Evidence of meeting #39 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 point.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Wayne Cole  Procedural Clerk

4:55 p.m.

Procedural Clerk

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

So anyway, until we get through the rest of the bill.... That may change the interpretation.

4:55 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Sure. I just wanted an explanation.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

Then we'll move back to it, just like we will with clause 2.

On a point of order, Mr. Armstrong.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Again, for clarification, could the committee decide to consider clause 2 if it so wished?

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

I'm making a recommendation that we don't. I think it would be presumptuous for us to deal with clause 2. Let's move on to clause 3.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

That wasn't my question. My question was, can the committee—

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

You can challenge me at any time.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Okay.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

If you guys want to do that, I'd be more than happy to step out of this chair for a while.

4:55 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

No--

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

If I'm making rules-based decisions, I expect you guys to respect them.

Mr. Warawa, you have the floor.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Thank you.

Would a question to stand clause 3, with conditions, be appropriate? That would trigger a debate....

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

I don't know if we need a motion for that. I just need consensus.

Do you want to speak to why you think you want to stand this clause?

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Well, Chair—

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

We're on clause 3, right?

I'll just read out clause 3. You all have it in front of you. It says:

This Act must be interpreted consistently with existing and emerging principles of environmental law, including but not limited to (a) the precautionary principle; (b) the polluter pays principle; (c) the principle of sustainable development; (d) the principle of intergenerational equity; and (e) the principle of environmental justice.

That's what we have. We have no amendments proposed.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Chair, I'd appreciate the opportunity to speak to clause 3.

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

Okay.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

It says: “including, but not limited to...the principle of sustainable development”. I want to focus on that.

What we heard from the commissioner is that all legislation is looked at through the lens of the Federal Sustainable Development Act. We also learned that if Bill C-469 should become law, it would set aside the principle of sustainable development, which has its four pillars of social, economic, and environmental impacts. It would primarily focus on the environment, setting aside the social and the economic.... This government is committed to protecting the environment, but also protecting jobs in a balanced way. This bill, this clause, does not permit that.

We've also heard from the witnesses, Chair, and we've heard from a number of the witnesses who have suggested that this bill be set aside. Ms. Murray, before she moved her motion to move us away from discussing whether or not this bill should be set aside.... She has moved the dilatory motion to take away that discussion, to take away that opportunity for a decision, and we find ourselves moving to clause-by-clause, against what the witnesses had recommended.

Ms. Murray referred to Mr. Miller, the commissioner for Ontario. When I questioned the commissioners, both Mr. Vaughan and Mr. Miller, I began my comments by reminding the federal commissioner...I confirmed with him that his responsibility as the commissioner of the environment is to provide parliamentarians with objective independent analysis--not critiquing bills and legislation, but to critique existing legislation, existing law in Canada--and to provide an analysis as to whether or not we are living up to the responsibilities and focusing on the environment. So it is to provide parliamentarians with objective independent analysis and recommendations on the federal government's efforts--not recommendations on bills but on the government's efforts to protect the environment and foster sustainable development.

There it is again: sustainable development. This is the lens through which we now look at Canadian law--the lens of sustainable development.

The commissioner did confirm that it would be very inappropriate for the commissioner of the environment to be commenting on a bill, so he did not. He made that very clear.

Now, when that issue came up, it was actually Mr. Scarpaleggia who talked to Mr. Miller, and he said, “Going back, I guess, to Mr. Warawa's point--”. Mr. Miller responded, “You didn't quite put it the way it's done”. Again, I'm again referring to legislation and comments by a commissioner on the legislation. This is my understanding of what he was talking about. This is what he said: For instance, let's say we're talking about a piece of legislation. If there's an issue going on, I may...on my own initiative bring forward an issue on such things. But once it has progressed to the posting of a proposal on the environmental registry, and especially a proposal pursuant to a law, I cease comment until after it has gone through the entire consultation process and the legislature and is passed. It's only afterwards that I review it.

That is consistent with what we have with Mr. Vaughan, Canada's commissioner of the environment: that a commissioner of the environment does not critique legislation. The commissioner assesses whether or not the government is performing its responsibilities.

So what was left is--and hopefully that answers Ms. Murray's comments--

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Chair, on a point of order, the member is speaking to a provision that comes much later in the bill.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

What provision would that be?

5:05 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

He's speaking to clause 26.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Bezan

I'd ask you to make sure that you're considering clause 3 and clause 3 only.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Correct, and I--