Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.

Sponsor

Jim Flaherty  Conservative

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

Part 1 of this enactment implements certain income tax measures and related measures proposed in the March 29, 2012 budget. Most notably, it
(a) expands the list of eligible expenses under the Medical Expense Tax Credit to include blood coagulation monitors and their disposable peripherals;
(b) introduces a temporary measure to allow certain family members to open a Registered Disability Savings Plan for an adult individual who might not be able to enter into a contract;
(c) extends, for one year, the temporary Mineral Exploration Tax Credit for flow-through share investors;
(d) allows corporations to make split and late eligible dividend designations;
(e) makes the salary of the Governor General taxable and adjusts that salary;
(f) allows a designated partner of a partnership to provide a waiver on behalf of all partners to extend the time limit for issuing a determination in respect of the partnership;
(g) amends the penalty applicable to promoters of charitable donation tax shelters who file false registration information or who fail to register a tax shelter prior to selling interests in the tax shelter;
(h) introduces a new penalty applicable to tax shelter promoters who fail to respond to a demand to file an information return or who file an information return that contains false or misleading sales information;
(i) limits the period for which a tax shelter identification number is valid to one calendar year;
(j) modifies the rules for registering certain foreign charitable organizations as qualified donees;
(k) amends the rules for determining the extent to which a charity has engaged in political activities; and
(l) provides the Minister of National Revenue with the authority to suspend the privileges, with respect to issuing tax receipts, of a registered charity or a registered Canadian amateur athletic association if the charity or association fails to report information that is required to be filed annually in an information return or devotes resources to political activities in excess of the limits set out in the Income Tax Act.
Part 1 also implements other selected income tax measures and related measures. Most notably, it
(a) amends the Income Tax Act consequential on the implementation of the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, including the extension of the tax deferral allowed to farmers in a designated area who produce listed grains and receive deferred cash purchase tickets to all Canadian farmers who produce listed grains and receive deferred cash purchase tickets;
(b) provides authority for the Canada Revenue Agency to issue via online notice or regular mail demands to file a return; and
(c) introduces a requirement for commercial tax preparers to file income tax returns electronically.
Part 2 amends the Excise Tax Act to implement certain excise tax and goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) measures proposed in the March 29, 2012 Budget. It expands the list of GST/HST zero-rated medical and assistive devices as well as the list of GST/HST zero-rated non-prescription drugs that are used to treat life-threatening diseases. It also exempts certain pharmacists’ professional services from the GST/HST, other than prescription drug dispensing services that are already zero-rated. It further allows certain literacy organizations to claim a rebate of the GST and the federal component of the HST paid on the acquisition of books to be given away for free by those organizations. It also implements legislative requirements relating to the Government of British Columbia’s decision to exit the harmonized sales tax framework. Additional amendments to that Act and related regulations in respect of foreign-based rental vehicles temporarily imported by Canadian residents provide, in certain circumstances, relief from the GST/HST, the Green Levy on fuel-inefficient vehicles and the automobile air conditioner tax. This Part further amends that Act to ensure that changes to the standardized fuel consumption test method used for the EnerGuide, as announced on February 17, 2012 by the Minister of Natural Resources, do not affect the application of the Green Levy.
Finally, Part 2 amends the Air Travellers Security Charge Act, the Excise Act, 2001 and the Excise Tax Act to provide authority for the Canada Revenue Agency to issue via online notice or regular mail demands to file a return.
Part 3 contains certain measures related to responsible resource development.
Division 1 of Part 3 enacts the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, which establishes a new federal environmental assessment regime. Assessments are conducted in relation to projects, designated by regulations or by the Minister of the Environment, to determine whether they are likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that fall within the legislative authority of Parliament, or that are directly linked or necessarily incidental to a federal authority’s exercise of a power or performance of a duty or function that is required for the carrying out of the project.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the National Energy Board or a review panel established by the Minister are to conduct assessments within applicable time limits. At the end of an assessment, a decision statement is to be issued to the project proponent who is required to comply with the conditions set out in it.
The enactment provides for cooperation between the federal government and other jurisdictions by enabling the delegation of an environmental assessment, the substitution of the process of another jurisdiction for an environmental assessment under the Act and the exclusion of a project from the application of the Act when there is an equivalent assessment by another jurisdiction. The enactment requires that there be opportunities for public participation during an environmental assessment, that participant funding programs and a public registry be established, and that there be follow-up programs in relation to all environmental assessments. It also provides for powers of inspection and fines.
Finally, the enactment specifies that federal authorities are not to take certain measures regarding the carrying out of projects on federal lands or outside Canada unless they determine that those projects are not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.
This Division also makes related amendments to the Environmental Violations Administrative Monetary Penalties Act and consequential amendments to other Acts, and repeals the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
Division 2 of Part 3 amends the National Energy Board Act to allow the Governor in Council to make the decision about the issuance of certificates for major pipelines. It amends the Act to establish time limits for regulatory reviews under the Act and to enhance the powers of the National Energy Board Chairperson and the Minister responsible for the Act to ensure that those reviews are conducted in a timely manner. It also amends the Act to permit the National Energy Board to exercise federal jurisdiction over navigation in respect of pipelines and power lines that cross navigable waters and it establishes an administrative monetary penalty system.
Division 3 of Part 3 amends the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act to authorize the National Energy Board to exercise federal jurisdiction over navigation in respect of pipelines and power lines that cross navigable waters.
Division 4 of Part 3 amends the Nuclear Safety and Control Act to extend the maximum allowable term of temporary members of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission from six months to three years. It is also amended to allow for a licence to be transferred with the consent of that Commission and it puts in place an administrative monetary penalty system.
Division 5 of Part 3 amends the Fisheries Act to focus that Act on the protection of fish that support commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fisheries and to more effectively manage those activities that pose the greatest threats to these fisheries. The amendments provide additional clarity for the authorization of serious harm to fish and of deposits of deleterious substances. The amendments allow the Minister to enter into agreements with provinces and with other bodies, provide for the control and management of aquatic invasive species, clarify and expand the powers of inspectors, and permit the Governor in Council to designate another Minister as the Minister responsible for the administration and enforcement of subsections 36(3) to (6) of the Fisheries Act for the purposes of, and in relation to, subject matters set out by order.
Division 6 of Part 3 amends the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 to provide the Minister of the Environment with the authority to renew disposal at sea permits in prescribed circumstances. It is also amended to change the publication requirements for disposal at sea permits and to provide authority to make regulations respecting time limits for their issuance and renewal.
Division 7 of Part 3 amends the Species at Risk Act to allow for the issuance of authorizations with a longer term, to clarify the authority to renew the authorizations and to make compliance with conditions of permits enforceable. The Act is also amended to provide authority to make regulations respecting time limits for the issuance and renewal of permits under the Act. Furthermore, section 77 is amended to ensure that the National Energy Board will be able to issue a certificate when required to do so by the Governor in Council under subsection 54(1) of the National Energy Board Act.
