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

Results 1-15 of 58
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Fisheries committee  I'll start. The act is scheduled to come into force two years after royal assent. From a Parks Canada perspective, there is actually work that will need to be done during that period to prepare for the act coming into force: development of requirements for a petition, for exampl

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  It's certainly nowhere near the order of magnitude of money that's required for conservation work.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  My colleague is pointing out to me that it's not as if we have money sloshing around that is not already allocated to priorities within the agency.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  We have the two years before the bill comes into force--that's preparatory time. There is then a period of two years during which petitions are received. That's the period when communities have the opportunity to express their interest in having lighthouses in their area designat

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  Doug is the more appropriate person to speak to that.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  The minister responsible for Parks Canada is the minister responsible for the act, which means he is responsible for the administration of the act. It does not imply and the act doesn't say that all lighthouses that are designated should be transferred to Parks Canada. So coast g

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  I'll start by answering the last question. The $65 million amount does not include the structures. If the structures were included, we would be talking about several millions of dollars more. As regards ownership, the bill does not state that there will be a change of owner aft

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  That's it: the amendments will reduce the costs.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  No, if the structures are included, that increases the costs; if they are removed, that reduces the costs.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  Yes, that's it.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  Yes, but there are fewer buildings than structures. So the word “structures” is more inclusive.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  All right.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  Even if we delete structures from the bill, there will definitely be costs associated with their maintenance, but they aren't costs associated with the bill. As the bill is based on heritage value, the designation of a lighthouse under this bill means that we must maintain it in

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell

Fisheries committee  No. The act provides for the obligation to maintain the designated lighthouses. However, there has to be access in order to maintain them. Even if the structures themselves are not designated, they have to be maintained, but in a non-heritage manner.

April 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Patricia Kell