Bill C-69 (Historical)

An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

Part 1 enacts the Impact Assessment Act and repeals the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. Among other things, the Impact Assessment Act
(a) names the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada as the authority responsible for impact assessments;
(b) provides for a process for assessing the environmental, health, social and economic effects of designated projects with a view to preventing certain adverse effects and fostering sustainability;
(c) prohibits proponents, subject to certain conditions, from carrying out a designated project if the designated project is likely to cause certain environmental, health, social or economic effects, unless the Minister of the Environment or Governor in Council determines that those effects are in the public interest, taking into account the impacts on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada, all effects that may be caused by the carrying out of the project, the extent to which the project contributes to sustainability and other factors;
(d) establishes a planning phase for a possible impact assessment of a designated project, which includes requirements to cooperate with and consult certain persons and entities and requirements with respect to public participation;
(e) authorizes the Minister to refer an impact assessment of a designated project to a review panel if he or she considers it in the public interest to do so, and requires that an impact assessment be referred to a review panel if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and the Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act;
(f) establishes time limits with respect to the planning phase, to impact assessments and to certain decisions, in order to ensure that impact assessments are conducted in a timely manner;
(g) provides for public participation and for funding to allow the public to participate in a meaningful manner;
(h) sets out the factors to be taken into account in conducting an impact assessment, including the impacts on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;
(i) provides for cooperation with certain jurisdictions, including Indigenous governing bodies, through the delegation of any part of an impact assessment, the joint establishment of a review panel or the substitution of another process for the impact assessment;
(j) provides for transparency in decision-making by requiring that the scientific and other information taken into account in an impact assessment, as well as the reasons for decisions, be made available to the public through a registry that is accessible via the Internet;
(k) provides that the Minister may set conditions, including with respect to mitigation measures, that must be implemented by the proponent of a designated project;
(l) provides for the assessment of cumulative effects of existing or future activities in a specific region through regional assessments and of federal policies, plans and programs, and of issues, that are relevant to the impact assessment of designated projects through strategic assessments; and
(m) sets out requirements for an assessment of environmental effects of non-designated projects that are on federal lands or that are to be carried out outside Canada.
Part 2 enacts the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, which establishes the Canadian Energy Regulator and sets out its composition, mandate and powers. The role of the Regulator is to regulate the exploitation, development and transportation of energy within Parliament’s jurisdiction.
The Canadian Energy Regulator Act, among other things,
(a) provides for the establishment of a Commission that is responsible for the adjudicative functions of the Regulator;
(b) ensures the safety and security of persons, energy facilities and abandoned facilities and the protection of property and the environment;
(c) provides for the regulation of pipelines, abandoned pipelines, and traffic, tolls and tariffs relating to the transmission of oil or gas through pipelines;
(d) provides for the regulation of international power lines and certain interprovincial power lines;
(e) provides for the regulation of renewable energy projects and power lines in Canada’s offshore;
(f) provides for the regulation of access to lands;
(g) provides for the regulation of the exportation of oil, gas and electricity and the interprovincial oil and gas trade; and
(h) sets out the process the Commission must follow before making, amending or revoking a declaration of a significant discovery or a commercial discovery under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act and the process for appealing a decision made by the Chief Conservation Officer or the Chief Safety Officer under that Act.
Part 2 also repeals the National Energy Board Act.
Part 3 amends the Navigation Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) rename it the Canadian Navigable Waters Act;
(b) provide a comprehensive definition of navigable water;
(c) require that, when making a decision under that Act, the Minister must consider any adverse effects that the decision may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;
(d) require that an owner apply for an approval for a major work in any navigable water if the work may interfere with navigation;
(e)  set out the factors that the Minister must consider when deciding whether to issue an approval;
(f) provide a process for addressing navigation-related concerns when an owner proposes to carry out a work in navigable waters that are not listed in the schedule;
(g) provide the Minister with powers to address obstructions in any navigable water;
(h) amend the criteria and process for adding a reference to a navigable water to the schedule;
(i) require that the Minister establish a registry; and
(j) provide for new measures for the administration and enforcement of the Act.
Part 4 makes consequential amendments to Acts of Parliament and regulations.