Part 4 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Division 1 of Part 4 amends a number of Acts to eliminate the requirement for the Auditor General of Canada to undertake annual financial audits of certain entities and to assess the performance reports of two agencies. This Division also eliminates other related obligations.
Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act and the Cooperative Credit Associations Act to prohibit the issuance of life annuity-like products.
Division 3 of Part 4 provides that PPP Canada Inc. is an agent of Her Majesty for purposes limited to its mandated activities at the federal level, including the provision of advice to federal departments and Crown corporations on public-private partnership projects.
Division 4 of Part 4 amends the Northwest Territories Act, the Nunavut Act and the Yukon Act to provide the authority for the Governor in Council to set, on the recommendation of the Minister of Finance, the maximum amount of territorial borrowings and to make regulations in relation to those maximum amounts, including what constitutes borrowing, the relevant entities and the valuation of the borrowings.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Financial Administration Act to modify, for parent Crown corporations, the period to which their quarterly financial reports relate, so that it is aligned with their financial year, and to include in the place of certain annual tabling requirements related to the business and activities of parent Crown corporations a requirement to make public consolidated quarterly reports on their business and activities. It also amends the Alternative Fuels Act and the Public Service Employment Act to eliminate certain reporting requirements.
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to establish the Social Security Tribunal and to add provisions authorizing the electronic administration or enforcement of programs, legislation, activities or policies. It also amends the Canada Pension Plan, the Old Age Security Act and the Employment Insurance Act so that appeals from decisions made under those Acts will be heard by the Social Security Tribunal. Finally, it provides for transitional provisions and makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 7 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to add provisions relating to the protection of personal information obtained in the course of administering or enforcing the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act and repeals provisions in the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act that are substantially the same as those that are added to the Human Resources and Skills Development Act.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to add provisions relating to the social insurance registers and Social Insurance Numbers. It also amends the Canada Pension Plan in relation to Social Insurance Numbers and the Employment Insurance Act to repeal certain provisions relating to the social insurance registers and Social Insurance Numbers and to maintain the power to charge the costs of those registers to the Employment Insurance Operating Account.
Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Parks Canada Agency Act to provide that the Agency may enter into agreements with other ministers or bodies to assist in the administration and enforcement of legislation in places outside national parks, national historic sites, national marine conservation areas and other protected heritage areas if considerations of geography make it impractical for the other minister or body to administer and enforce that legislation in those places. It also amends that Act to provide that the Chief Executive Officer is to report to the Minister of the Environment under section 31 of that Act every five years. It amends that Act to remove the requirements for annual corporate plans, annual reports and annual audits, and amends that Act, the Canada National Parks Act and the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act to provide that that Minister is to review management plans for national parks, national historic sites, national marine conservation areas and other protected heritage areas at least every 10 years and is to have any amendments to a plan tabled in Parliament.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act and the Insurance Companies Act in order to allow public sector investment pools that satisfy certain criteria, including pursuing commercial objectives, to directly invest in a Canadian financial institution, subject to approval by the Minister of Finance.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the National Housing Act, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act and the Supporting Vulnerable Seniors and Strengthening Canada’s Economy Act to enhance the governance and oversight framework of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
This Division also amends the National Housing Act to establish a registry for institutions that issue covered bonds and for covered bond programs and to provide for the protection of covered bond contracts and covered bond collateral in the event of an issuer’s bankruptcy or insolvency. It also makes amendments to the Trust and Loan Companies Act, the Bank Act, the Insurance Companies Act and the Cooperative Credit Associations Act to prohibit institutions from issuing covered bonds except within the framework established under the National Housing Act. Finally, it includes a coordinating amendment to the Supporting Vulnerable Seniors and Strengthening Canada’s Economy Act.
Division 12 of Part 4 implements the Framework Agreement on Integrated Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement Operations between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America signed on May 26, 2009.
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act to reflect an increase in Canada’s quota subscription, as related to the ratification of the 2010 Quota and Governance reform resolution of the Board of Governors of the International Monetary Fund, and to align the timing of the annual report under that Act to correspond to that of the annual report under the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Canada Health Act so that members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are included in the definition of “insured person”.
Division 15 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act to
(a) remove the office of the Inspector General;
(b) require the Security Intelligence Review Committee to submit to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness a certificate on the Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s annual report; and
(c) increase the information on the Service’s activities to be provided by that Committee to that Minister.
Division 16 of Part 4 amends the Currency Act to clarify certain provisions that relate to the calling in and the redemption of coins.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act in order to implement the total transfer protection for the 2012-2013 fiscal year and to give effect to certain elements of major transfer renewal that were announced by the Minister of Finance on December 19, 2011. It also makes certain administrative amendments to that Act and to the Canada Health Act.
Division 18 of Part 4 amends the Fisheries Act to authorize the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to allocate fish for the purpose of financing scientific and fisheries management activities in the context of joint project agreements.
Division 19 of Part 4 amends the Food and Drugs Act to give the Minister of Health the power to establish a list that sets out prescription drugs or classes of prescription drugs and to provide that the list may be incorporated by reference. It also gives the Minister the power to issue marketing authorizations that exempt a food, or an advertisement with respect to a food, from certain provisions of the Act. The division also provides that a regulation with respect to a food and a marketing authorization may incorporate by reference any document. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 20 of Part 4 amends the Government Employees Compensation Act to allow prescribed entities to be subrogated to the rights of employees to make claims against third parties.
Division 21 of Part 4 amends the International Development Research Centre Act to reduce the maximum number of governors of the Centre to 14, and to consequently change other rules about the number of governors.
Division 22 of Part 4 amends Part I of the Canada Labour Code to require the parties to a collective agreement to file a copy of it with the Minister of Labour, subject to the regulations, as a condition for it to come into force. It amends Part III of that Act to require employers that provide benefits to their employees under long-term disability plans to insure those plans, subject to certain exceptions. The Division also amends that Part to create an offence and to increase maximum fines for offences under that Part.
Division 23 of Part 4 repeals the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act.
