Environment Committee on May 5th, 2009

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

The government has opened the door, in proposed paragraph 21(1)(g.1), to the whole notion of trying to correct and get better the discretion amongst these nine statutes being amended. Am I correct? That's what we're talking about here?

As Mr. Woodworth indicated, we're trying to not perfect but to improve, to bring uniformity across these statutes. Now that we've opened the door and we're examining this, then this is an interesting opportunity for this committee to examine other forms of discretion that might be indicated to the judiciary through these amendments. Correct?

We can get this much better, can't we?

[Renée Caron]

It certainly is in the hands of this committee to determine what the content would be, as to the motions it decides to pass.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you, madame.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We barely have a minute left.

Ms. Duncan, please.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

We're talking apples and oranges here. First of all, I note that there is a very minor change, from “environmental studies” to “studies on the environment”. The bill was put forward to make them uniform, and it is troubling that the government didn't take the time to do what Mr. McGuinty is alluding to, which is.... Why were not all of these innovations and sentencing applied to all the statutes across the board?

Frankly, what troubles me most is that consideration is not being given to the Fisheries Act, the dilatory substance of which provisions are enforced by Environment Canada and are also very broad. One of the points I wanted to make, in the vein that Mr. McGuinty is raising, is civil proceedings. You don't intervene in a criminal prosecution. In some cases, there are private prosecutors. Indeed, that is exactly the amendment that I have put forward and to which I will be speaking shortly, and that is making all of Environment Canada's statutes—the statutes that they enforce—uniform, and uniform to what is provided for in the federal Fisheries Act. That deals with giving the courts the opportunity to apportion a portion of the penalty to the private prosecutor.

I think that's probably what you're trying to delve into. The enforcement statute is not where you deal with intervenor costs. That would be dealt with in another...or even intervening in a civil action or judicial review. It would not occur in a criminal court. But if I'm correct, I think you're alluding to the fact that in some cases there are private investigators who file the charges and then the government takes over the prosecutions. In some cases, private prosecutors actually prosecute. Under the Fisheries Act, there has been a very laudable provision where, if they conduct that prosecution, they have the potential to get half the fine. I will be speaking to that, because that is precisely my provision.

The one thing I do object to is that I do not want the scope narrowed to colleges and universities. In my province, we have technical institutes that do a lot of the training in the area of environmental reclamation, spill response, and so forth. I am quite content with keeping it broad, on the basis that the department will continue its process and embellish its process of having the investigators make recommendations to the crown, in turn making recommendations to the judge.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I have Mr. Bigras, Mr. Trudeau, and Mr. Warawa.

Can we do this quickly, because it's already 11 o'clock.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

It's 11 o'clock and I believe we are coming to the end. However, at the outset, Ms. Duncan was in favour of the amendment. From what I understand, she would like it to be expanded.

Going back to the question Ms. Duncan asked about 15 minutes ago, has the department produced a list of institutions considered as educational institutions? If the judge's decision concerns an educational institution, there should be a list of such institutions. That was Ms. Duncan's question at the outset.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Please be brief, Ms. Caron.

[Renée Caron]

Mr. Chairman, we don't have a list in hand corresponding to the definition of the term educational institution. However, we can provide examples from a case study or existing precedents. However, even though there is no definition, the term is open enough for a judge to be able to determine whether one institution fits the concept.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Bigras.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

An example can be provided; that's always highly relevant. However, if we agree to this amendment, the judge will nevertheless have to be guided. That's what's important. We want to do some research to determine what is considered to be an educational institution, particularly in Quebec. You're no doubt able to do that kind of research as well.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That's a good point.

Mr. Trudeau.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

I'll speak next time.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I have only a closing comment, Mr. Chair.

I'm okay with the amendment that's being proposed. It broadens it. I think we're at the point now where we either vote on this or, if there are still concerns that need to be dealt with, I think we need to defer it to the end, so we can move on.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Let's defer it.

Yes, Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I think we'd probably agree that it would be.... We've agreed to defer this.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I do want to make the point that we cannot rush through this bill. We're going to have to take the time we need to go through this bill clause-by-clause. It's our job.

As Mr. Woodworth knows, we can't necessarily rush through this. If we're going to come across some of these, we may have to punt these to the back end and come back to them in due course.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, Mr. Bigras.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I want to assure the government that these are not dilatory manoeuvres on our part. We are engaged in conducting this consideration as quickly as possible, but when we need explanations, it's essential that we get them. It should not be forgotten that we have carried 11 clauses thus far. Things are going relatively quickly.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

There is an adjournment motion. So, if you agree, we will see each other on Thursday at 9:00 a.m.

The meeting is adjourned.