The federal government is uniquely positioned to protect a Great Lakes basin that is changing before our eyes in fundamental ways and deteriorating in many respects. It has the scope of action, the resources and a track record of successes.

Yet an audit of efforts to protect the Great Lakes basin from environmental degradation that I tabled yesterday in the House of Commons found that Ottawa has retreated from many areas where it was once active. It found a government that has abandoned important stated positions; a government that is losing the basic science capacity necessary to meet its commitments.

We must address the problem of declining and unstable funding to those departments whose responsibilities include the health of the Great Lakes. Federal departments received only 12 per cent of the $125-million in new funding promised for Great Lakes programs. Faced with multiple priorities and less money, they are spreading their efforts thin. Many activities are short-term and unconnected, rather than being part of consistent long-term strategies.

While there have been many improvements to the environment in this region over the past three decades, these gains are at risk of being lost. For while federal leadership wanes, the basin is being subject to increased environmental pressures, including pollution from industry, municipalities and livestock production.

The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River basin is home to 16 million Canadians and has major economic importance. Its lakes, rivers and streams support the highest concentration of industry in the country. Agricultural production in the area is now valued at more than $11-billion annually. Beyond this, the basin is a natural wonder and holds 20 per cent of the Earth's fresh water.

My findings have implications that are nationwide. The health, prosperity and social well-being of half of Canada's people are inextricably linked to the quality and health of the basin's environment.

My audit found a number of challenges that face Ottawa, including:

There is no clear strategy to deal with threats to drinking water. The federal government's understanding of changes in water quality is based on monitoring a limited number of contaminants. It does not know whether our drinking water meets the national safety guidelines it helped develop. Unlike the United States, Canada does not have enforceable drinking water standards. As well, Ottawa's readiness to deal with large-scale exports of the basin's waters remains incomplete;

Current farming practices are not sustainable. In spite of conservation efforts, close to half of Ontario's agricultural soil is at risk of washing away faster than new soil can form. Livestock operations in Ontario and Quebec -- often "factory farms" -- generate manure equal to the sewage of 100 million people. This activity contributes nitrogen, phosphorus and bacterial contamination to groundwater and nearby streams and lakes. Ottawa is not working effectively with the provinces to manage the problem, nor has it any formal plan in place;

Only 10 per cent of the endangered and threatened species under the federal government's jurisdiction in the basin have stable or improving populations. Forty per cent have declining populations. Trends for the remaining 50 per cent are not reported;

Invasive aquatic species such as zebra mussels are a serious and growing threat to the basin's ecosystem balance. Ballast water and sludge from ocean-going ships are the main sources of this risk. Canada relies upon voluntary guidelines and compliance with U.S. regulations;

Canada is not living up to its international commitments. Under an agreement with the United States, 17 highly contaminated sites on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes were identified for cleanup in 1985. Sixteen sites are still on the list.

My audit also found that the federal government has delayed responding to information requests and recommendations from the International Joint Commission -- the century-old, Canada-U.S. body established to safeguard the Great Lakes. Ottawa's loss of scientific expertise due to budget cuts leaves Canadian input to the IJC at risk.

Protection of the basin cannot be achieved without U.S. co-operation. Canada's failure to meet its cleanup and IJC commitments serves to undermine Canada's best interests.

Ottawa should renew its commitment to the millions of Canadians who rely on the environmental health of the basin for clean air and drinking water, food and shelter, good health, employment and recreation by:

Formulating a long-term plan for living within the carrying capacity of the ecosystem, including concrete steps, clearly defined roles, dedicated resources, and follow-through;

Providing clear-cut federal commitments to deal with clearly defined threats to the basin's sustainability;

Funding those commitments adequately;

Rebuilding or acquiring the scientific knowledge needed to understand and manage threats to the basin.

Progress that has been achieved to date is at risk. The leadership, innovation, science and diligence that served the basin in the past has diminished. This is a legacy worth protecting, and yet there is a sense of complacency, not urgency, and of resignation, not inspiration.
Johanne Gélinas is Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. She and her staff are part of the Office of the Auditor-General. The full audit appears at http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/environment.