Bill S-15 (Historical)

Expansion and Conservation of Canada’s National Parks Act

An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001

Part 1 of this enactment amends the Canada National Parks Act to create Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada.
It also amends the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act to prohibit drilling for petroleum in Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada or within one nautical mile seaward of Sable Island’s low-water mark, to restrict surface access rights provided for under that Act and to provide for the issuance of licences and authorizations with respect to activities that may be carried out in Sable Island National Park Reserve of Canada.
Finally, it makes consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001.
Part 2 amends the Canada National Parks Act to provide that the dedication of the national parks of Canada to the people of Canada is subject to any Act of Parliament.
It also amends the description of the commercial zones for the Community of Field in Yoho National Park of Canada in Schedule 4 to that Act and of the leasehold boundary of the Marmot Basin Ski Area in Jasper National Park of Canada in Schedule 5 to that Act.

Bill S-15—Time Allocation

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to Bill S-15, An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration of the second reading stage of the Bill; and

That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration of the second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Pursuant to Standing Order 67(1), there will now be a 30-minute question period.

I invite all hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate.

The hon. member for Halifax.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I have about a minute for a question. Is that correct?

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

I have been allotting a little bit of extra time for the first question, but after that, yes, I expect the questions and the answers to be approximately one minute.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, often when time allocation is moved in the House, we, the NDP, the official opposition, stands. We are angry, because we find time allocation to be an abusive process for shutting down debate.

However, I am not angry today. I am actually standing here with sadness, because there was a legitimate attempt by the NDP to work with the government on this bill to get it through the House. This is a really important piece of legislation about a park, Sable Island park, that will actually be in the riding of Halifax, and I want to support this bill--

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

There is just far too much noise in the House. A number of you do not intend to stay for the full half hour. Those of you who are carrying on conversations, would you please take them outside the chamber? We are having a very hard time hearing the member.

The member for Halifax.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I want to support this bill. I want this bill to get through. I want park protection for Sable Island. That is the thing I want most.

We opened a door for the Conservatives to say, "Let us talk about how we can expedite this and how we can get it through the House together and work on some of the problems together". We opened that door, and now the Conservatives are slamming it in our faces.

I am not angry standing here. I am profoundly sad. I apologize to the constituents of Halifax for thinking I could actually work with the Conservatives and that we could move something along together. I apologize for my naïveté.

My question to the minister is this: Why are they doing this? What it says to me is that there are other things I cannot trust in this bill. It says to me that maybe I should not be supporting this bill, because I cannot trust what the Conservatives put forward when I cannot even trust them to work together to get this bill through the House. I think there are other things in this bill I cannot support.

Why is the minister doing this? Why is he using time allocation?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, and I have spoken to my colleague about this on a number of occasions, our government appreciates the support we have received from other parties, both in the House and in the Senate. There was an agreement with regard to the number of speakers we would put up for the bill, which is largely embraced not only by all parties in Parliament but by all parties in the Nova Scotia legislature and beyond. I am talking about first nations, environmental groups and others, who for two years have considered and celebrated the action that has finally been taken, after 50 years.

This legislation, this protection of an iconic piece of Canadian nature, has been 50 years in the making. As we address many other bills in the final weeks of this session, the time has come for the House to vote.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is yet another sad day. This is not about Bill S-15. This is about a Conservative majority government under the Prime Minister and his attitude and his lack of respect for due parliamentary process.

The Prime Minister, more than any other in the history of Canada, has demonstrated borderline contempt in not allowing members the opportunity to address important issues. Canadians have a right to know that parliamentarians have been afforded the opportunity to speak and the opportunity to see a bill go through a natural process. The Conservative government has incorporated in its standard process as a majority government something that is totally abhorrent and disrespectful toward democracy.

My question is not to the minister. My question is to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons or to the Prime Minister. Why has the government decided to take such strong action with time allocation, unprecedented in the history of our country, to deny members the opportunity to debate?

If there were an ounce of good-faith negotiation, that is what should be taking place. We should have negotiation through House leaders so that there is a proper procedure to pass legislation through the House of Commons. Why is the government not doing what it should be doing in terms of preserving democracy inside the House of Commons?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this government embraces the concept of parliamentary debate. Unfortunately, the agreement that existed among parties seems to have fallen apart, and the time has come to vote.

I would remind my hon. colleagues that the passage of this legislation to protect Canada's 43rd national park reserve involves and requires mirrored legislation in the House and in the Nova Scotia legislature. Mirrored legislation was introduced there on April 24. It achieved second reading on April 25 and third reading on May 6. It received royal assent on May 10.

There has been a fulsome debate in the Senate. We had an agreement for debate in the House, which, for opposition reasons, has fallen apart. We are prepared today to take questions about the material content of Bill S-15 and to proceed to the time allocation vote.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the minister that we are not in the Senate, and we have had no debate on this.

I am motivated to remark on the comments by my colleague from Halifax, who asked what is really going on in relation to this bill.

If we look at the preamble to the bill, it talks about amending it to ensure that, for the first time, I think, the Canada National Parks Act is subservient to any other legislation of Canada. Why is this being talked about in a bill that is supposed to set up a new reserve? Why would that vehicle be used to open a debate about the whole nature of how strong the commitment to national parks is in this country?

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, there has been debate. Debate began this past week. We were prepared to continue and conclude that debate today, until the opposition changed the terms of the agreement.

This bill, as I have said, is mirrored in legislation passed in the Nova Scotia legislature. We agreed that there were some clarifications that needed to be made on the record, which I am quite prepared to make, regarding the low-impact activity that will still be allowed on the island after it becomes a national park reserve.

Time is short in this legislative session. This has been well examined over the past two years, and it is time for the House to stand and vote.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative ministers have come up with a new argument for their time allocation motions. They say that the bill has been on track for years. When speaking about a bill on the railways, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities recently told us that we had already been discussing it for six or seven years. Now, the Minister of the Environment is telling us that we have been discussing this bill for two years.

Then why now? The parliamentary session is winding down and now suddenly there is some pressing need to pass these bills even though the Conservatives have been in power since 2006. If it has been such a long time, then it seems to me that we should have had formal discussions and debate on all these bills sooner.

In closing, I want to correct the Minister of the Environment. He said there was agreement among all parties about the number of speakers. I can assure you that he certainly did not talk to the Bloc Québécois to find out when we might speak. It is funny because when they need us they do not talk to us and we are a non-recognized party and when they do not need us then we no longer exist.

I would remind the House and all parties that all 308 members here are legitimately and democratically elected, from the Prime Minister to the ministers, to every other member, regardless of where they sit.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, discussions with regard to procedures of this House should be conducted elsewhere. As you have informed the House, we are in this period to discuss the creation of Canada's 43rd national park.

In the 2000 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada made a commitment to create significant new protected areas. This legislation has been in the works for more than 50 years, starting with school children who wrote to protect the famous wild horses of Sable Island. In 1967, the government of the Rt. Hon. John Diefenbaker passed regulations protecting these horses, which planted the original seeds for the long-term protection of Sable Island.

The importance of the conservation gains of creating this new national treasure, this new national park reserve, cannot be underestimated. Sable Island is home to 350 species of migratory birds, the breeding ground for virtually the world's entire population of the Ipswich sparrow, and turning Sable Island into a national park would ensure its protection for generations to come.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his comments today. I wonder if he could comment a bit on one of the oldest established national parks, that being Yoho National Park, and some of the regulatory changes in this bill that would affect Yoho, and explain to the people how it would be a positive impact.