Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
MARITIME POLLUTION: CANADA’S APPROACH
P. D. Lowry
of Messrs. Macrae, Montgomery, Spring & Cunningham, Barristers and Solicitors, Vancouver.
The concern for Canada’s extensive maritime environment is reflected in principally two pieces of Federal legislation. Taken together Part XX of the Canada Shipping Act1 and the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act2 constitute a formidable though somewhat unilateral approach to the world-wide concern for pollution of the sea by ships.
In large measure, the Articles of the 1969 Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage3 are evident in both pieces of legislation. However, a variety of proposals arising out of a Royal Commission Inquiry into the grounding of the tanker Arrow on the coast of Nova Scotia in 19704 as well as those put forward by Government agencies and Parliamentary subcommittees have yielded a two-fold statutory approach which is in many ways unique in the international context and inconsistent within itself.
In commenting then on some of the unique and inconsistent aspects of Canada’s current maritime pollution legislation, the purpose of this article will be to consider the provisions of Part XX of the Canada Shipping Act and the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act in an effort to assess their function and practical effect.
APPLICABILITY
Both Acts are applicable to all vessels5 navigating in Canadian waters. While the Canada Shipping Act is limited to seagoing enterprise, the arctic waters legislation (for constitutional reasons6) encompasses all undertakings both on land and sea which have the potential for polluting the waters defined as “arctic waters”.
The “arctic waters” are those which lie north of the 60th parallel of north latitude (east of the 141st Meridian) and are adjacent to the mainland and islands of the Canadian arctic.7 The legislation purports to extend jurisdiction
1 R.S.C. 1970, 2nd Supp. C.27.
2 R.S.C. 1970, 1st Supp. C.2.
3 The Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization met in Brussels in Nov., 1969, and agreed upon the terms of the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage. It is perhaps significant that Canada did not lend her support to the terms of the Convention.
4 Final report of the Royal Commission on Pollution of Canadian Waters by Oil and the Formal Investigation into the grounding of the steam tanker “Arrow”. (Information Canada Catalogue No. 21-1970/2). The grounding of the “Arrow” gave rise to the worst single incident of maritime pollution in Canadian coastal waters.
5 Sup., note 1 s. 727(2) (d) and note 2 s. 2.
6 Unlike the provincial coastal regions of Canada the northern territories are constitutionally the domain of the Federal Government such that Federal legislation need not be limited to matters related to navigation and shipping as elsewhere.
7 Sup., note 2 s. 3(1).
10