Natural Resources

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-69 demonstrates exactly the opposite. It confirms that the government is not listening.

The member spoke of collaboration with provinces. She spoke of competitiveness of our resources. I bring to her attention the catastrophic differential on Canadian crude for the lack of pipeline capacity, and the testimony of Premier Kenney and Minister Savage at the Senate energy committee last week. The member will note from the testimony there that Bill C-69 is the absolute wrong approach and the most disastrous thing that the Liberals could do to rectify the inability under the current government for any of these other pipelines to be built. This is the bill that would ensure that no similar project is ever proposed in Canada.

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge for his question.

Through Bill C-69, we are delivering on a promise to Canadians to review and streamline our environmental review and regulatory processes. We know that this legislation will put in place better rules to protect our environment, fish, and waterways and help rebuild public trust in how decisions about resource development are made, all while strengthening investor confidence and advancing indigenous reconciliation. How? It is by implementing a single, integrated and consistent approach based on the principle of one project, one review, and by ensuring that good projects move forward in a predictable and timely way.

Indeed, Bill C-69 would tighten timelines, eliminate overlap among review panels and make government more accountable. This new approach would also help to diversify Canada's energy markets, expand our energy infrastructure and drive economic growth. That is what Bill C-69 would do. lt is about ensuring that the economy and the environment go hand in hand. That was our vision behind Bill C-69 and the reason for creating a new Canadian energy regulator to replace the National Energy Board.

We want to create a new federal regulator that reflects Canada's changing energy needs, with an expanded mandate, greater diversity and enhanced powers. This is important. and frankly overdue, because the NEB's structure, role and mandate have barely changed since it was created in 1959. We need a modern regulator to integrate Canada's energy, economic, environment and climate goals, and at the same time, renew Canada's relationship with indigenous peoples.

All of these things are clearly illustrated in our government's comprehensive response to the Federal Court of Appeal's decision on the Trans Mountain expansion project. We instructed the National Energy Board to reconsider its recommendations on the project to include the effects of marine shipping related to the pipeline's expansion. We relaunched our government's phase III consultations with indigenous groups affected by the project. These actions are among the things that make Bill C-69 transformational: earlier public consultations and indigenous engagement, greater collaboration with the provinces and territories and decisions based on science.

Through all of these measures, we can create a Canadian energy sector for tomorrow's clean economy, one that is globally competitive, attracts investments and ensures that we are developing and transporting our energy responsibly. These are all things that Canadians have told us were important to them. Bill C-69 shows that we were listening.

[Karen McCrimmon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, of course, we are going to see the issue differently. Our government has said since day one that economic growth and environmental stewardship can and must go hand in hand. They are not competing interests. They are not opposing goals. Canadians have made that clear.

With help from indigenous peoples, representatives from our natural resource sectors, environmental groups and Canadians from coast to coast to coast, Bill C-69 proposes a number of key improvements over the current system.

These changes would ensure that decisions are transparent and guided by robust science and indigenous knowledge. They would ensure that project reviews consider a wider range of impacts, including those on the economy, the environment, our health, indigenous rights and local communities. They would also support more timely and predictable reviews, advance reconciliation and partnership with indigenous peoples, and reduce duplication and red tape through a one project, one review approach.

Canada has a new wave of projects on the way which makes this legislation not only important to address existing concerns, but necessary for us to take full advantage of future potential.

Our latest inventory indicates there are more than 400 resource projects either already started or planned over the next decade worth a combined value approaching $585 billion.

The time is now. If we want to keep seizing all of these opportunities and build a Canada that works for everyone, we must develop our resources the right way. That is the purpose of Bill C-69 and the reason for creating a new Canadian energy regulator to replace the National Energy Board. Canadians deserve a federal regulator that reflects Canada's and the world's changing energy needs. lt does so in five key ways.

