Evidence of meeting #12 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendments.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you for that through you, Mr. Chair.
Then as far as the re-lettering of the section....
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
That takes place after the committee makes decisions on the various clauses. It's a change that takes place to ensure that the numbering is correct. We don't have to actually deal with that.
Ms. Duncan.
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
When Mr. Trost tabled removing paragraph (e), he said that it was replaced by the new legislation. I'm just wondering why then you don't reference the new legislation. Or is this agreement not referenced in that new legislation?
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
9:15 a.m.
Director General, Energy Safety and Security Branch, Department of Natural Resources
It no longer referenced the federal legislation because it no longer applies.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
What I thought was that the effect of this paragraph (e) has already been achieved in the act that was passed last year, so there's no need to achieve it again. That's my understanding from what Mr. Trost read.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Regan.
Is it agreed that government amendment 9 pass?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 115 as amended agreed to)
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
The next grouping is 116 to 119.
Is it agreed that we pass clauses 116 to 119 unamended?
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
On division.
(Clauses 116 to 119 inclusive agreed to on division)
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you.
Now we're at clause 119.1, NDP amendment 1.
Who would like to move that and speak to it?
Mr. Julian, go ahead.
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will move it.
What this essentially does, given the concerns that were raised by a number of witnesses around an independent offshore area regulator.... We understand that the legislation is going forward without that, which is understandable because there were a number of witnesses who also said that they didn't see the need at this time for an independent offshore area regulator.
What we are doing is building into the legislation the ability to come back to that question if there's a need, to have a report tabled by the minister not later than five years after the act comes into force. If then this committee or the minister himself or herself decides it is best to move in that direction, we have a review mechanism that allows us to ensure that this legislation is doing everything it is set out to do.
It's a bit of an insurance policy. I think government members can support this as well. It allows for, subsequent to the act being passed, having a review mechanism to ensure that the operation and implementation of the act is increasing the safety mechanisms in the way that we all want to see them increased.
I'd like to move the amendment and I hope that it gets support from the government side.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
You've heard Mr. Julian's proposed amendment and his comments on it.
I see some others, Ms. Duncan then Mr. Regan then Ms. Block, on this proposed amendment.
Ms. Duncan.
February 11th, 2014 / 9:20 a.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I very strongly support this amendment. It's quite a common provision at the federal level. We are introducing a new legislative regulatory regime. This is a completely new regime and will be highly complex because it involves three jurisdictions in the legislation and three jurisdictions covering a very complex sector.
As Mr. Julian said, there was still a difference of opinion from the witnesses across the three jurisdictions about whether or not some mechanisms would be more appropriate than others. It's similar to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. There actually is a provision in there as well as in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, because when you're dealing with something, let's say, in an energy sector, things evolve and new information comes to light.
It is a very reasonable proposal. It enables the public to know that the government is going to closely watch the implementation of this legislation to make sure it actually delivers on what the intent was, and whether all parts of the legislation are working in the way it was thought they would in the beginning.
Paragraph 119.1(2)(b) is a very good one because it gives total discretion to determine what aspects of the bill should be reviewed to whatever committee the review is assigned to, having consulted with the three governments and other authorities, namely, industry, workers, and so forth. It is a very wise provision. It is the kind of provision in modern legislation that is often included when you're putting in place a new regime of a nature such as this one.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The speed at which this bill is progressing so far today is not an indication that it is not an important bill. If we think about the devastating loss of life we've seen, we know what the importance of this legislation is and what it's trying to achieve.
I agree with the arguments that have been made so far in support of this amendment. I'd like to point out that, in my view, if it were passed, this would not cause the bill to be in conflict with provincial legislation because it simply applies to the section that concerns the federal government and the federal Parliament.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
NDP
Claude Gravelle NDP Nickel Belt, ON
Mr. Chair, thank you very much.
I agree with my colleagues. This is just an insurance policy. We all have insurance policies here at this table. This ensures that this piece of legislation will be reviewed after five years. It is nothing outrageous. If it's working, fine, and if it's not working, we can make some changes after five years. That's all it is.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
You've heard the proposed amendment and the discussion around it. Is there any further discussion on amendment NDP-1?
We'll go to the vote.
