few hundred millions that are in question, but billions. And after all, Fonds bleu looks so pretty.