Environment committee  The short answer is that I'd be happy to provide some thoughts on that in writing, if you'd like. I don't think you need a whole lot in the act. I recognize that it's late in the game here to provide detail, but you do want to establish it in the act. I think you want to be cle

Environment committee  In my experience in environmental law, there's long been a tendency to be very empowering and discretionary. When I look, for example, at Nova Scotia's Environment Act, it's largely enabling legislation. I think part of the challenge is, with the early environmental laws, they ha

Environment committee  I think the opportunity to say no is there. Would it be helpful to develop some criteria around how to apply that? I would go back to my original comments. I think whenever there is discretion, it's useful to provide direction about how that discretion is to be exercised. But I t

Environment committee  I think it's fair to say the political support to approve this project isn't there, but I think we need the information to determine whether it's a good project. To get that information, we need to go through the process.

Environment committee  I said “court”.

Environment committee  Yes. I think my co-panellist was speaking about the panel decisions—

Environment committee  —whereas my comment was about the more specialized function of the tribunal to review the decisions that are being made. I think you need specialized legal expertise and EA expertise to determine whether the determination that is made is appropriate. I wouldn't want the appeals

Environment committee  I don't think we're missing the expertise. We're just missing the institution to apply it.

Environment committee  I am. I have no difficulty with that. I think what you want...and there are different ways to do this. We can also have an independent body that makes decisions, similar to what the offshore boards and the NEB, and so on, do. But I'm completely comfortable with the idea of havin

Environment committee  I'll let others comment on the last point. I think there are many different ways to do this, but the challenge with the Federal Court of Appeal is, number one, judicial deference. Some of the administrative law cases since Dunsmuir have not been very helpful in providing an appr

Environment committee  —and they can be much more effective, much more efficient, at making decisions. Having said that, at this point I think a good step forward would be just a small-scale specialized tribunal that hears appeals on key decisions in the process.

Environment committee  I think that's critical. As a general comment, I would say that the greatest risk I see to projects from any kind of assessment or regulatory process is the uncertainty that is associated with the loss of social licence, and environmental assessments are an opportunity to gain th

Environment committee  I think there are many different ways to do that. Certainly, I think the old process worked, and I think we got to a point where it was fairly refined, but I think a project list can also work. The key issue is not whether you take a definition and a law list approach or whether

Environment committee  The basic idea would be that you identify what decisions along the way can be appealed to that tribunal. The tribunal would be independent, and it would hear appeals from anyone who has an interest in the process, and it would be an expedited process. It would develop rules of pr

Environment committee  My preference overall is to focus on the appeals tribunal. I don't have a magic answer to you on the cabinet issue, but I would focus on the appeals tribunal as a way of ensuring proper application of the guidance that is provided in the legislation.