An Action Plan for the National Capital Commission

An Act to amend the National Capital Act and other Acts

This bill was last introduced in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in December 2009.

Sponsor

John Baird  Conservative

Status

In committee (House), as of Oct. 5, 2009
(This bill did not become law.)

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the National Capital Act to
(a) modify the governance structure of the National Capital Commission and increase its transparency;
(b) clarify the National Capital Commission’s responsibilities, including those regarding planning and sound environmental stewardship;
(c) establish the boundaries of Gatineau Park;
(d) enhance the National Capital Commission’s regulation-making powers;
(e) remove the requirement that the National Capital Commission seek Governor in Council approval for real estate transactions; and
(f) harmonize that Act with the civil law regime of Quebec.
This enactment also amends the Official Residences Act to clarify the National Capital Commission’s responsibilities regarding official residences. As well, it makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2009 / 4:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, I said that I was prepared to support this bill at second reading so long as many of the problems I have raised are resolved in committee. That means that I hope the government is prepared to consider and support certain amendments. We have submitted questions to the minister. I put the question to the member for Carleton—Mississippi Mills on this subject specifically. He was not prepared to answer. That leads me to assume that all the amendments may well be blocked. If that is the case, when the bill goes to committee after second reading and the government does not permit improvement of the bill, we will vote accordingly. I personally am prepared to let it go to committee after second reading, but on a number of conditions, which I insist on. We will see what happens.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2009 / 4:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened attentively to the remarks by my colleague from Ottawa—Vanier. They reflect his wisdom and planning.

He touched on an important matter when he spoke of the administration of the bridges in the National Capital Region. As we know, the NCC currently administers the Champlain and Portage bridges. The Chaudière and the Alexandra, better known as the Interprovincial, and one third of the Macdonald-Cartier are administered by Public Works and Government Services Canada.

I would like my colleague to tell me, given that the government wants the National Capital Commission to be involved in the planning, whether he thinks it wise for the five existing bridges and future bridges to all be under the administration of the National Capital Commission, with appropriate funding, of course.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2009 / 4:35 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that management should always be made as simple as possible. The fact, though, is that a number of bodies are responsible for the bridges in the same region. There is another bridge too that could be included, although it is used by trains and not vehicles. It is obvious that we need to be consistent if we want sound management of all the various elements in the network of roads—including the bridges in the National Capital Region—and if we want to give the National Capital Commission a certain ability to plan transportation, something that is desired in the bill and that I very much support. If a piece of road heads for the river but stops there because there is no bridge, it is hard to get across. The road system is therefore far from complete. It would be logical for the National Capital Commission to manage all the bridges and have the credits it would need to do so.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2009 / 4:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON

Mr. Speaker, getting back to the question on the protection of the environment, I would like to assure the hon. members for Ottawa—Vanier and Hull—Aylmer that the protection of the environment is just as important on this side of the House as it is on theirs.

The government will ensure that the NCC is carrying out its responsibilities to manage the environment by examining its annual report and business plan, which are submitted each year for approval by the Governor in Council. In addition, the government will ensure that the NCC carries out its obligations to manage the environment by examining and approving its 50-year master plan.

I will also invite the hon. member for Ottawa—Vanier to talk these things over a little with me after this session. We will find ways to improve the bill.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

September 16th, 2009 / 4:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would have liked to hear these words from the minister because that would mean they were coming from the government.

I have another problem with what I just heard. The 50-year plan mentioned in the bill will be adopted or approved solely by the Governor in Council. First of all, the House will therefore not have a chance to address the famous plan mentioned here, and second, there is no mention in the bill of the ecological integrity of the Greenbelt. So there is an inconsistency here.

If the government is serious, which I do not doubt, one of the government ministers or a parliamentary secretary who can speak on behalf of the government needs to make a statement like this.

With all due respect, my colleague knows what I am talking about. It is the Governor in Council who has to speak out. So far, the Governor in Council has not confirmed what my colleague across the way just said. If the Governor in Council wants to confirm it, I think the situation would be better than it is now.

The House resumed from September 16 consideration of the motion that Bill C-37, An Act to amend the National Capital Act and other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

October 5th, 2009 / noon
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Is the House ready for the question?

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

October 5th, 2009 / noon
See context

Some hon. members

Question.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

October 5th, 2009 / noon
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

October 5th, 2009 / noon
See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

An Action Plan for the National Capital CommissionGovernment Orders

October 5th, 2009 / noon
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to a committee)