Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 16-21 of 21
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Natural Resources committee  My understanding is that with shallower water drilling, which is less dangerous, less technical, those are circumstances where smaller companies or mid-size companies are more easily able to participate because the challenges are less serious. However, as many of us know, Chevron has drilled very, very deep wells in the deep water off of Newfoundland, and those are areas where you probably wouldn't want a junior company playing ball.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Prof. William Amos

Natural Resources committee  Whether they pursue it or not would be a business decision. However, I think they would be less constrained by the question of affordability of insurance because they would simply be looking to their own resources. I think it's simply a matter of looking at whether or not a company is going to determine for itself the relative risks and benefits.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Prof. William Amos

Natural Resources committee  For me, what isn't commensurate is the notion that the foundation of the legislation would be the polluter pays principle, but then on the other hand, the only guaranteed payment pursuant to this legislation would be the absolute liability of one billion dollars. Thereafter, fault or negligence would have to be proven.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Prof. William Amos

Natural Resources committee  I'll give you four. First, remove the $1 billion cap on absolute liability in accordance with the polluter pays principle. That's proposed subsection 26(2.2). Second, and I haven't mentioned this so I'll put special emphasis on it, eliminate the discretion of the Minister of Natural Resources to reduce absolute liability levels to below the legislated level of $1 billion.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Prof. William Amos

Natural Resources committee  There are other jurisdictions with unlimited absolute liability. Norway offers the prime example. I think, to be fair, that there is a distinction to be drawn, because Norway's oil and gas industry is a crown corporation, with Statoil engaged. There are distinctions to be drawn.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Prof. William Amos

Natural Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all of the members. I appreciate the opportunity again. This is an important issue, and I'm very happy that we have legislation on the floor of the House. This is long overdue, but I'm very glad that we've reached this stage. I'm with Ecojustice, which is Canada's largest public interest environmental law organization.

June 3rd, 2014Committee meeting

Prof. William Amos