Evidence of meeting #25 for Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Here, Mr. Chair, we're helping to clarify what “large industrial emitter” means for the country. It's important for Canadians who are watching to know that approximately 700 large industrial emitters are releasing 65% of Canada's greenhouse gasses. We are pleased to see now that the bill reflects a real strategy to deal with those large industrial emitters. We need, of course, the definition of them at the front of the bill.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
There's no debate.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Again, we need to now define a “national carbon budget”, since we've inserted it in the legislation. That's what this definitional term does.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
There's no debate.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
We've referred to “a national carbon budget” and have defined it. We've referred to “an individual carbon budget” and have defined it. Now we talk about “a sectoral carbon budget” and we're going to define that.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
There's no debate.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Amendment L-17 ensures that releases covered by CEPA, under the regulations, include accidents. The government amendment, which we're talking about here, seeks to restrict CEPA regulations to “intentional” releases, so we're strengthening the provision.
1:50 p.m.
Acting Director General, Legislation and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Stewardship Branch, Department of the Environment
Mr. Chair, I'd like to explain the rationale for the clauses that this amendment would remove or the lines that this amendment would remove.
With the way part 5 of CEPA is currently constructed, the government can regulate products that contain a toxic substance and that then emit a toxic substance. For example, paint contains VOCs and releases VOCs. We cannot, however, regulate products that do not contain a toxic substance but which emit a toxic substance. The example I'll give you is a wood stove, which is a piece of cast iron and doesn't contain a toxic substance. When you put wood in it and you fire it up, it emits particulate matter and all sorts of nasty things that create smog, etc. We can't regulate the design of such products at the moment.
In clause 14, which this committee passed, there are numerous references to the term “product that contains or may release”. That is expanding the authority so that we can now regulate, for example, wood stoves under CEPA.
The provision that amendment would delete is simply an effort to define, for clarity, what is meant by “a product that may release”. We have other provisions and authorities in CEPA to address inadvertent or accidental releases. We're confident that we can do so and that we're not therefore losing any authority. This is to clarify an expanded authority under CEPA.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Thank you, Mr. Moffet.
Are there further comments from Mr. Godfrey?
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I am so convinced by the eloquence of Mr. Moffet that we will withdraw this.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
L-17 is withdrawn.
I call the question on clause 3.
(Clause 3 as amended agreed to)
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Moving on now to the schedule, is there any debate on the schedule?
Mr. Cullen.
March 29th, 2007 / 1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
NDP-38 is not moved. Thank you.
Let's move to the schedule of Bill C-30 on page 36. Is there any debate?
Go ahead, Mr. Godfrey.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
We basically are against the schedule, because it doesn't make sense, given the changes we've made to clause 18 of Bill C-30.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there further debate?
Mr. Moffet, do you have a clarification?
1:55 p.m.
Acting Director General, Legislation and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Stewardship Branch, Department of the Environment
Can you clarify where we are?
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
We are on page 36 and 37 of Bill C-30. It's the schedule to the bill. It's votable, like a clause. It lists excluded volatile organic compounds, and so on.
1:55 p.m.
Acting Director General, Legislation and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Stewardship Branch, Department of the Environment
May I explain what this is here for?
