Again, this amendment doesn't change the basic premise of the section. The Federal Court already has the discretion to grant public interest standing to those who meet the test set out in the section. It's appropriate that the Federal Court retain this discretion. It allows the court to discourage frivolous litigation. And that's what we're talking about today: the increase in frivolous litigation caused by this bill. We need it to preserve scarce judicial resources and ensure that the determination of an issue benefits from contending points of view of those most directly affected by the issue.
This allows any entity—it could be a foreign entity that sets up in Canada—to challenge any project in any province, including Quebec, projects in Atlantic Canada, projects in Alberta, B.C., and all across the country. You don't even have to be a Canadian citizen to do it. Nor does this amendment address the concern that is likely, that this provision would increase litigation on environmental matters, which in turn could lead to a situation where government priorities would have to be determined not by the best interests of the citizens of Canada but rather by the success of individual litigants, as opposed to the broader public interest.
Therefore, I'll be voting against this amendment.