Bill C-17 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act

This enactment amends the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act, in particular by repealing the provisions
(a) that authorize the federal minister to delegate any of his or her powers, duties and functions under that Act to the territorial minister;
(b) that exempt projects and existing projects from the requirement of a new assessment when an authorization is renewed or amended and there are no significant changes to the original project as previously assessed;
(c) that establish time limits for assessments; and
(d) that authorize the federal minister to issue binding policy directions to the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board.
The enactment also amends the Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act by repealing the transitional provision relating to the application of time limit provisions enacted by that Act to projects in respect of which the evaluation, screening or review had begun before that Act came into force but for which no decision had yet been made.

Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will read something, “Climate change is a fact. It is a threat. It is man-made. We have to do something about it, and that something includes putting a price on carbon.” I agree with this sentiment. We just heard it. I agree with the sentiment, but the quote is not mine. It belongs to the leader of the Ontario PC Party, Patrick Brown.

I wonder if my colleague across the way agrees with his view. Is he peddling a conspiracy theory? Is it junk science? What is Mr. Brown up to? I wonder if she could enlighten the House.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite better check his phone and GPS. This is not the Ontario legislature. This is the federal Parliament of Canada.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege to rise today to speak to Bill C-17, a bill that would change significant amounts of a bill that was passed in the previous parliament, Bill S-6.

It is with some reluctance that I stand up today. I am quite concerned about the direction the current government is going. In particular, I am convinced that the government is certain that it does not want resource development to happen in this country. However, the Liberals are not willing to come out and directly say that. No, they are going to ensure resource development does not happen in this country in much the same way as they did when they said that they approved pipelines to the coast. They said, “We approved pipelines to the coast”, but they have no interest in those pipelines actually getting built.

I am going to be sharing my time with the member for Lakeland.

I sit on the northern and aboriginal affairs committee. I represent 14 first nations or Métis communities in my riding in northern Alberta. The north is where I come from. I always say to the people from Thunder Bay that if it is not still light at 11:30, they are really not in the north yet. They have to go where there is pretty much 24 hours of sunlight to understand what the north is all about.

However, it does give me some perspective for sure. Yukon is within sight, I like to say. I can nearly spit from my riding and hit Yukon, so it is within sight, so to speak, and I have some understanding of how things operate in the north.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Can you see Russia from where you are?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that from the Yukon they can spit, and they see Russia for sure. We are definitely having a good time here tonight, Mr. Speaker.

I meet often with first nations people in my riding, and one of the things they say is that they always look at everything for seven generations. They often talk about their seven generations. They look down the road seven generations. They know whatever they are doing today will have an impact and they want to make sure that what they do today has beneficial impacts seven generations from now.

I would argue that the current government is definitely not taking that approach. Particularly when it comes to their deficit spending and the massive debt that they are taking on, the Liberals are not looking at how the seven generations that follow us in this place are going to have to deal with bringing the debt and the deficit under control. I would say that we need to look to our first nations communities for that example of considering the seven generations. That is very important for them, and it is something that we can embrace in this place. In everything we do, we can consider how it is going to affect the next seven generations. I very much reprimand the current government for its use of taxpayer dollars, its use of deficit spending, and the ballooning of our debt from that particular perspective.

I also would like to comment a bit about the resource development that happens in the north. In the party that I come from, we often talk about resource development. It is something we say all the time, but we do not necessarily put how it affects everyday life into more concrete terms. Resource development in my riding is heavily based in the primary industry sectors, such as agriculture, mining, forestry, the oil fields, and those kinds of things. We talk about it, but then we still do not necessarily know what it means or how it impacts our individual lives.

I would ask members to take a look around them. They are going to see wood. That comes from the logging industry in this country. I imagine that the pads in front of us are made from some sort of plastic material. That comes from the oil patch. If we look around us, we are going to see some metal that came from mining. The copper wiring that we see all around us comes from a copper mine. I know that in northern B.C. there is a large copper mine that I have driven by before. All of these kinds of things make our lives better. That is the real point.

I come from an automotive background. I worked as an automotive mechanic. I definitely think that automobiles have made our lives better. The fact that we can get from point A to point B in a relatively short time is something that even my grandparents, when they were my age, would never have considered, or that we would be able to drive 100 kilometres an hour for 12 hours at a time without any major breakdowns.