Division 24 of Part 4 amends the Old Age Security Act to provide the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development with the authority to waive the requirement for an application for Old Age Security benefits for many eligible seniors, to gradually increase the age of eligibility for the Old Age Security Pension, the Guaranteed Income Supplement, the Allowance and the Allowance for the Survivor and to allow individuals to voluntarily defer their Old Age Security Pension up to five years past the age of eligibility, in exchange for a higher, actuarially adjusted, pension.
Division 25 of Part 4 dissolves the Public Appointments Commission and its secretariat.
Division 26 of Part 4 amends the Seeds Act to give the President of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency the power to issue licences to persons authorizing them to perform activities related to controlling or assuring the quality of seeds or seed crops.
Division 27 of Part 4 amends the Statutory Instruments Act to remove the distribution requirements for the Canada Gazette.
Division 28 of Part 4 amends the Investment Canada Act in order to authorize the Minister of Industry to communicate or disclose certain information relating to investments and to accept security in order to promote compliance with undertakings.
Division 29 of Part 4 amends the Customs Act to allow the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to designate a portion of a roadway or other access way that leads to a customs office and that is used by persons arriving in Canada and by persons travelling within Canada as a mixed-traffic corridor. All persons who are travelling in a mixed-traffic corridor must present themselves to a border services officer and state whether they are arriving from a location outside or within Canada.
Division 30 of Part 4 gives retroactive effect to subsections 39(2) and (3) of the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985.
Division 31 of Part 4 amends the Railway Safety Act to limit the apportionment of costs to a road authority when a grant has been made under section 12 of that Act.
Division 32 of Part 4 amends the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act to replace the two Vice-chairperson positions with two permanent member positions.
Division 33 of Part 4 repeals the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development Act and authorizes the closing out of the affairs of the Centre established by that Act.
Division 34 of Part 4 amends the Health of Animals Act to allow the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to declare certain areas to be control zones in respect of a disease or toxic substance. The enactment also grants the Minister certain powers, including the power to make regulations prohibiting the movement of persons, animals or things in the control zones for the purpose of eliminating a disease or toxic substance or controlling its spread and the power to impose conditions on the movement of animals or things in those zones.
Division 35 of Part 4 amends the Canada School of Public Service Act to abolish the Board of Governors of the Canada School of Public Service and to place certain responsibilities on the Minister designated for the purposes of the Act and on the President of the School.
Division 36 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act by adding a preamble to it.
Division 37 of Part 4 amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to eliminate the requirement of a hearing for certain reviews.
Division 38 of Part 4 amends the Coasting Trade Act to add seismic activities to the list of exceptions to the prohibition against foreign ships and non-duty paid ships engaging in the coasting trade.
Division 39 of Part 4 amends the Status of the Artist Act to dissolve the Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal and transfer its powers and duties to the Canada Industrial Relations Board.
Division 40 of Part 4 amends the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy Act to give the Round Table the power to sell or otherwise dispose of its assets and satisfy its debts and liabilities and to give the Minister of the Environment the power to direct the Round Table in respect of the exercise of some of its powers. The Division provides for the repeal of the Act and makes consequential amendments to other acts.
Division 41 of Part 4 amends the Telecommunications Act to change the rules relating to foreign ownership of Canadian carriers eligible to operate as telecommunications common carriers and to permit the recovery of costs associated with the administration and enforcement of the national do not call list.
Division 42 of Part 4 amends the Employment Equity Act to remove the requirements that are specific to the Federal Contractors Program for Employment Equity.
Division 43 of Part 4 amends the Employment Insurance Act to permit a person’s benefits to be determined by reference to their highest earnings in a given number of weeks, to permit regulations to be made respecting what constitutes suitable employment, to remove the requirement that a consent to deduction be in writing, to provide a limitation period within which certain repayments of overpayments need to be deducted and paid and to clarify the provisions respecting the refund of premiums to self-employed persons. It also amends that Act to modify the Employment Insurance premium rate-setting mechanism, including requiring that the rate be set on a seven-year break-even basis once the Employment Insurance Operating Account returns to balance. The Division makes consequential amendments to the Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board Act.
Division 44 of Part 4 amends the Customs Tariff to make certain imported fuels duty-free and to increase the travellers’ exemption thresholds.
Division 45 of Part 4 amends the Canada Marine Act to require provisions of a port authority’s letters patent relating to limits on the authority’s power to borrow money to be recommended by the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Finance before they are approved by the Governor in Council.
Division 46 of Part 4 amends the First Nations Land Management Act to implement changes made to the Framework Agreement on First Nation Land Management, including changes relating to the description of land that is to be subject to a land code, and to provide for the coming into force of land codes and the development by First Nations of environmental protection regimes.
Division 47 of Part 4 amends the Canada Travelling Exhibitions Indemnification Act to increase the maximum indemnity in respect of individual travelling exhibitions, as well as the maximum indemnity in respect of all travelling exhibitions.
Division 48 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority Act to provide that the chief executive officer of the Authority is appointed by the Governor in Council and that an employee may not replace the chief executive officer for more than 90 days without the Governor in Council’s approval.
Division 49 of Part 4 amends the First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act to repeal provisions related to the First Nations Statistical Institute and amends that Act and other Acts to remove any reference to that Institute. It authorizes the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to close out the Institute’s affairs.
Division 50 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act to provide for the payment or reimbursement of fees for career transition services for veterans or their survivors.
Division 51 of Part 4 amends the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act to add powers, duties and functions that are substantially the same as those conferred by the Department of Social Development Act. It repeals the Department of Social Development Act and, in doing so, eliminates the National Council of Welfare.
Division 52 of Part 4 amends the Wage Earner Protection Program Act in order to correct the English version of the definition “eligible wages”.
Division 53 of Part 4 repeals the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act.
Division 54 of Part 4 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 2008 to provide for the termination of certain applications for permanent residence that were made before February 27, 2008. This Division also amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things, authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to give instructions establishing and governing classes of permanent residents as part of the economic class and to provide that the User Fees Act does not apply in respect of fees set by those instructions. Furthermore, this Division amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to allow for the retrospective application of certain regulations and certain instructions given by the Minister, if those regulations and instructions so provide, and to authorize regulations to be made respecting requirements imposed on employers in relation to authorizations to work in Canada.
Division 55 of Part 4 enacts the Shared Services Canada Act to establish Shared Services Canada to provide certain administrative services specified by the Governor in Council. The Act provides for the Governor in Council to designate a minister to preside over Shared Services Canada.
Division 56 of Part 4 amends the Assisted Human Reproduction Act to respond to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Reference re Assisted Human Reproduction Act that was rendered in 2010, including by repealing the provisions that were found to be unconstitutional and abolishing the Assisted Human Reproduction Agency of Canada.

