Evidence of meeting #31 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was right.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Merci beaucoup for a very thoughtful presentation, Monsieur Simard.
I offer my apologies: my questions will be in English, because both you and the interpreter would struggle with trying to translate my French.
I have a very practical question to ask you first. It relates to the experience in Ontario, which has had an environmental bill of rights for some time and has put mechanisms in place to actualize that bill so that it's useful to citizens.
One of the implementation measures used in Ontario—it may be in Quebec as well, and you can inform us—is that they have established a registry whereby the Government of Ontario has to post all proposed laws, policies, and regulations. So the citizens have the right to know what is coming forward and what is being proposed, and then they can contact the government and say that they would like to participate in the decisions on that law or policy going forward.
I'm wondering if any kind of mechanism like that has been implemented in Quebec under their bill, and secondly, whether you think it would be useful in helping deliver on the right to be engaged and then on the duty of the government under this bill to engage citizens in the development of any environmental decision-making or any new law or policy.
5:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Nature Québec
I didn't understand clearly. Can you repeat your question, please?
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
It's my understanding that under Ontario law they have exactly the same rights to participate in the development of new environmental law and policy—similar to the provisions that I set forth in this bill. But the Ontario government has taken it one step further. They actually have a registry posted online so that the residents of Ontario can know when new law and policy are about to be proposed.
I'm wondering whether measures like that have been exercised in Quebec and whether you think it would be useful to implement the rights under this bill.
5:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Nature Québec
I think the bill contains that provision, which is very similar to the brief. That's what we call it. I think you can, in practice, file a complaint with the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development.
The opportunity to exert influence and participate doesn't exist in the Quebec legislation, but we think this is worthwhile and desirable. Environmental problems are extremely complex. We are dealing with problems associated with climate change that will be increasingly extreme. So we are absolutely going to need the wisdom of the public and the ability to discuss environmental protection policy with the public.
I think that governments are going to come out looking better as a result of this. These problems are very complex and environmental policy should have the support of as many people as possible. We hope that people will be consulted on broad policy, something that is not provided in the Quebec statute.
For example, there could be an Internet registry. I very much like the sound of what you're saying. It is very interesting. I think that Bill C-469 will open the door to measures, while not specifying whether it's on the Internet or not. It opens the door to suggestions from the public about policy and allows for public openness about these things. I welcome that aspect. That's in Bill C-469.
I would sometimes even like it to be taken further. When the provincial governments and the Government of Canada have to decide about doing oil or gas exploration, or are considering legislation about mines, for example, or how to exploit our natural resources, it would be a good thing if they could hold public consultations when policy is to be made. There could be public hearings bureaus on the environment or commissions that would allow for calm debate about the future of oil and gas resource exploitation development, and even for windmill and alternative energy development. If broad public policy is being made, it is important to seek out public wisdom.
In Quebec, there have been a few exercises relating to forestry, through the Coulombe Commission. It has been done for water and hazardous waste, and I think that improved environmental legislation enormously. That kind of commission can do an in-depth study of the issues and propose new policies to our politicians and officials, who often need those ideas themselves. Managing environmental problems is a culture of complexity. It is not easy.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Simard. I am Steven Blaney, member of Parliament for Lévis—Bellechasse.
I have been listening to you carefully, particularly since you are talking about the methane terminal project and windmill projects. In fact we have met on this subject.
I am going to let my colleague ask you a few questions, Mr. Simard. But first I would like to share three concerns with you. The first is that certainly, when we talk about substantive rights, every Canadian resident has the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. I think everyone agrees on that. Even the Supreme Court has recognized it, implicitly.
For the other rights, I'm concerned about how this bill might judicialize the environmental process. Just now, one of the witnesses told us this was virtually a form of disguised taxation, a carbon tax, by legislative means.
You also addressed the principle of interference in the division of powers. I thought about the concrete example of shale gas. I will leave that aside. I yield the floor to Mr. Woodworth, because we don't have a lot of time. I am eager to hear you.
Thank you, Mr. Simard.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Simard.
I'm going to speak in English because I don't speak French very well.
I assume that you have read this bill. You've said you're not a lawyer, but have you read this bill?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Am I correct to understand that Nature Canada would be interested in the broader issue of greenhouse gases?
5:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Nature Québec
Nature Québec is a member of Nature Canada, but it is still an independent organization. Certainly we are also interested in greenhouse gases, of course.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Merci.
Would Nature Québec favour, for example, a carbon tax?
5:10 p.m.
Executive Director, Nature Québec
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
If I may, I need to stop you there, because I'm afraid I have limited time with which to ask my questions and I did have a reason for asking you about a carbon tax. But you haven't answered my question. Does that mean that Nature Québec--
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Point of order, Mr. Chair. I think it's important that questions asked by members be directly related to the subject on the agenda. It seems to me that the subject of a carbon tax goes well beyond the subject under consideration today.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Speaking to that point of order, Mr. Chair, we've heard from testimony today that what's being proposed through Bill C-469 is a price on carbon. How do you achieve a price on carbon? It's through a carbon tax and we know what the Liberals' position is on a carbon tax. I think it's a very relevant question and it came from testimony that we heard.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Just one minute, Mr. Simard. We're dealing with a point of order first.
Mr. Woodworth.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
In fact, if I thought that the witness was in favour of a carbon tax, I would then like to ask him about certain provisions of this bill which may relate to achieving his goal. I wished to simply lay the foundation first by asking him if he was in favour of it.
If I may add on another comment...? There seems to be a delay in the translation. I hope that my time will be extended accordingly with this witness.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
I'll extend it somewhat to deal with this point of order, but we do have a problem with time to deal with the motion at the end of the meeting, which we're getting very tight on now.
I would suggest, as always, that we treat our witnesses with all due respect.
I know, Mr. Woodworth, that you're always very effective at getting answers to your questions, but we also ask that you give them some latitude to answer the questions you put before them.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
I do object, Mr. Chair, if you're suggesting that by interrupting the witness when he wanted to go back and respond to Mr. Blaney I did anything inappropriate, because I didn't think so--