Evidence of meeting #83 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was environment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you very much.
To be sure that everybody knows, the fact is that this committee never issued a report on the statutory review of SARA in spite of repeated efforts by the NDP. I simply wanted to address that.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
9:40 a.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Maybe.
My other question has to do with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.
I was often told in the House of Commons that the Navigable Waters Protection Act was no longer necessary to protect lakes and rivers. Ninety-eight per cent of lakes and rivers are no longer protected, but the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act will, we are told, do all the work.
I hear that there will be cuts on the order of 50% related to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Mr. Leboeuf, I am very worried. With all of these cuts, how are you going to ensure that the agency functions well? I am really worried. I don't think that it will work well because of all of these cuts.
I would like to add one thing, Minister, before you answer me. It is something that concerns me a great deal. Why are the programs of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency only aligned with the results of the government's “Strong economic growth” program, but not with the results of “A clean and healthy environment”? It seems to me that this doesn't make sense. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency is only aligned with the economy, but not with having a clean and healthy environment.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Thank you for your question.
Obviously it doesn't. We make the point at every opportunity—and certainly it is a process of environmental assessment to ensure—that when an application is made, for example, for a resource development, consideration of the impact on the environment is paramount. Those proposals are only approved conditional to actions that must be taken to protect the environment or to remediate after the extraction of whatever resources involved is completed.
With regard to your initial question, the Navigable Waters Protection Act dealt with navigation. Over the years, communities across the country had asked the government to amend the act—to contemporize the act, if you will. At the same time, issues regarding water quality, fish habitat—all of these other environmental concerns, issues, and protections—continue to be addressed in other legislation, both under the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and under Environment Canada.
Yves, would you like to add an observation?
9:40 a.m.
Yves Leboeuf Vice-President, Operations, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Yes.
Concerning the 50% reduction you alluded to, I imagine that you were talking about the reduction in the budget of the agency for the period after 2014-2015. As the minister explained a little earlier, these are funds that were allocated to the agency in Budget 2012, i.e. $8 million for large-scale projects and $6.8 million a year for aboriginal consultations. This represents an increase as compared to what we received in the past. These funds were allocated for three years. They will expire at the end of 2014-2015 and their renewal will then be considered.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Excuse me, Mr. Leboeuf, but I only have 15 seconds left.
I would like to ask one last question, Mr. Chair.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
In this committee, we have only examined Bill S-15. All of the other legislative measures which concerned the environment were studied in the context of omnibus bills.
Can you promise us that the next bills on the environment which amend the act will be referred to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, so that we may be able to our work?
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
I can't give a yes or no. As you know, the government House leader determines, in consultation with cabinet, the composition of legislation.
Last year was an exceptional year that included CEAA, 2012. We continue to be open to discuss and to consider improvements. As you know, this year there have not been a great number of.... As a matter of fact, I don't think we have had any Environment Canada legislation. There has been associated legislation, but that's a matter of the whole of government.
Perhaps the committee should consider calling those ministers who are responsible for tangential responsibilities in respect to the environment to discuss things such as navigable waters.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Certainly I look forward, I hope in the very near future—and thank you for your consideration of Bill S-15, as I said at the beginning—to bringing any new proposed legislation before the committee for consideration.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you very much.
I want again to thank Minister Kent and his officials for being with us today.
Thank you, committee, for great questioning.
At this point, we have the honour to adjourn, and then I have the honour of presenting Bill S-15 to the House in a few minutes. So we're going to adjourn at this point.
Thank you very much.