First, it proposes a modern governance and management model. Second, it would enhance investor certainty by reducing red tape, duplication and unnecessary delays in the decision-making process. Third, the new Canadian energy regulator would renew public trust in the review process by making it more inclusive, transparent and meaningful. Fourth, the new Canadian energy regulator would support indigenous participation and ensure meaningful engagement throughout the review process. Fifth and finally, the new federal energy regulator would have the tools it needs to safeguard the public and protect the environment.

Through all of these measures we can reap the benefit of the tremendous future in front of us, ensure Canada is competitive and our future is bright for our kids, grandkids and future generations.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Mr. Speaker, this past December, I asked the Liberal government an important and straightforward question: When will the Liberal government finally start standing up for the Canadian energy sector and kill Bill C-69, a bill which absolutely suffocates this critical sector with additional regulation burdens and uncertainty? I received the usual Liberal response of another non-answer.

Tonight, I know the Liberals have no intention of backing away from Bill C-69, even though this bill would have a very severe impact on many of the thousands of Canadians who are employed in the energy sector throughout this country. Instead of working to support Canadians, the Liberal government continues to stubbornly persist in working against Canadians.

We know the policies of the Liberal government when it comes to our energy sector, a sector which represented nearly 11% of our country's normal GDP in 2017. The Liberals, we should be reminded, killed the northern gateway pipeline. They stopped the energy east pipeline by piling on the red tape and additional regulations. They passed Bill C-48 in the House to place a moratorium on the traffic of oil tankers along B.C.'s northern coast. They failed to support the construction of the Trans Mountain pipeline. As a result, they had to spend $4.5 billion of taxpayer money to buy the existing Trans Mountain pipeline just to keep the project from collapsing entirely.

It is clear that the Liberals have never had a plan to support the Canadian energy sector. It is clear, through their insistence on passing Bill C-69, that the Liberals do not intend to support our energy sector any time soon.

The Liberal government has a responsibility to look out for the hundreds of thousands of Canadian workers who are employed in the Canadian energy sector, and it is obvious that it is failing to do so. Through the dangerous and reckless policies of the Liberal government, investment in our resource and energy sectors is collapsing like never before. In 2018, Statistics Canada reported capital spending on oil and gas extraction fell for the fourth straight year, decreasing by 12% from the spending of 2017.

Why is the Liberal government doing nothing to protect the livelihoods of the many thousands of hard-working Canadians who actually work in Canada's energy sector? When will the Liberals finally scrap Bill C-69?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition today on behalf of members of my community who are very frustrated with the government's punitive policies toward the energy sector with Bill C-69, the tanker ban, the carbon tax, the political vetoing of major energy infrastructure projects and the delay on the Trans Mountain pipeline.

The petitioners feel that these policies have changed the social contract for equalization in Canada and are calling on the government to immediately cancel Bill C-69; launch a study into the economic impact of equalization, including an examination of the formula and an examination of how renewable and non-renewable resources, including energy resources, both developed and underdeveloped, are treated in the formula; and issue a report to Canadians on the fairness, effectiveness and outcomes of the equalization program.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that the Liberals will make it so that nothing is ever built again. They are not helping the environment. They are not helping indigenous communities. They are not helping resource development.

Eight provinces and three territories oppose Bill C-69. Hundreds of indigenous businesses and communities are against it. Economists, investors, big companies, family businesses and municipalities oppose it. The hundreds of thousands of Canadians who have lost their jobs because of the Liberals are against it.

Will the Liberals approve TMX on June 18 and kill Bill C-69?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, no, we will not kill Bill C-69. It is in the Senate. I was very pleased to testify today to talk about the importance of Bill C-69. Unfortunately, under the previous environmental assessment regime brought in by the Conservatives in an omnibus budget bill, the Conservatives gutted environmental protections and good projects cannot go ahead in a timely way because they all end up in court.