That we can get across this country in less than a day is still mind-boggling to my grandparents. All of the resource development, all of those things that start out in rural Canada, have an impact on our everyday lives. All of those things say nothing to the person who has that job at that mine, that sawmill, that oil installation, or that refinery. I know several people who are gold miners in Yukon. It is an adventure and a great thing for the people who gold-mine in the Yukon. I think there is even a TV show about it. However, it also puts food on the table for their family.

I have a quote from Chief Joachim Bonnetrouge, who is not from Yukon but the Northwest Territories. He testified at the committee with respect to our suicide study. I think this quote is fitting for this discussion as well. He said:

I was told a couple of weeks ago that the unemployment rate in our community is 54%. And you mentioned self-esteem. Boy, if the band or a band company could create some jobs.... If you have a family and a father, and they could give him a job, holy man...that would make a big difference in anybody's life.

That is what we are talking about today: jobs for people in the north of Canada, jobs for people to provide their family with an income, food, clothing, and shelter. That is what the economy is all about, providing people with the ability to provide their family with food, clothing, and shelter.

The other thing that comes with the economy is wealth creation. We hear more and more all the time at the northern and aboriginal affairs committee how we are not managing wealth, we are managing poverty. The first nations communities across this country are saying that they are living in third world conditions, and I agree with that to some degree. However, the trouble is we are not allowing wealth creation to happen in those places. We have to unshackle these communities and allow them to pursue wealth creation. To do that we need to get investment to come in. That goes to the very heart of this bill. With this bill, and the time frames being extended, or with no end dates being put on them, we are not bringing it in. People who have a billion dollars to invest anywhere in the world will look around the world and say that Yukon is unstable, and that they are not quite sure how long they will have to work there before the project that they think will make them money will actually get going, so they would rather go to a jurisdiction where they know and understand the timelines.

What we really need to do is allow the investments to come in to the north to provide the people who live there the jobs they need to provide for their family. In the process, they will produce a product out there that the rest of the world can use to make their lives better. The stuff that we develop in Canada we export around the world. That makes the lives of people all around the world better. Therefore, we need to ensure that the investments come to northern Canada, and that development happens in northern Canada so that the people who live in those communities can make the quality of their life better, and that with those products that are produced in those communities and shipped around the world, Canadians will make every person's life in the entire world better.

With that, I will wrap it up. This bill is wrong-headed because it takes out a number of things that had brought stability to Yukon. We will see a withdrawal of investment in that area, and it says nothing to what will happen to the current projects that will be sitting in limbo after this bill is passed.

I look forward to the questions.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, for the record I want to clarify the member's very last comment. There will not be any projects left in limbo.

On the day Bill C-17 receives Royal Assent, section 49.1, of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act is repealed. Projects that have been submitted to a decision body, prior to that day, for an exemption from assessment and have received, before that day, a positive decision (or as the quote above states “were greenlit without additional review”) continue to enjoy the benefits of that decision and do not have to be reassessed.

Therefore, the certainty this bill will put in place and that it has brought about the court case, and the uncertainty related to a potential abrogation of the treaty, and the letter of the law, if not the spirit of the law, I think will allay the member's fears in his last comment.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for allying my fears on that.

The member said there are groups that have had a decision made, and those decisions will not be overturned. As far as I understand, there is a number of groups that are either in the process of having it reviewed or have submitted but are not in the process yet. There is some confusion as to what is going to happen with those particular groups.

That said, the underlying premise of my entire speech is that we need the development of the north to ensure that the people who live in the north have their lives made better. In that process, they can make the lives of all Canadians, and people around the world, better through the products that are produced right here in Canada.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comment from my colleague on the Standing Committee for Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

I listened carefully to his speech. Some parts are good; some parts are troubling. As members know, I come from a region where the rules are pretty tight and pretty severe in terms of environmental assessment and review of projects, whether they be mining projects or forestry projects or hydro development projects.

Where there are rules that are strict, I believe there is certainty, because every player will know by which rules they need to play in any given territory. This is what this bill is all about. This is why indigenous people in particular who hold constitutional rights in the region need this as well. They have agreed to this bill for that.

