Environment Committee on May 8th, 2018

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

The drafters initially put it all together, but in fact I wanted to bring them in one by one because there may be agreement on one part and not another. You should have received that, but maybe you don't have the updated files. I appreciate the clarification. It is paragraph (b) in the consolidated version that you have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We've been trying to accommodate as much as we can what people want to try to do as we move forward and make it clear.

(Amendment negatived)

We go now to LIB-1 on indigenous knowledge.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

This is one of a number of motions that we've put forward to change the term used in the bill from “traditional knowledge” to “Indigenous knowledge”. It's in keeping with what we've heard from a number of different witnesses that the act really needs to emphasize indigenous knowledge and not just traditional knowledge. This supports our goal of advancing reconciliation through this legislation. There are a number of different places where this occurs within the bill itself. This Liberal amendment will address that. It's changing the words from “traditional knowledge” to “Indigenous knowledge”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. That's clear.

In in the interests of expediency if I could, LIB-4, LIB-5, LIB-16, LIB-46, LIB-57, LIB-60, and LIB-62 are all amendments that talk to the exact same wording in different places.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

There is a slight difference in 5, 16, 46, 57, and 60, in that it's “Indigenous knowledge” in place of a phrase that refers to “traditional knowledge” of the indigenous peoples of Canada. This is just say that we should just call it “Indigenous knowledge” rather than “traditional knowledge”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. We'll do them separately. Is it exactly the same in LIB-4, which is the definition?

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

No, once again, that's the definition, so it's not just the word “indigenous” itself.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

That's fine. I'm just trying to move it along.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

It would be LIB-1 and LIB-62 that would actually be changing that. Then there are other changes as well, but those are in the other two acts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. I've got it.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Only LIB-1?

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

LIB-1, and you're suggesting LIB-62, but I think it's being suggested that we'll just leave it for now.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

In LIB-62, it is just the word “indigenous”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We will leave it for now. Simplicity is best.

Mr. Sopuck.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

The problem with this amendment is that it completely eliminates other Canadians who have traditional knowledge. I have said over and over in this committee that rural people, farmers, ranchers, loggers, trappers, and so on have a wealth of knowledge about the natural world, but they're always excluded from these kinds of things, especially by the Liberals.

I think what this does is exclude the knowledge that people like my constituents would have—the trappers, farmers, ranchers—from even being considered as part of this particular bill.

I can count as well as the next person, and I know where this is going to go, but I want to get that note on the record.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Mr. Sopuck, I didn't see it, but did you bring forward an amendment to talk to that?

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

No. I'm commenting on this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Fair enough. That's fine.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have a comment on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Go ahead.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That may cause a problem when we get to the part of the bill where traditional knowledge can be deemed confidential. I'm not sure you want to say all indigenous knowledge can be deemed confidential. Unless you talk about traditional knowledge somewhere in the text, that provision won't make sense.

I'm wondering how you're going to resolve that because I know the access to the traditional knowledge is the point of contention by a good number of first nations and other indigenous communities. I haven't heard that they have the same issue with all of the knowledge they may carry.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

There are amendments throughout the bill that I will be making that deal with indigenous knowledge, defining indigenous knowledge. There will be many different parts throughout the bill where I will be making amendments in relation to this.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

But you're not answering my question. If you change it to “Indigenous knowledge” everywhere, how are you resolving that provision that deals with confidentiality of traditional knowledge if we never reference traditional knowledge in the bill?

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I don't know.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I'm going to have to reserve my vote because I need to know what the implications are of that provision.