Environment Committee on Dec. 5th, 2023

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you.

I think it's important that we know what the guardrails of our work are.

In the last meeting, it was called into question whether or not we ought to make recommendations to one specific province. At that time, it was Alberta. I sensed a little bit of defensiveness from my Conservative colleagues with respect to Alberta. We can use our imaginations as to why that might be the case, but the fact remains that, if we're going to have a look at whether or not we ought to do something similar with British Columbia—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is there a point of order?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I really do take offence to that. I'm not from Alberta. I stand up for all the provinces in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That's a point of offence. It's not a point of order.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

I apologize if I offended anybody, but I do sense occasionally that there are members of certain parties that are—and they may applaud when I say it—more ardently opposed to any action that might limit the ability of oil and gas companies and energy companies to do their work in the same way that they have been doing it.

That's problematic because, as we heard from the Alberta Energy Regulator, it's just not working. People are being negatively impacted by the pollution caused through these massive oil and gas extraction projects. I think it is certainly part of our work to be focused on it.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I have a point of order.

Really, are you still filibustering? Let's get back to the motion. We need to get this—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Again, it's not a point of order.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

It's not relevant. Talking about a—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You're questioning relevance.

I've asked Mr. van Koeverden to narrow the focus now. I don't think there's any issue with the federal government focusing on a particular province. We come to agreements with provinces all the time. We do this in agriculture, which is kind of a joint jurisdiction.

Anyway, Mr. van Koeverden, go ahead, but please mind the guardrails on this.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thank you.

I would just observe that I was only responding to the point of order from my colleague when I got point of ordered again saying that I ought to stay on topic, so I will try to stay on topic with respect to this motion in particular.

With that, I think I will table the amendment. It's that we simply drop the clause in there about....

Mr. Bachrach, if you'll indulge me, because I don't have it in front of me. Perhaps it's a friendly amendment if we can simply drop the section that says we report this to the House. It would be, “with the Government of British Columbia to establish a $1 billion watershed security fund; and that the government table a written response.”

Does everybody agree?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I don't have the text in front of me. I do actually, but let me just....

Can you just tell us what the amendment is? Could you just spell it out again?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Perhaps I'll just read it from the beginning.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

The amended motion would read, “That, given the importance of freshwater ecosystem services to the prosperity, sustainability, and resilience of British Columbian communities, and given the increasingly severe impacts of climate change including drought, wildfires, and floods, the committee urge the federal government to work with the Government of British Columbia to establish a $1 billion watershed security fund; and that the government table a written response.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You're taking out “that the Committee report this to the House”. That's the amendment.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Yes. This is just committee business, and I think the committee ought to make that recommendation on its own two feet.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

This is an amendment to the motion that we can now debate.

Does anyone want to speak to this? If there's general agreement to doing this, we don't have to have a big debate on it.

How do you feel about this?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Chair, through you to Mr. van Koeverden, thanks for the amendment.

I do favour the idea of reporting to the House and having the government table a written response, but really the goal here is to try to build support around the table to get this motion passed and to speak as a committee. If Mr. van Koeverden feels that striking the one clause of the motion will bring him on board and allow him and his colleagues to support the motion, I'm happy to do that.

I think the important thing is that we have the debate and that, as a committee, we're able to express it to the government, even if we're not tabling it in the House formally. I would hope that they're listening intently to our deliberations today. Of course, we have the parliamentary secretary here contributing to that debate. I think that's the key thing.

I'm happy to either accept it as a friendly amendment, or we can vote on it. Maybe a vote would be more appropriate, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, it's pretty substantive.

Do we have any other speakers on this amendment? Can we just vote on it?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Can we have the amendment read back?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Actually, Mr. van Koeverden's amendment is just to delete the words “that the Committee report this to the House”.

Can we vote on that?

Does anyone object to this?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

As indicated, I object, but in the interest of building consensus, if it's unanimous I'm not going to stand in the way of—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Let me put it this way. Hypothetically, if we had a vote, would you vote for this amendment?