I want to ask the same question I asked the member's colleague previously. There is talk about imposing a time limit on environment assessments, something which I wholeheartedly disagree with because constitutional rights of indigenous peoples do not have time limits. They exist now; they existed yesterday; they will continue to exist tomorrow.

Time limits cannot be imposed on constitutional rights. Whatever time it will take to consult with indigenous peoples is a constitutional duty that we need to undertake every time.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, he talks about how the rules are tight in the James Bay agreement. There comes a significant level of certainty with the tight rules. I think we both agree on the fact that the certainty is what allows groups to move in and understand what the process is, that they have to go through the process, and at the end of they will have a yes or no. They will get to proceed, or the project does not proceed.

One of the defences of the bill that was tabled by the government is that the current projects are doing their assessments in less than a third of the time that is allocated by the certainty of the long date, the 18-month period. What that has allowed is that at 18 months, there is going to be a yes or a no. That provides certainty.

The member said that in the James Bay agreement there is certainty. This, as well, is certainty. I think we are undermining that certainty by just leaving it open-ended on the extended date.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am speaking against the proposed amendments for Bill C-17, an act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act.

The bill seeks to reverse progress in Yukon's economic and natural resources development. For years, northerners have built and relied on their increasingly thriving economy, unlocking the opportunity and prosperity of their natural resources. From mining, to hunting, to tourism, Canada's northern territories are an important and strategic asset to Canada's future.

The YESAA became law in 2003. The goal of that original bill was to develop a single development assessment process for projects on all federal, territorial, and first nations land in Yukon. Part of the legislation included a mandatory review after five years of becoming law. The review was a joint initiative of the Council of Yukon First Nations and the Governments of Canada and Yukon, and was completed successfully in March 2012. These changes were formally introduced in Bill S-6 in 2014, which intended to make northern regulatory regimes more consistent with those in the south in order to attract investment and expand economic opportunities now and for future generations.

The bill, which was called the Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act, amended both YESAA and the Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act, and was part of a broader suite of reforms intended to give northerners greater control over their resources and to help promote resource development and economic growth.

The changes to Nunavut's regulatory regime have not been controversial. Bill S-6 reflected many of the jointly agreed upon findings for the five-year review of YESAA, but also reflected changes to regulatory regimes in the rest of Canada, as well as input from Yukon's government.

Bill C-17 proposes to repeal many of the changes enabled by Bill S-6. These include removing time limits on the steps in the review process, removing an exemption for projects that have already been approved through the assessment process, removing the ability for the federal minister to provide binding policy direction to the board, and removing the ability to delegate the federal minister's powers, duties, or functions under the act to the territorial government.

At its core, the bill would make natural resources development much more difficult in Yukon for project proponents and investors. It would slow down the review process by increasing the number of projects that need to be reviewed and by removing timelines for approval. It would also damage industry and investment confidence in the regulatory regime. It is a step backward for the self-determination of Yukoners, because it takes away northern control over northern resources and puts it in the hands of federal ministers and of MPs from large, southern urban centres. Northerners know their needs and capabilities best and they should be equipped and empowered to make decisions for themselves.

However, Canadians should not be surprised. The Liberals have shown their cards, sometimes on purpose, sometimes accidentally, that prove they are fundamentally anti-Canadian energy and anti-Canadian resource development. The bill is another part of their plan to dismantle Canada's successful natural resources development.

Bill C-17 brings more uncertainty to the resource development review process that will undermine economic opportunities for all Yukoners. It also introduces new uncertainty for the rest of Canada about whether it is a template for the basis of Liberal policy going forward.

I had the amazing opportunity to visit Yukon last summer. Of course, the landscapes are breathtaking, the resources vast, and the people are friendly. However, what stood out to me was an almost universal and distinct, independent, pioneering, adventurous spirit, and a deep appreciation and abiding love for their land. It is the same can-do streak of Canadian miners.

The most important sector of Yukon's economy is mining. The territory is extremely rich in mineral potential. The main resources mined are gold, which in 2011 accounted for 70% of metal mining, copper, zinc, lead, tungsten, silver, and coal.

Yukon has some of the largest iron ore and zinc deposits in the world. There are over 80 mineral resource deposits there with enormous economic potential. Last year, more than $300 million was spent on exploration and mineral production soared above $400 million, from just $46 million in 2006, according to the Yukon Chamber of Mines.

