Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on March 29th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Mr. Jean.

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

I'd like to first hear first from the department in relation to the reference to the carbon budget, and then I'd like a response from Mr. McGuinty in relation to how it is of any positive benefit.

[John Moffet]

Well, as I heard the amendment it would refer to regulations made under subsection 93(1), which is the authority to regulate toxic substances, including air pollutants and GHGs; 103.05(2), which is the authority to establish a carbon budget; and 103.07(2)(b), which is the requirement to establish air emission standards.

The potential connection between fuel standards and toxic standards is clear, and the connection between fuel standards and air emission standards under 103.07 could be made. I'm not sure about the rationale to link this provision to 103.05(2), which is the authority to establish a carbon budget.

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

That was exactly my worry, Mr. Chair.

I'd like some clarification from the Liberal member as to why that would be necessary, or even relevant.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

On this advice, I think we would withdraw that reference and reconsider it at report stage.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Define the reference to the--

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

We want to make sure we're getting the right one here.

Okay. We just withdraw the reference that is in the original amendment to 103.05(2). We just pull that altogether.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

So that's a friendly amendment.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

So we would remain with referencing the two bits: subsections 93(1) and 140(1).

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

So you're deleting both the “103.05” and “103.07”?

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Yes, that's correct.

[John Moffet]

Subsection103.07(6) was the other addition from Mr. McGuinty, and that refers to air emissions standards. That makes sense to me.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Sorry. So that's okay.

So we have three that remain and one that goes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

You can make another friendly amendment and read what the amended amendment says.

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

I think we've seen the NDP come to the side of the government and put back some good amendments that we had. If there's a little more opportunity for the Liberals, maybe they'll see the light and come across with the original bill.

I mean, with one comment we've already found a couple of errors that make this bill make no sense whatsoever.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I would like to clarify so we can get on with the business we're here to do.

In total, the friendly amendments would read as follows:

subsection 93(1), 103.07(2)(b), or 140(1);

That would be the amendment as moved.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

And finishing with a semicolon.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you. Semicolon.

So we would remove “103.05(2)”, given Mr. Moffet's good advice, and we stand by the changes we made earlier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

So that is the new amendment. Does everybody understand that?

Mr. Jean.

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

Could I have the member read it out one more time with the brackets and semicolons?

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

He just loves hearing you say that.

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

I want to make sure we're on the same page. Because I see that you struck off “103.05(2)”, but you have “103.07”...is it paragraph “(2)(b)”?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Yes. Could you read it again, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Laurie Hawn]

Okay. As copied by the chair, it says: “subsection 93(1), 103.07(2)(b) or 140(1);”.

Do we have it bracketed?

Is there any further discussion or debate on amendment L-22?

(Amendment agreed to)

(Clause 22 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 24)