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.

Votes

June 18, 2012 Passed That the Bill be now read a third time and do pass.
June 18, 2012 Failed That the motion be amended by deleting all of the words after the word "That" and substituting the following: “this House decline to give third reading to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, because this House: a) does not know the full implications of the budget cuts given that the government has kept the details of the $5.2 billion in spending cuts from the Parliamentary Budget Officer whose lawyer, Joseph Magnet, says the government is violating the Federal Accountability Act and should turn the information over to the Parliamentary Budget Officer; b) is concerned with the impact of the changes in the Bill on Canadian society, such as: i) making it more difficult for Canadians to access Employment Insurance (EI) when they need it and forcing them to accept jobs at 70% of what they previously earned or lose their EI; ii) raising the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement from 65 to 67 years and thus driving thousands of Canadians into poverty while downloading spending to the provinces; iii) cutting back the federal health transfers to the provinces from 2017 on, which will result in a loss of $31 billion to the health care system; and iv) gutting the federal environmental assessment regime and weakening fish habitat protection which will adversely affect Canada's environmental sustainability for generations to come; and c) is opposed to the removal of critical oversight powers of the Auditor General over a dozen agencies and the systematic concentration of powers in the hands of government ministers over agencies such as the National Energy Board, which weakens Canadians' confidence in the work of Parliament, decreases transparency and erodes fundamental democratic institutions by systematically eroding institutional checks and balances to the government's ideologically driven agenda”.
June 13, 2012 Passed That Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, be concurred in at report stage.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting the Schedule.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 753, be amended by replacing lines 8 and 9 on page 424 with the following: “force on September 1, 2012.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 711.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 706.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 700.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 699, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 401 with the following: “2007, is repealed as of April 30, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 699.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 696, be amended by replacing lines 2 and 3 on page 401 with the following: “on September 15, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 685.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 684, be amended by replacing lines 6 to 8 on page 396 with the following: “684. This Division comes into force on September 1, 2012.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 661.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 681, be amended by replacing lines 32 to 34 on page 394 with the following: “681. This Division comes into force on January 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 656.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 654.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 620.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 619, be amended by replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 378 with the following: “608(2) and (3) come into force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 606.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 603.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 602.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 595.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 594, be amended by replacing lines 6 and 7 on page 365 with the following: “on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 578.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 577, be amended by replacing lines 18 to 20 on page 361 with the following: “577. This Division comes into force on June 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 532.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 531.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 530, be amended by replacing lines 24 and 25 on page 342 with the following: “on January 15, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 526.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 525, be amended by deleting lines 6 to 10 on page 341.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 525, be amended by replacing lines 6 to 10 on page 341 with the following: “And whereas respect for provincial laws of general application is necessary to ensure the quality of the banking services offered;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 525, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 340 with the following: “Whereas a strong, efficient and publicly accountable banking sector”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 525.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 522, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 340 with the following: “possible after the end of each fiscal year but”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 516.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 515, be amended by replacing line 28 on page 338 with the following: “September 1, 2013 or, if it is later, on the day on”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 508, be amended (a) by replacing line 1 on page 336 with the following: “( b) humanely dispose of that animal or thing or require” (b) by replacing line 3 on page 336 with the following: “care or control of it to humanely dispose of it if, according to expert opinion, treatment under paragraph ( a) is not feasible or is not able to be carried out quickly enough to be effective in eliminating the disease or toxic substance or preventing its spread.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 506.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 505, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 333 with the following: “on January 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 490.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 489, be amended by replacing line 20 on page 329 with the following: “February 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 487.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 486, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 328 with the following: “January 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 484.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 481.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 480, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 326 with the following: “subsection 23(1) and all criteria and factors considered in reaching a decision or sending notice under that subsection, with the exception of all commercially sensitive information;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 479.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 478, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 27 on page 325 with the following: “478. This Division comes into force on September 15, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 476.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 475, be amended by replacing lines 18 and 19 on page 324 with the following: “tion 4.1, including their issuance and their”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 474, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 324 with the following: “that he or she considers appropriate for assuring the quality of seeds and seed crops, subject to the conditions set out in subsection (5).”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 473, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 323 with the following: “tion 4.2, including their issuance and their”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 473.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 468.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 467, be amended by replacing lines 3 to 5 on page 322 with the following: “464 and 465, come into force on June 15, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 446.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 445.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 444, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 306 with the following: “444. This Division comes into force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 441.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 440, be amended by replacing lines 21 and 22 on page 305 with the following: “force on January 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 427.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 426, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 299 with the following: “426. This Division comes into force on May 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 420.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 419, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 295 with the following: “force on January 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 416, be amended by replacing line 40 on page 292 with the following: “considers appropriate and must be subject to regulatory approval.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 413, be amended by deleting lines 25 and 26 on page 291.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 412.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 411.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 391.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 378.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 377.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 374, be amended by replacing lines 31 to 33 on page 280 with the following: “374. This Division comes into force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 368, be amended by adding after line 34 on page 274 the following: “(3) Every officer appointed under this section must conduct every operation, wherever it takes place, in a manner respecting the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 368.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 367, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 272 with the following: “force on January 1, 2014.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 353.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 325, be amended (a) by replacing line 20 on page 244 with the following: “(2) The Minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of the manage-” (b) by replacing line 22 on page 244 with the following: “at least every 10 years, taking into account any feedback received from the public under subsection (2.1), and shall cause any” (c) by adding after line 24 on page 244 the following: “(2.1) In every year, the Minister shall ( a) publish on the departmental website the management plan for each national historic site or other protected heritage area; and ( b) open the plan to public consultation and feedback, to be taken into account by the Agency in future decisions regarding changes to the management plan.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 324, be amended (a) by replacing lines 13 and 14 on page 244 with the following: “(2) The Minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of the management plan for each park at least every 10 years, taking into account any feedback received from the public under subsection (2.1),” (b) by adding after line 16 on page 244 the following: “(2.1) In every year, the Minister shall ( a) publish on the departmental website the management plan for each national historic site or other protected heritage area; and ( b) open the plan to public consultation and feedback, to be taken into account by the Agency in future decisions regarding changes to the management plan.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 319, be amended (a) by replacing line 39 on page 243 with the following: “(2) The Minister shall conduct a comprehensive review of the manage-” (b) by replacing line 41 on page 243 with the following: “protected heritage area at least every 10 years, taking into account any feedback received from the public under subsection (2.1),” (c) by adding after line 43 on page 243 the following: “(2.1) In every year, the Minister shall ( a) publish on the departmental website the management plan for each national historic site or other protected heritage area; and ( b) open the plan to public consultation and feedback, to be taken into account by the Agency in future decisions regarding changes to the management plan.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 318, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 243 the following: “(2) The report referred to in subsection (1) shall include, for the previous calendar year, all information related to any action or enforcement measure taken in accordance with subsection 6(1) under any Act or regulation set out in Part 3 or Part 4 of the Schedule.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 317.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 315.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 314, be amended by replacing lines 8 and 9 on page 242 with the following: “on May 1, 2013.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 304.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 303, be amended by replacing lines 2 and 3 on page 235 with the following: “on September 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 283.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 281, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 226 with the following: “April 1, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 223.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 219.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 218.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 217, be amended by replacing lines 21 to 23 on page 194 with the following: “217. This Division comes into force on April 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 217.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 214.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 209.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 175, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 185 with the following: “financial statements of the Council, and the Council shall make the report available for public scrutiny at the offices of the Council.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 170.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 163, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 181 with the following: “(6.1) Subject to subsection 73(9), the agreement or permit must set out”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 163.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 161, be amended by deleting lines 32 to 39 on page 180.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 160, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 180 with the following: “published in the Environmental Registry and in the Canada Gazette; or”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 159, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 179 with the following: “mental Registry as well as in the Canada Gazette.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 157, be amended by replacing lines 37 and 38 on page 178 with the following: “and, subject to the regulations, after consulting relevant peer-reviewed science, considering public concerns and taking all appropriate measures to ensure that no ecosystem will be significantly adversely affected, renew it no more than once. (1.1) Before issuing a permit referred to under subsection (1), the Minister shall ensure that the issuance of the permit will not have any adverse effects on critical habitat as it is defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act. ”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 157.