The mining sector in Yukon is very successful, but it has challenges. Difficult access and rugged terrain of the territory make it difficult to access many of these deposits. That is where the federal government can assist, by investing in infrastructure and making it easier for developers to access resources across the territory, given all of the challenges.

Bill C-17 would not make any of this easier. In fact, it would make mining more difficult for many families who have been in the industry for generations.

Last fall, the Standing Committee on Natural Resources heard from several witnesses during a study on the future of the mining sector in Canada. Mike McDougall is the president of the Klondike Placer Miners' Association. He came to Ottawa representing the 160 family-owned and operated placer mines in Yukon. I would like to share his thoughts on Bill C-17. He said:

YESAA defines much of how the placer industry's operations are assessed for impacts and how these impacts are mitigated. Placer mining is the single-largest client of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board...

Issues such as costly and time-consuming reassessments for unchanged projects, inconsistency and lack of accountability between designated offices, and a lack of clear timelines all leave our industry with uncertainty. The amendments were meant to bring YESAA into line with the other Canadian jurisdictions, provide certainty for investment, and allow the Yukon to be competitive. As the government is now prepared to amend this legislation once again, we would like to see these issues addressed in the amended bill.

The federal government has heard the concerns of the first nations. As the number one client and end-user of the YESAA process, the KPMA expects that government will engage with us prior to finalizing any amendments.

Mr. McDougall's testimony highlights how uncertainty and ongoing regulatory changes and challenges will hinder their ability to fully engage in northern development, which should be a serious concern to the Liberals, since mining is the most important part of Yukon's economy. Putting up more roadblocks and adding more red tape is not the answer. Bill C-17 adds a barrier for investment as companies would be uncertain as to when a decision will be made.

Furthermore, the bill would immediately increase the regulatory burden and major costs for proponents, which would impact many working Yukoners and their families, since mining is a major employer in the territory. The bill would worsen the economic situation in the north by putting thousands out of work.

The Liberals claim consultation as a cornerstone of their platform, and they consistently refer to it as an important part of their legislative process, but in this case stakeholders such as the KPMA, which would be impacted significantly, were not consulted before the changes presented in Bill C-17 were hastily introduced last spring.

The Liberals' Ottawa-centric agenda is not working, and worse yet, they are not listening to those who are and will be worse off because of it. Their promise to simply repeal the controversial sections of Bill S-6 is yet another example of how they made promises during the election campaign without considering the consequences. Now they put Yukon at a competitive disadvantage with the rest of Canada for attracting private investment.

Their regulatory changes are not the only ways they are harming the north, though. The Liberals' carbon tax burdens northerners, their businesses, and their families more than any other region in the entire country. People in northern territories are already required to pay more in fuel and transportation expenses just to sustain the basic necessities of life and to get essentials to their communities. The carbon tax will victimize people who rely on these services.

The Prime Minister said his plan will be good for the economy, good for innovation, and good for jobs, but it is just not true. His carbon tax will cripple industry, hinder the economy, and drive up the cost of living for northerners. It will also mean northerners will pay more for food that is already more than four times more expensive than the costs elsewhere, along with other essential goods and products. Electricity will become unaffordable to communities that do not have any other source but diesel. In the north, the carbon tax is really a tax on living. In a place where home heating and travelling long distances is part of life, northerners cannot afford it, particularly when legislation like Bill C-17 forces further barriers to their most important economic driver, Canada's world-class mining sector.

Whether it is higher taxes, more red tape, or ongoing uncertainty, the Liberals make it clear that developing Canada's natural resources will be more difficult than ever before, everywhere. At a time when technology, research and development, and innovation are at an all-time high, the Liberals are attacking the very people who are ensuring the long-term and sustainable development of natural resources in Canada.

The bill would not help Yukon, a territory rich in natural beauty, natural resources, and irrepressible human capital. The Liberals are limiting opportunities for future generations and are just adding challenges to the north. The Liberals need to do what they have pledged all along. They need to listen.

That is why I oppose these amendments.

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations and I believe if you seek it you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, the sub-amendment and the amendment to the second reading motion of Bill C-17, An Act to amend the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act, respectively standing in the name of the Member for Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa and the Member for Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, be deemed negatived on division.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

The House has heard the terms of the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

(Amendment agreed to)

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Yukon.