Evidence of meeting #108 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
A video is available from Parliament.
Professor, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University, As an Individual
My preference overall is to focus on the appeals tribunal. I don't have a magic answer to you on the cabinet issue, but I would focus on the appeals tribunal as a way of ensuring proper application of the guidance that is provided in the legislation.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Thank you very much.
Welcome to all of our guests.
I'm going to direct most of my questions to Mr. Carlton, but before I do, I wanted to ask Ms. Péloffy one question. Did I understand you to say that you want all projects to undergo an assessment review?
Managing Director, Québec Environmental Law Centre
I mean all projects once we have certain criteria to define them, not every single action going on in Canada. That's physically impossible. Yes, I think every single project that has the potential to have an impact on an area of federal jurisdiction should be assessed. I think Stewart Elgie said we shouldn't define federal jurisdiction in this act. I think I would agree. This act will need to be implemented—
Managing Director, Québec Environmental Law Centre
—according to the Constitution, and the jurisdiction arises when you make conditions for approval, not when you assess.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
That is a good preface to my question to Mr. Carlton.
Back in 2012, our previous Conservative government made a number of changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act, and we made a distinction between minor and major projects to make sure that the minor projects weren't caught up in the incredible red tape that a full impact assessment would require.
You've now had a chance to review this Bill C-69. If the amendments that you have suggested here at the table today are not made, do you believe that Bill C-69 will make it more difficult for local projects to be approved?
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
As I said in my comments, the fact that we have this middle ground that captures undefined structure between minor and major works, if the act doesn't change, means there will be more municipal projects under review than if we did not review the definition of the minor works order.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
That means that costs to municipalities will increase because there are additional review and assessment burdens they would have to meet.
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Potentially.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Okay.
I also wanted to check one other statement you made. When you were talking about consultation and that municipalities be singled out in the legislation as being an order of government that needs to be consulted in a very significant way, I believe you also said that applicants who are having projects reviewed should also be compelled to comply with municipal bylaws.
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Within the limits of the Constitution, yes.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
All right, I'm glad you qualified that, because it's very, very important.
What we see playing out in British Columbia today is that a number of municipalities are using their bylaw-making powers to thwart the duly approved Kinder Morgan pipeline project. Of course, the courts will determine whether in fact they've exceeded their jurisdiction, and I'm confident that they did.
It would be very hurtful to our ability to develop much-needed infrastructure and also resource projects across Canada if we were caught up in this game of federal approvals being thwarted by municipal governments using their bylaw-making power to do that.
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
I think we're fairly clear that the municipalities have a bylaw-making capacity and that that bylaw capacity needs to be respected within the constraints of the Constitution as it exists.
To your first point, we believe that municipalities need to be identified separate from a public consultation process generally, so that municipalities are considered orders of government that are involved in a unique way in the consultation mechanisms.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Let me ask you a more direct question on that then.
Is Bill C-69 going to speed up the review process, or is it going to slow it down?
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
We're recommending some changes so that the timeliness of the review process is appropriate. As we say, in some instances we think the timelines need to be defined and adhered to so that we don't end up with endless delays.
When we look at the National Energy Board work and the pipelines, we think there's a project-by-project need for review of timelines, because of the complexity and the size of these projects.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
You've had a chance to review the discretionary powers given to the minister and cabinet to extend and suspend timelines within the impact assessment act.
Are you concerned about the uncertainty that will create?
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
We don't really have a position on that.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
You don't have a position. Okay.
Perhaps I could ask a question to Mr. Freberg or Ms. Risbud.
Thank you for your testimony.
You've generally been supportive of the legislation. You've suggested some amendments that would be required. You've had a chance to review the discretionary powers given to the minister and cabinet.
Are you satisfied that they are circumscribed enough to provide the kind of predictability that will continue to attract investment to Canada?
Mark Freberg Director, Permitting and Closure, Teck Resources Limited
Yes, we support the idea that final decision-making should occur at the political level. There needs to be some criteria to set that out. I think we're generally supportive of the approach that's been taken in the act.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Okay, that's it. Thank you very much. That was good timing.
Mr. Fisher.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much for being here, folks.
Brock, it's great to see you again. As you know, I was on the municipal council in Halifax for seven years, so I dealt with you quite a bit at FCM. Welcome. I look forward to seeing 2,000 of your closest friends in Halifax in just five weeks.
Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Three thousand of my closest friends.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
It's 3,000. Well, that's because we have a new convention centre now.
Brock, because we have multiple levels of government, that poses unique challenges for impact assessment. Every order of government is only able to regulate the matters within its own jurisdiction. We know that co-operation is imperative. We have to have co-operation.
Notwithstanding your comments and the recommendations in your testimony about explicitly listing municipalities—and I do think there are changes to this legislation from 2012 that take municipalities and some of your recommendations into play—maybe you can expand a bit on what you notice in Bill C-69 that ensures co-operation and input from all levels of government, especially from the early planning phase.