Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on March 28th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

You had asked to be--

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Oh, I apologize. I was turning over my time to Monsieur Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have to tell you I am concerned about the proposed amendment, especially subsection 3(1) which seems to be extremely rigid from the perspective of the regulator, since it purports to impose a standard “that meets or exceeds international best practices for any prescribed class of motor vehicle for any year“. Restricting the latitude of the regulator so much could create a very difficult situation. There could be negative impacts on the Canadian automotive industry and we would not necessarily reach greenhouse gas reduction targets because low-emissions vehicles could be imported.

I find this rigidity very worrisome. It seems to me the section that was proposed earlier had measures that were both ambitious and realistic. It was much more flexible and left the regulator with some latitude.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Thank you for that. I will point out that this is similar to what was passed in the previous amendment. I understand your position on that.

Any further debate on L-31?

Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

We could support NDP-33, but the motion as it stands right now--

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

We're on L-31, clause 47.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I know.

Sorry, I'm looking at the wrong clause.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

I'll just clarify what we're voting on. It's L-31, as amended twice in friendly fashion. The first one, being proposed subsection 3(3), changes “within six months”, on line three, to “within one year”, and the second adds a new subsection 3(4) that says:

Starting in 2011 the fuel consumption standards prescribed under this section shall be benchmarked against leading standards in other jurisdictions, considering technical feasibility.

All those in favour of L-31 as amended, please so indicate.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Now, Mr. Cullen, do you wish to proceed with NDP-32?

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

No, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Okay. NDP-32 is withdrawn.

(Clause 47 as amended agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Moving on to a new clause 47.1, which has been proposed pursuant to two amendments by the NDP, we have NDP-33, first of all.

Mr. Cullen, over to you.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

We won't be moving either one, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Okay. NDP-33 is not moved and NDP-34 is not moved, so clause 47.1 does not exist.

(On clause 48)

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

We are moving on to clause 48, which is addressed by NDP-35, on page 60.

Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

This is one that I referred to earlier in our debate. When seeking to have our auto sector produce the best vehicles in terms of efficiency, the construction of a design body needs to be broad and focused.

NDP-35 alters this section. It allows the government to have seats at the table, as well as, of course, the automakers themselves, labour organizations.... We think it's quite progressive to put labour, environmental organizations, the manufacturers, and government together in the designing of these criteria.

The ability to start to include...as we've seen all the way through with the amendments the NDP has put through this bill, it is to try to find ways to not allow the externality of pollution and the cause and effect of what we do to go on. There must be a way for business to incorporate the objectives they bring forward in terms of profitability, employment, and others, as well as the objectives that Canadians hold valuable. The externality of climate change, the externality of air pollution, and the health effects on Canadians must be caught somewhere. As it is right now, it's caught in a plight of the commons, if you will. That can't be acceptable if we're looking to make the changes. I know government has made similar suggestions, to capture those pieces in the bill.

I so move this. I think it brings us further ahead and actually creates less argument and confrontation in the design phase in the future, rather than always trying to catch up once the pollution is done.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Thank you.

Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I have a quick comment. We support the amendment.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

That's good.

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

I have a very brief comment, Mr. Chair. I, too, will be supporting the inclusion of labour organizations at the table.

Further to that, I think our amendment, G-2, showed that this Conservative government is listening, not only to industry but to labour in the auto sector.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a couple of friendly amendments I'd like to put to my colleague, Mr. Cullen, if I could. I hope they add something constructive to his good suggestion.

On the parties that might be involved in this regulations design and development exercise, I was hoping we would consider including provinces. I'm thinking particularly of the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec, which are intricately attached in terms of the overall auto sector. That is the first consideration put to Mr. Cullen.

Second, with respect to the ministers who would be involved, I take the first minister in this amendment to be the Minister of Transport, given that this act is under the ambit of the Minister of Transport and the Department of Transport. We have the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of the Environment, but given the important role the Minister of Industry plays, I would suggest that the Minister of Industry be engaged in this because it would help align industrial policy with these choices.

Those are the significant ones I wanted to put forward. The inclusion of the Minister of Industry and the inclusion of provinces and territories--those are my friendly amendments, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

You mentioned the Minister of Transport.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Yes, but the Minister of Transport is already here. He's the first minister.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Do we have that written down by any chance?