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 156, be amended by replacing lines 29 and 30 on page 178 with the following: “and 153 come into force on July 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 154, be amended by replacing line 18 on page 177 with the following: “Act may not be commenced later than twenty-five years”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 150, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 29 on page 176 with the following: “recommendation of the Minister following consultation with the public and experts or, if they are made for the purposes of and in relation to the subject matters set out in an order made under section 43.2, on the recommendation of the minister designated under that section following consultation with the public and experts.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 149, be amended by replacing line 40 on page 174 with the following: “( i.01) excluding certain fisheries, on the basis of public consultation and expert opinion, from the defini-”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 148, be amended by replacing lines 15 to 21 on page 174 with the following: “42.1 (1) The Minister shall, as soon as possible after the end of each fiscal year, prepare and cause to be laid before each house of Parliament a report on the administration and enforcement of the provisions of this Act relating to fish habitat protection and pollution prevention for that year, including for those fisheries of particular commercial or recreational value and any fisheries of cultural or economic value for Aboriginal communities.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 145, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 164 with the following: “enforcement of this Act, provided that, with regard to the designation of any analyst, the analyst has been independently recognized as qualified to be so designated.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 144, be amended by replacing lines 46 and 47 on page 161 with the following: “results or is likely to result in alteration, disruption or serious harm to any fish or fish habitat, including those that are part of a commercial, recreational”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 143, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 159 with the following: “made by the Governor in Council under subsection (5) applicable to that”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 142, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 158 with the following: “(2) If conducted in accordance with expert advice that is based on an independent analysis so as to ensure the absolute minimum of destruction or disruption of fish populations and fish habitat, a person may carry on a work, under-”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by adding after line 32 on page 157 the following new clause: “139.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 32: 32.1 Every owner or occupier of a water intake, ditch, channel or canal referred to in subsection 30(1) who refuses or neglects to provide and maintain a fish guard, screen, covering or netting in accordance with subsections 30(1) to (3), permits the removal of a fish guard, screen, covering or netting in contravention of subsection 30(3) or refuses or neglects to close a sluice or gate in accordance with subsection 30(4) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable, for a first offence, to a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars and, for any subsequent offence, to a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 139, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 157 with the following: “32. (1) No person shall kill or harm fish by any”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 136, be amended by replacing line 39 on page 154 to line 1 on page 155 with the following: “(2) If, on the basis of expert opinion, the Minister considers it necessary to ensure the free passage of fish or to prevent harm to fish, the owner or person who has the charge, management or control of any water intake, ditch, channel or canal in Canada constructed or adapted for conducting water from any Canadian fisheries waters for irrigating, manufacturing, power generation, domestic or other purposes shall, on the Minister’s request, within the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 135, be amended by replacing line 9 on page 154 with the following: “commercial, recrea-”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 134, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 151 with the following: “programs and, if the Minister has determined, on the basis of the features and scope of the programs, that the programs are equivalent in their capabilities to meet and ensure compliance with the provisions of this Act, otherwise harmonizing those”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 133, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 150 with the following: “thing impeding the free”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 132.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 131, be amended by replacing lines 35 and 36 on page 149 with the following: “force on August 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 124, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 141 with the following: “replace a licence after consulting the public, expert opinion and peer-reviewed scientific evidence, or decide whether it is in the public interest to authorize its transfer, on”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 123, be amended by replacing line 18 on page 141 with the following: “seven months.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 122.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 121, be amended by replacing lines 7 and 8 on page 141 with the following: “June 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 116.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 115, be amended by replacing lines 33 and 34 on page 138 with the following: “and 99 to 114 come into force on September 1, 2015.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 97, be amended by replacing lines 40 and 41 on page 125 with the following: “120.5 The Board may issue a ”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 94, be amended by replacing line 36 on page 124 with the following: “recommendation, the Board shall, after all required consultation with members of the public and with First Nations, seek to avoid”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 93, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 124 with the following: “oil or gas, the Board shall, after all required consultation with members of the public and with First Nations and taking into account all considerations that appear to it to be relevant, satisfy itself that the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 90, be amended by replacing line 12 on page 118 with the following: “was constructed in accordance with the Navigable Waters Protection Act and that passes in, on, over, under, through or”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 89, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 117 with the following: “certificate under section 52 or 53 authorizing the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 88, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 117 with the following: “under which section 58.29 does not apply or leave from the Board under”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 87, be amended by replacing line 44 on page 114 with the following: “a work to which that Act applies, unless it passes in, on, over, under, through or across a navigable water.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing line 32 on page 112 with the following: “V, except sections 74, 76 to 78, 108, 110 to 111.3,”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 85, be amended by replacing lines 2 to 4 on page 111 with the following: “the Board shall have regard to all representations referred to in section 55.2.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 84, be amended by replacing line 36 on page 109 with the following: “the time limit specified by the Chairperson pursuant to a motion and vote among Board members,”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 83, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 27 on page 105 with the following: “shall consider the objections of any interested person or group that, in their opinion, appear to be directly or indirectly related to the pipeline, and may have regard to the”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 82, be amended by replacing lines 39 and 40 on page 104 with the following: “(4) Subsections 121(3) to(5) apply to”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 81, be amended by replacing line 14 on page 104 with the following: “(2) A public hearing may be held in respect of any other matter that the Board considers advisable, however a public hearing need not be held where”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 79, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 103 with the following: “(2) Except in any instances where, based on what the Board considers necessary or desirable in the public interest, the Board considers it is advisable to do so, subsection (1) does not apply in respect”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 78, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 103 with the following: “(1.1) Except in any instances where, based on what the Board considers necessary or desirable in the public interest, the Board considers it is advisable to do so, subsection (1) does not apply in respect”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 76, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 101 with the following: “15. (1) The Chairperson or the Board may authorize one”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 75, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 101 with the following: “14. (1) The Chairperson may propose a motion to authorize one”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 72, be amended by replacing lines 34 to 40 on page 100 with the following: “(2.1) For greater certainty, if the number of members authorized to deal with an application as a result of any measure taken by the Chairperson under subsection 6(2.2) is less than three, the Board shall elect a third member to satisfy the quorum requirements established under subsection (2).”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 71, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 99 with the following: “an application, the Chairperson may propose a motion to put in place a”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 68.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 67, be amended by replacing lines 20 and 21 on page 98 with the following: “force on April 30, 2016.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 52, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 29 on page 35 with the following: “with respect to a project, that a group or individual is an interested party if, in its opinion, the group or individual, including those who use adjacent land for recreational, cultural or hunting purposes, is directly — or could potentially be indirectly — affected by the carrying out of the project, or if, in its opinion, the group or individual has relevant information or expertise:”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 52, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 31 the following: “Whereas the Government of Canada seeks to achieve sustainable development by conserving and enhancing environmental quality and by encouraging and promoting economic development that conserves and enhances environmental quality; Whereas environmental assessment provides an effective means of integrating environmental factors into planning and decision-making processes in a manner that promotes sustainable development; Whereas the Government of Canada is committed to exercising leadership, within Canada and internationally, in anticipating and preventing the degradation of environmental quality and, at the same time, in ensuring that economic development is compatible with the high value Canadians place on environmental quality; Whereas the Government of Canada seeks to avoid duplication or unnecessary delays; And whereas the Government of Canada is committed to facilitating public participation in the environmental assessment of projects to be carried out by or with the approval or assistance of the Government of Canada and to providing access to the information on which those environmental assessments are based;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 52.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 19.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 16, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 14 with the following: “on January 1, 2013 a salary of $137,000.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 16.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 4.
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 8 with the following: “interest, being any activity that contributes to the social or cultural lives of Canadians or that contributes to Canada's economic or ecological well-being.”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 5 on page 7 with the following: ““political activity” means the making of a gift by a donor to a qualified donee for the purpose of allowing the donor to maintain a level of funding of political activities that is less than 10% of its income for a taxation year by delegating the carrying out of political activities to the qualified donee;”
June 13, 2012 Failed That Bill C-38 be amended by deleting Clause 1.
June 12, 2012 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, not more than 10 further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the Bill and 8 hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill; and That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the 10 hours for the consideration at report stage and at the expiry of the 8 hours for the consideration at the third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.
May 14, 2012 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.
May 14, 2012 Failed That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “this House decline to give second reading to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, because it: ( a) weakens Canadians’ confidence in the work of Parliament, decreases transparency and erodes fundamental democratic institutions by systematically over-concentrating power in the hands of government ministers; ( b) shields the government from criticism on extremely controversial non-budgetary issues by bundling them into one enormous piece of legislation masquerading as a budgetary bill; ( c) undermines the critical role played by such trusted oversight bodies as the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, the CSIS Inspector General and the National Energy Board, amongst many others, thereby silencing institutional checks and balances to the government’s ideological agenda; ( d) raises the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement from 65 to 67 years in a reckless effort to balance the government’s misguided spending on prisons, incompetent military procurement and inappropriate Ministerial expenses; ( e) includes provisions to gut the federal environmental assessment regime and to overhaul fish habitat protection that will adversely affect fragile ecosystems and Canada’s environmental sustainability for generations to come; ( f) calls into question Canada’s food inspection and public health regime by removing critical oversight powers of the Auditor General in relation to the Canada Food Inspection Agency all while providing an avenue and paving the way for opportunities to privatize a number of essential inspection functions; and ( g) does nothing to provide a solution for the growing number of Canadians looking for employment in Canada’s challenging job market and instead fuels further job loss, which according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer will amount to a total loss of 43,000 jobs in 2014.”.
May 3, 2012 Passed That, in relation to Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, not more than six further sitting days shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the sixth day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC

That is fine, thank you.

I also wanted to come back to what Mr. Prystay was saying concerning the assessment procedures.

You were happy that the wait periods for the assessments were shortened, as you found them long. However, the environment and sustainable development commissioner was very clear on this. Why were the wait periods for the environmental assessments long? Because there were some communication gaps between the various departments and the federal agencies.

Do you think that Bill C-38 sets out any solutions to this lack of communication between the departments, which would explain why the timeframes have been shortened?

Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Gratton, as part of the statutory review of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the environment committee heard examples, such as the park bench that needed an environmental assessment under the old process.

Do you think the new approach in Bill C-38 is more balanced? If so, what effect do you think it will have on the environmental assessment process?

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for coming out tonight, particularly at such a late hour.

You know we're studying a very controversial bill. I've participated, and many of my colleagues have, in standing-room-only public meetings across the country on this. You've all seen the poll that came out this morning that showed that in part due to the reaction to Bill C-38, the Conservatives would lose 50 seats and would be returned to opposition if an election were held today. A Conservative member of Parliament, David Wilks from Kootenay—Columbia, said he'd be voting against the bill because of everything being thrown together and exactly because of that lack of clarity and that lack of predictability.

Ray Orb Vice-President, Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities

Thank you, and good evening.

My name is Ray Orb, and I am the vice-president of the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities. I am also the reeve of the Rural Municipality of Cupar, in Saskatchewan.

I would like to begin by thanking the subcommittee on Bill C-38 of the Standing Committee on Finance for inviting me here to present our views tonight.

SARM represents all 296 rural municipalities in Saskatchewan and acts as the common voice of rural Saskatchewan.

SARM serves as the principal advocate in representing the municipal governments of the province on priority issues, including the changes to the Fisheries Act being proposed through this bill.

Distinction of waterways. SARM applauded the federal government for the changes to the Fisheries Act that were announced in April by federal fisheries minister Keith Ashfield. The changes to the act provide the long-awaited distinction between vital Canadian waterways that support fish populations and smaller bodies of water that do not house fish. It is our understanding that the amendments to the Fisheries Act will focus protection rules on significant threats to fish and will set clear standards for routine projects concerning smaller fish-free water bodies.

Currently the Fisheries Act applies the same protection to rivers and streams as municipal drains and farmers' irrigation canals. This adds unnecessary costs and extended timelines to routine municipal road construction projects. For example, in 2011, in my municipality, we were involved with a culvert replacement project in a non-fish-bearing area. DFO required us to attain a permit, which caused a time delay, and the overall cost was increased significantly. The culvert accommodated drainage for farmland. There were no fish in the area, but the project was treated as if there were.

If DFO clearly defined waterways to allow an RM to determine whether or not they needed to consult with the department, it would expedite projects where DFO approvals aren't required. This will save RMs time, which is a priority in Saskatchewan, with its short five-month construction season.

In many cases, municipalities have been required to install larger culverts to accommodate the passage of fish when constructing roads around all bodies of water, regardless of whether fish were present or not. The rules need to be clarified to support municipal governments while continuing to protect fish habitat where fish are present.

The changes to the act are welcome news if they translate into allowing routine municipal road construction projects to proceed without unnecessary costs and delays in the future.

Avoiding duplication. SARM is also encouraged by the proposed changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act of 2012, which will establish a new federal environmental assessment regime. We understand that for larger-scale resource projects this will mean that firm timelines will be placed on reviews, requiring that they be completed within two years. We hope these changes will foster increased cooperation between the federal and provincial governments when it comes to the environmental assessment process.

The province of Saskatchewan is experiencing rapid growth with our natural resource sector; therefore, allowing for a more streamlined approval process could mean increased economic activity to our province, which will benefit our members, the province, and the country as a whole.

SARM would hope that in the future a similar approval process could be implemented for municipal infrastructure projects as well. This will reduce the regulatory burden, which will help all levels of government.

Public cost share. SARM would also like to take this opportunity to express our concerns regarding the costs associated with implementing fish-accommodating structures that are required by the Fisheries Act when fish are present. The need for protection of fish and fish habitat is widely supported and is viewed by SARM as necessary to prevent the loss of this valuable natural resource. That said, we are concerned that the Fisheries Act continues to place the onus on the individual or municipality to bear the cost of compliance with the act. This includes the requirement to install larger culverts, and burying them underground in many cases, to accommodate fish movement. These requirements are above and beyond those that would normally be utilized in a typical road construction project, thus adding additional costs.