We know we need a better system and better rules to develop our resources in a way that protects the environment, that has proper consultation and accommodation with indigenous peoples and that ensures good projects go ahead.

We will continue to move forward and work with senators.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, for months, first nations, trade unions and provinces have warned that the Liberals' no more pipelines bill, Bill C-69, will block resource development. Yesterday, it got even worse.

The Liberals will steamroll provinces, giving themselves unprecedented power over highways, passenger trains, recycling plants and of course provincial resources, like wind, hydro and oil.

Not since the eighties have federal Liberals pit Canadians against each other over resource development and put the whole Canadian economy at risk. Will the Liberals kill Bill C-69?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been paying for the broken promises of the Liberal government ever since the 2015 election. That will come to an end in October.

Another area where the Liberal government has completely failed Canadians has been the energy sector. The Conservative record on pipelines has been to see the private sector build four major pipeline projects during our time in office. However, the Liberals have vetoed and killed projects, and now they have purchased a pipeline that they cannot build.

Bill C-69 is the final nail in the coffin. More and more Canadians are speaking out against it. Will they—

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

You'll forgive our skepticism of the comments you made about the future energy projects, given Bill C-69, which is in the Senate right now, but this does open the door for me to ask you about how Bill C-48, the oil tanker moratorium, is viewed by the shipping industry as a whole.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thanks to all the officials for being available for us today.

I have a question about the transition as a result of Bill C-69.

The 2019-20 estimates show an allocation of $3.7 million under vote 5 for the purpose of disbanding Canada's world-leading and historically renowned National Energy Board and replacing it with the new Canadian energy regulator. Since the allotment for that transition is already here even before the bill has become law, I'm hoping that, if possible, you can tell us exactly how long it will take to completely establish the proposed Canadian energy regulator and what year that will be complete, given, of course, the certainty that will be required for investors or proponents of major resource projects. What is the timeline of that transition?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Edmonton Mill Woods, AB]

Through you, Mr. Chair, when the draft discussion paper was launched regarding what goes on the project list, it was mentioned in the draft discussion that in situ projects will be exempt from Bill C-69 federal review as long as there is a cap on emissions in the jurisdiction where they are being proposed. We have been clear, as part of the pan-Canadian framework on climate change and clean growth, we want to ensure that our oil and gas sector continues to grow in a sustainable way and that they're able to continue to innovate. We will continue to support them investing in new clean technologies. The sector can continue to grow, and at the same time we want to make sure that emissions are controlled as well.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Thank you, Minister. You confirm that the cabinet will approve the TMX again. That's fine.

On a different topic, last week you publicly threatened to include in situ oil sands projects under Bill C-69's project lists, in a political response to the election in Alberta. Of course, I'm sure you know and feel just as strongly as I do, as an Albertan, that oil extraction and upstream resource development is provincial jurisdiction, and of course a threat is only a threat if there's a negative consequence.

Now that you've finally admitted what industry, economists, first nations, premiers and other groups have been saying for a year, that Bill C-69 is meant to harm oil and gas development, will you commit to repealing Bill C-69 before it's too late and ensure that in situ oil sands projects will not face federal review?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Look, Mr. Speaker, Canadians want the Liberals to invest their tax dollars in our own country, in Canada, to get Canadian resources to market, not build pipelines in Asia. The Liberals have deliberately killed two export pipelines already, and not a single inch of new pipeline is in service in Canada. Their no more pipelines bill, Bill C-69, will guarantee that none will be proposed in Canada ever again.

My question is very simple, and the minister should answer. When will the Trans Mountain expansion be built?

Intergovernmental Relations

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, across the country, people are speaking out against Bill C-69. This bill is bad for the Canadian economy, bad for natural resource development and bad for federal-provincial relations.

A few days ago, Quebec's environment and climate change minister, Benoit Charette, spoke out against this bill because it gives the federal government more control over provincial jurisdictions and it would duplicate assessment work. He said that it would be an uphill battle for developers.

Why is the government fighting with people who want to help our economy thrive?