Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.
Foreign Affairs committee Good morning. I would like to begin by echoing Adèle's thanks to the committee for the opportunity to be with you this morning. My remarks today reflect the long-standing interest that CWIC has had in the issue of interbasin removals of water generally, and water exports more sp
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee It's not so much in terms of amendments, but that there is a different approach. We have suggested a different approach in the model act that I talked about. It is oriented to interbasin removals generally and is focused on basins rather than on international boundaries. One of
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee I would have thought the economics of rail transport would be unlikely to make that the most obvious mode. The most likely mode, and it has been the subject of some proposals, is marine tankers—the Friel Lake example in B.C.—in which you get close to a coastal lake, load up the t
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee I think it's fair to say there is a fair bit of trade both ways in bottled water, but if you look at the actual volume we're talking about, it's in terms of swimming pools rather than something really significant. That was probably one of the reasons we didn't address it. Of co
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee I think you are talking there, sir, about the amendments for the boundary waters legislation.
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee There wouldn't be any boundary waters on the coast that would be relevant.
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee The only conceivable one would be the St. Croix River. I grew up at the mouth of the St. Croix, and there's no way you could get a tanker up to the point where the waters are non-saline. That's why they're not covered. The waters you're talking about are not boundary waters and
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee It may well be covered by provincial legislation. Whether or not it's a federal matter depends on the federal government's own choice. It would certainly involve international trade, which is certainly within the federal purview. Now, the federal government may choose to defer th
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee Boundary and non-transboundary waters are what you're dealing with, yes.
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee This bill certainly would allow tanker exports. It doesn't say anything about it.
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee Oh, sorry, if it's transboundary waters, no, it wouldn't.
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee I can't conceive of any transboundary waters where tankers would be involved, so it's sort of a moot point.
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee It probably prohibits them, because it says “by any other means,” but there are—
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee I didn't quite get your first question. Could you perhaps clarify that?
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders
Foreign Affairs committee Sure, absolutely. As you may remember, one of the issues surrounding NAFTA was whether or not there should be an explicit provision excepting bulk water removal. What was done with NAFTA was interesting. There was a fix, if you will. They didn't change NAFTA, but they—meaning the
October 25th, 2012Committee meeting
J. Owen Saunders