A good example of these costs comes from the RM of White Valley in the fall of 2011. The RM was replacing a culvert in one of their existing municipal roads that intersected a seasonal running stream. They consulted with DFO. DFO assessed the stream and determined that fish were present. DFO then required the RM to accommodate fish by installing a larger culvert, which in turn added $28,000 to the overall road project costs. The taxpayers of the rural municipality are left to pay the additional costs of the culvert required to accommodate the fish. SARM does recognize the importance and value of protecting fish but believes it is a benefit that is realized by all of Canadian society. SARM would like to ask that the federal government share in these costs that are currently fully absorbed at the municipal or individual level.

In contrast, under the Species at Risk legislation, a landowner discovers that there is an endangered plant or animal living on his or her property. Compensation is paid to the landowner for the loss of the use of the property, thereby recognizing the public benefit. SARM would encourage the federal government to consider providing funding to municipalities and individual land owners for the costs they accumulate while taking measures to maintain fish and fish habitat.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear today. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

Pierre Gratton President and Chief Executive Officer, Mining Association of Canada

Thank you, distinguished members of the committee, clerk, staff, and observers, for the opportunity to appear before you today in the examination of this important piece of legislation.

My name is Pierre Gratton. I'm president and CEO of the Mining Association of Canada.

MAC represents the national voice of the mining industry. We have members active in every jurisdiction in Canada, except for Prince Edward Island and the Yukon. We've been actively supporting the mining sector since 1935. We have members that produce a whole range of products, from base metals to gold and precious metals, iron ore, steel-making coal, diamonds, uranium, and oil from the oil sands. The industry in 2011 contributed some $36 billion to the gross domestic product and employed over 300,000 workers.

For the record—this was not put in my remarks for the purposes of today, as we always include it—the industry accounts for more than 50% of freight revenues on Canada's rail system. Obviously we need a rail system that functions.

We represent over 21% of Canada's goods exported and about 3% of gross domestic product.

Our industry is also enjoying a period of some growth and prosperity. Notwithstanding the troubles in Europe and the slight slowing of the economy in China, we continue to enjoy commodity prices that we have not seen in many years, leading to new investments in every region of the country. We've estimated that some $140 billion in new investments have either already been commissioned or could be commissioned within the next decade. For example, in Newfoundland alone we've seen mining production quadruple in the past decade. Quebec is poised to have the largest investment, at over $4.6 billion this year, leading Canada in new mining investment in 2012.

So it is a pan-Canadian industry supporting communities across the country. That is why having an efficient and effective regulatory system that enables this industry to continue to grow and invest is important to us.

We also place a high degree of importance on responsible development. Through our Towards Sustainable Mining initiative, which is an award-winning program, we commit to public reporting on performance and third-party assurance. It's guided by a national advisory panel made up of representatives from many different walks of life across Canada.

Turning to our views on Bill C-38, note that our comments are based on preliminary analysis of the legislation. Certain questions remain regarding the bill's overarching impact, and we're still seeking clarity on them. With that caveat, I'll reflect our members' reaction to the bill.

As an industry that operates outside of urban Canada, we are pleased that Bill C-38 recognizes the importance of aboriginal consultation. A tremendous opportunity for mutual benefit and success exists and is being realized through the partnerships the Canadian mining industry has formulated and continues to develop with our aboriginal partners. Open and honest consultation is a cornerstone of developing those partnerships.

On the new CEAA, we do not expect it to have a dramatic substantive effect on mining projects. As we told the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment last fall, great improvements in the process for mining projects came from the 2010 amendments. They cut out delays in starting federal assessments and allowed the federal process to start at the same time as provincial assessments.

These amendments, you may recall, addressed comprehensive studies—that level of review within the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act that represents the lion's share of mining assessments in Canada. Nevertheless, CEAA 2012 does promise additional significant improvements in clarity and predictability, as well as a reduction in duplication of process. As an association serving a diverse group of members, an important feature for us is that we will have an act that we will be able to explain for the first time since CEAA was created.

CEAA 2012 can be summarized on a simple flowchart. The current Canadian Environmental Assessment Act cannot be explained simply; the complex interplay of definitions and triggers and exclusion list and inclusion list left most people confused.

CEAA 2012 includes the features that we have been calling for, including one clear responsible authority; a clear and predictable process with defined timelines; sufficient flexibility to make common sense decisions; the screening process and the safety net process should ensure that unforeseen situations can be resolved; authority to initiate and to engage in regional studies, which was one of our recommendations last fall; substitution and equivalency where warranted; and an obligation on federal authorities to provide timely information.

There are, of course, some features of CEAA 2012 that will require careful implementation, such as enforceable decision statements. It will be important that the agency ensure that these are clear and feasible. None of these changes will affect the substance and quality of the assessment process. In fact, in our view, they will enhance it.

I would, however, flag one disappointment. Given that the projects where the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, CNSC, will be the responsible authority includes uranium mines and mills, the benefits of the positive regulatory reforms should be available to uranium operations to the extent possible, in our view. A uranium mining or milling operation has more in common with a gold mine, yet this industry continues to be treated as more akin to a nuclear reactor. As a result, the uranium mining and milling sector has been exempted from some of the most beneficial measures announced in the new CEAA, including equivalency, substitution, and screening out.

Furthermore, the timelines specified in the transitional provisions do not impact the current comprehensive studies where the CNSC is the responsible authority, when the same is not the case for those led by the National Energy Board. We have difficulty reconciling the different treatment in this regard.

We are less advanced in our understanding of the changes to the Fisheries Act. The incorporation of means for better federal-provincial cooperation is valuable, as is the incorporation of a larger tool box for dealing with the act's absolute prohibitions, such as the possibility of regulations for section 35.

However, at this time, we are not clear about how the fisheries and pollution prevention provisions, sections 35 and 36 of the act, will work together in practice. Section 35 has been significantly amended; section 36 has not. As some members may recall from our visits in November of last year during our mining day on the Hill, we expressed concerns about the lack of clarity and consistency in how sections 35 and 36 worked together. For the mining industry this issue appears to be made murkier by the amendments. We are working with officials in both Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans to develop, we hope, greater clarity through regulations and guidance.

Thank you very much, and I look forward to your questions.

Ward Prystay Principal, Environmental Services, Stantec Consulting Ltd., Canadian Construction Association

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good evening. My name is Ward Prystay. This evening I am here to provide testimony on behalf of Canadian Construction Association, or CCA, on part 3 of Bill C-38 regarding responsible resource development. I am a principal with Stantec Consulting, which is a member of CCA. I have 20 years of experience as an environmental professional, with the past 18 years as a fisheries and environmental assessment consultant.

The CCA represents 17,000 members across Canada working primarily in the non-residential construction business. As an industry, construction employs over 1.25 million Canadians and accounts for just under 7% of our overall GDP. CCA members are supportive of strong environmental assessment and permitting processes and believe they are an important contributor to sustainable development in our country.

With regard to the proposed changes of Bill C-38, I would like to comment on the amendments to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Fisheries Act.

