Environment Committee on May 8th, 2018

[The Chair (Mrs. Deborah Schulte (King—Vaughan, Lib.)), Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Good morning. Thank you very much, everybody. We are starting clause-by-clause of Bill C-69, an act to enact the impact assessment act and the Canadian energy regulator act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act, and to make consequential amendments to other acts.

Welcome to those who have joined us at the table. There are also some people in the back, so there's a lot of support with us today should we need it.

I'll introduce them. We have from the Department of the Environment, Mary Taylor, Executive Director, Environmental Assessment, Environmental Protection Operations. We have from the Department of Natural Resources, Jeff Labonté, Assistant Deputy Minister, Major Projects Management Office; and Terence Hubbard, Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch. We have from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Christine Loth-Bown, Vice-President, Policy development sector; and Brent Parker, Director, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Division. From the Department of Transport, we have Catherine Higgens, Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs; and Nancy Harris, Executive Director, Regulatory Stewardship and Aboriginal Affairs. Welcome back to some of you.

They're here with us today, should we have any questions.

We also have others in the back who may come up should they need to. We have Nicola Contini, Counsel, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Legal Services; Barbara Winters, Counsel, Natural Resources Canada Legal Services; François-René Dussault, Counsel, Transport Canada Legal Services; Martha Green, Senior Counsel, Transport Canada Legal Services; Yves Leboeuf, Senior Counsel, Environment and Climate Change Canada Legal Services; and Jean Sébastien Rochon, Senior Counsel, Department of Justice, Resource Development Coordination Unit.

Thank you.

If we are all ready—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have a question.

I'm noticing that we're still receiving amendments drafted on May 4. The deadline to submit them was April 30, so I wonder why we are still receiving some dated May 4. The members can say them from the floor, but if the cut-off was a cut-off....

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

I think the intention was to give everybody as much notice as possible. There were some drafting errors and some changes. It's your pleasure. They could have been tabled on the floor, but I think people wanted to make sure that everybody had as much advance notice as possible on anything that was going to be discussed. That's why they were distributed.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

My question is simple: was the deadline April 29, or not?

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

It was.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

If any amendments were submitted after that, people are free to place them on the floor. I just don't understand why some were allowed after that date. We did not submit any more because you said that was the firm date. Any that were submitted after that should be submitted from the floor, not as though they were submitted on time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

That's fair enough. Thank you.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It's just in fairness to everyone.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

It's not fair to me.

With all due respect to my colleague, of course, as a non-member of committee, I'm required to be here by the terms of the motion passed by this committee for clause-by-clause consideration, instead of having my rights at report stage. We did our best to get everything in on time. The drafters had a hard time working with this. I did submit one on May 4 and I'm hoping that it will be allowed to be considered, because I'm not allowed to present it at the table today.

I know what Linda is saying. She didn't submit any more. We were up against it. We couldn't get the drafting time, and we submitted one after the deadline. I hope it will be accepted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. We did set a deadline, but we've also had a lot of errors and omissions, and amendments. I felt that it was appropriate to get as much in front of the members as possible, which meant we also had some changes. I understand your point. Let's leave it as—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It's just a question of fairness.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

What's not fair?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

When there's a deadline, there's a deadline, and then there are exceptions for some. I just think we need to stop doing that, because we could have easily submitted more after the date. I don't want to be unfair to Ms. May. There's no reason one of us can't bring it forward on the floor.

That's all I'm suggesting. We can always bring them forward on the floor.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

I do want—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I just wish we'd stop changing the rules after we agreed to what they are, so that everybody is treated the same. That's all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Linda, I'm just going to say one more thing, and then I really want to get into clause-by-clause.

We also accepted a change of yours after there was a split, so we were trying to accommodate—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It was a drafting error. It wasn't our—

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

I understand, but many of the others are also errors and omissions, so let's accept the package as is. I understand your point. Thank you.

Joël.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Madam Chair, after the discussion we have just had, and based on our feelings since we started to study this bill, we are dealing with it in unnecessary haste. That is what has led to this kind of situation.

I share Ms. Duncan’s opinion that rules are rules. Unfortunately, I was not here last week and I was not able to meet the deadline for submitting amendments.

I have stopped submitting them because I play by the rules. Some colleagues may submit amendments after the designated date by claiming an error in translation, an error in the text, or some kind of error, and that’s all well and good. But do some committee members have the privilege of submitting an amendment after the deadline? I am not very comfortable with that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay, so Joël, just so you know, the members of the committee, at any time during clause-by-clause, can table an amendment on the floor, so you have every right and ability to table what you would like to do on the floor.

What I was trying to do was to give us an opportunity to get as much heads-up on the ones that are going to be coming so that we don't spend a tremendous amount of time trying to understand what people are doing. We have time to do that ahead of the meeting, but please, there's no denying of your rights to table anything you want to bring forward as we move through clause-by-clause. All right?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you very much, and I look forward to getting started.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of the preamble is postponed, and I now call clause 1.

(On clause 1)

Starting on clause 1, it was requested that NDP-1 be split. We now have NDP-1a.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Could I ask a question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Yes.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Those amendments go to the preamble. I was advised when I inquired that the preamble is reviewed at the end, not the beginning. I'm happy to do it now, if we change what we're doing, but I was advised that the preamble is discussed at the end of the bill.