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.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Okay. Let me just deal with it. Give me a couple of minutes.
Procedurally, I need to get the motion on the floor. Once the motion is on the floor, I can deal with Mr. Holland's motion to go in camera.
With that, Mr. Armstrong, please finish moving your motion.
Conservative
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to pick up where I left off: The Committee will continue hearing from witnesses on Bill C-469, An Act to establish a Canadian Environmental Bill of Rights, on Wednesdays.
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
As is standard practice for this sort of matter, I move that we go in camera.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Procedurally, I'm going to go with this motion first. We have a motion to go in camera. All in favour? Opposed?
(Motion negatived)
The committee stays in public.
We're in public and, Mr. Armstrong, you have the floor on your motion.
Conservative
Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS
I support the premise of Bill C-469, but I have concerns with Ms. Duncan's fifth point, the judicial remedies. I was particularly concerned with the legal implications and the civil litigation impact contained within the bill.
Therefore, seeing the good progress we've made in working together on the Species at Risk Act over the past couple of meetings, I believe that we should work on SARA on Mondays and continue with Bill C-469 on Wednesdays, seeing as now we're looking at the possibility of opening the door for nuisance lawsuits potentially overriding provincial rights, and now we've brought in the carbon tax implications. So I think it's going to take several meetings to get through Ms. Duncan's bill.
I think all of us have had meetings with NGOs that are encouraging us to continue with SARA and speed it up. I think we're working very well together on pushing SARA through. I think it's a very reasonable request, a very reasonable motion, that we work on SARA on Mondays and work on Bill C-469 on Wednesdays.
October 27th, 2010 / 5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Okay.
I have Mr. Warawa, Mr. Calkins, Mr. Blaney, and then Ms. Duncan.
I also remind you that when the bells start ringing, it is my duty to adjourn the meeting, unless there's consent not to. The bells will start ringing in five minutes.
Mr. Warawa.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To protect the species that are at risk that have been identified through COSEWIC, we need to have an improvement to SARA. We heard from witnesses---and we had witnesses on SARA--and it's been quite a while since we've had a report that we've been able to forward to the government, back to the House. If we're close to doing that, why would we abandon that responsibility? We had a legislative responsibility to review SARA. Legislative responsibilities are our number one priority--as is Bill C-469, a private member's bill.
So when we're close to finishing with SARA, why would we abandon that responsibility? I think the motion is very appropriate. It strikes a balance that we meet that responsibility of finishing SARA and that we do it in a balanced approach--one day SARA and one day Bill C-469.
Now, my question to Mr. Armstrong is on the point that if we were to finish SARA in a couple of meetings, we wouldn't be meeting on Mondays on SARA anymore. My understanding is that we would then go back to both days on Bill C-469. That's my question, through you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate my colleague moving this motion. I do think the committee is now going to be tasked with making a decision on this motion that.... It's a frustrating situation. We have more work to do than we have time.
I think all members respect...and they should pay particular respect to the privilege of private members. We need to make sure we do that. If I had a bill before committee and it was being treated in any way that was deemed less than respectful, I would be very frustrated. There is sometimes little privilege on the Hill when it comes to private members' business, and we must always keep that in mind.
However, for about two years on this committee, I've also been slaving away over the Species at Risk Act, and I see the finish line in sight. I think the intention of this motion is respecting both the right of Ms. Duncan, who has the right to have her bill soundly heard before this committee, and also the right of the rest of parliamentarians at this table to get to that finish line. I think the motion does strike a good balance. I'm hopeful that my colleagues will support it.
I do have one technical question. I asked Ms. Duncan about this. I want to make sure we have adequate time to explore the effect this proposed legislation would have. When is the 60 days up since the referral of this bill to committee? Could we get a date of when the 60 days is up? Also, if we wanted an extension on this bill, and we were, as a committee, going to ask Parliament, when would we need to ask? What would that date be? Is it the same date? If I could have some clarification on that, it might help me decide how I'm going to vote on this motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
We'll get that put together. It's sometime in February. I'll get back to you as soon as we pull up that date.
We'll continue.
Monsieur Blaney.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am a very new member of the committee, but I would simply like to inform you that at the Standing Committee on Official Languages, that's how we work, we often deal with two issues at the same time. It can allow the witnesses a little flexibility. On that point, Mr. Armstrong's proposal is worthwhile and would allow the committee to take on a number of battles at the same time.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Okay. Just so you know, the date is February 3. We'd have to ask for an extension by February 3.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
Is that the day we would have to report the bill back to the House unamended if we hadn't addressed the bill? It's the same date?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Amended or unamended, February 3 is when we would have to be back in the House.
I have Ms. Duncan, Mr. Holland, and Monsieur Bigras.
Ms. Duncan.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Mr. Chair, I find this absolutely disturbing. If there's one thing that we agreed on when we came back after the summer recess, it was that this nonsense would stop.
We had a discussion in this committee on what our agenda would be and what would go in what order. We also agreed that we would give equal respect to private members' bills, respect equal to what we would give to the government bills. I've bent over backwards to let the--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Not on a point of order. A point of order takes precedence.
Mr. Warawa, it had better be a point of order.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Mr. Chair, what Ms. Duncan has just spoken of are things that happened at in camera meetings--
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Our agenda is public. It's posted on the website. I am speaking to the agenda that is posted on the website, okay? We have posted the agenda--