During the parliamentary review of CEAA in November last year, CCA presented membership concerns to the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Environment regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of the administration of the act and the lack of certainty and predictability in its implementation. In particular, CCA raised concerns about uncertainty regarding triggering and timeliness of the process, the wasted resources applied to the assessment of projects and activities that have very little environmental risk, and the duplication of effort and process when both federal and provincial environmental assessments are triggered.

The changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act in Bill C-38 address the concerns that CCA raised last November. I would like to touch on these.

With respect to uncertainty regarding triggering and timeliness of the process, the current CEAA framework triggers an environmental assessment by one of four mechanisms: when the Government of Canada is the proponent of a project; when it will transfer lands to facilitate a project; when it will provide funding to enable a project; or when it issues a permit or authorization identified in the law list regulations.

For private sector projects, it is usually a permit or authorization that triggers an environmental assessment. As a result, proponents must invest in a high level of engineering design at the planning stage of their projects to trigger CEAA. For environmental screenings there is no timeline for receiving formal confirmation that the act applies. The 2011 timeline regulations for comprehensive studies have been a distinct improvement, but they still allow three months for a decision on whether the Environmental Assessment Act applies. They also allow the agency to suspend the 365-day review process whenever a question is asked of the proponent.

Under the proposed changes, environmental assessments will be triggered based on project-specific thresholds identified by regulation when there is a direct linkage to federal areas of responsibility. This list-based approach of deciding which projects require an assessment was a recommendation of CCA last November, and it is fully endorsed by the membership. It removes uncertainty about the need for environmental assessment and will improve project planning. It will also free up federal resources from a bureaucratic interdepartmental coordination process that has no value from an environmental protection perspective.

The concern CCA raised regarding timeliness of the process is also addressed by the proposed changes. The key steps to triggering an environmental assessment are clearly defined in the new legislation, as are timelines for each of these steps. This will bring certainty to proponents at the early stage of the process. There are also timelines for reviewing the environmental assessment and for making decisions. This will provide significant certainty in project planning, regardless of the type of environmental assessment.

I have an important comment on the proposed changes to CEAA in regard to the beneficial use of government resources. Today there are 3,040 environmental screenings, 36 comprehensive studies, and 11 review panels active under CEAA. Many of these screenings are mere checklists for legislative compliance—they're not true environmental assessments. The new project-based threshold approach is expected to eliminate the majority of the small screenings that pose little to no environmental risk. In addition, the consolidation of responsibility for conducting environmental assessments—under the authority of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, the National Energy Board, and the Nuclear Safety Commission—will result in the Government of Canada making one common decision for a project. It will no longer make the same decision five or more times for a single project through various departments.

With respect to duplication of effort and process where both federal and provincial environmental assessments are triggered, the proposed amendments will allow the federal assessment requirements to be addressed by provincial processes where they're equivalent. This will bring to life the philosophy of one project, one assessment.

Together, these changes will simplify scoping, improve the timeliness of assessments, and free up government resources to focus on assuring resource projects are constructed, operated, and decommissioned in an environmentally responsible manner.

We would like to raise one minor concern regarding section 67 of the proposed legislation. We are concerned that intervenors may use this clause as a basis for legal challenges against the federal government. In this section, where the federal government carries out a project that is not a designated project under the act, there is a requirement to confirm that the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects before proceeding, or if it would, that the Governor-in-Council would decide if the project is justified.

We believe this determination cannot be made without an environmental assessment that meets the standard of CEAA. We believe this is not the intention of Parliament, and we recommend considering an amendment that clarifies the basis and scope of this determination.

CCA has also reviewed and supports the proposed changes to the Fisheries Act. Specifically, CCA agrees with the addition of a purpose section of the act; revisions to the pollution prevention and fisheries protection provisions; changes that allow a single authorization to be issued addressing both fish and habitat together; and inclusions of a framework for improving the timeline for review of applications.

Together these will provide clarity on interpretation and application of the act across Canada, and will ultimately improve the efficiency of the approval processes for projects.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, CCA views the proposed changes within part 3 of Bill C-38 as a positive step forward. We believe the changes to CEAA will establish a regulatory framework that assures one project, one assessment. This will minimize duplication of process, improve timelines, and free up federal resources to tackle projects with the potential for greater environmental consequences.

In addition, the changes to the Fisheries Act will clarify the intent of the legislation to protect fisheries and ensure greater consistency in application of the act across Canada.

Together, these will provide greater certainty on the regulatory requirements and timelines for projects without lowering environmental standards.

Once again, thank you for inviting CCA to share our membership views on the changes to Bill C-38.

May 28th, 2012 / 9:10 p.m.


See context

Director General, Strategic Policy and Planning, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

Sandra Harder

Well, as you know, because these are provisions in the budget act, they've only been made public since the introduction of Bill C-38. I guess there is an expectation that some people who have been in the federal skilled worker backlog for some time could be disappointed, and we certainly understand that, but by moving in this kind of very direct manner, and being very clear about what the provisions are and what the cut-offs are and allowing people the opportunity to reapply under the current program...I think that's the approach that has been taken.

Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

I'm just asking if you were consulted on the changes in Bill C-38. Yes or no?

Robert Chisholm NDP Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Were any of the other panellists consulted about these changes to any of the legislation that's included in Bill C-38?

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thanks to all the witnesses for coming here this evening.

I'd like to start with Mr. Meisenheimer and Mr. Rees. Mr. Meisenheimer, please thank your wife for your presence here tonight. It's very important.

Mr. Rees, you spoke about an unprecedented omnibus bill, and this is certainly extremely controversial. We've seen public meetings with standing-room-only crowds across the country. We saw just this morning in the National Post that Conservatives would lose 50 seats if there were an election today, in part because of their reaction to Bill C-38. There was even a Conservative MP a few days ago who said he'd be voting against Mr. Wilks from Kootenay–Columbia.

So there is a lot of controversy around how everything has been brought together in this bill.

Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Thank you.

The fact that we have all eight of you here at the same time in a way represents what is wrong with Bill C-38 and the way we are going about it now. We have here three people who specialize in charities, one person from agriculture, one person from mining, one person who promotes the oil sands, someone who has been talking about the tax consequences, and someone who comes from independent business, all in a single group.

I am going to try to focus my questions, but five minutes does go by fairly quickly.

My first question is for Mr. Blumberg, Ms. Krause and Mr. Lauzière, in particular.

With the information you have, do you have enough evidence to show that groups in Canada, charities, have laundered money, as a Conservative minister has said?

I am asking all three of you. Go ahead, Mr. Lauzière.

May 28th, 2012 / 8:30 p.m.


See context

President, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

David Collyer

Bill C-38 will lead to credible environmental assessment more efficiently and more effectively than we do today, and that will assist in increasing our social licence.

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

Will Bill C-38 improve your industry's social licence to operate?

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

When they are properly assessed, that's usually included.

Given the increased scrutiny of the environmental impacts of the oil sands, how do you anticipate these changes to environmental laws in Bill C-38 will improve your industry's social licence to operate?

Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON

The additional environmental impacts, perhaps a tripling under the tripling of production...how will Bill C-38 reduce those impacts?