Evidence of meeting #113 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 line.
A recording is available from Parliament.
The Clerk
Right now, paragraph 3, line 15, reads as follows: “Au moins un membre nommé au titre du paragraphe”.
After the amendment, it will read as follows: “Au plus un membre nommé au titre du paragraphe”.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I would like a recorded vote, Madam Chair.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Liberal 29 was withdrawn.
We now have LIB-30 in front of us.
Mr. Amos.
Liberal
William Amos Liberal Pontiac, QC
As earlier referenced, we've heard from stakeholders asking for a reconsideration of the role of life-cycle regulators on review panels. We've heard the arguments that suggest they ought not to be a majority on review panels. This amendment that we're proposing would address concerns of those stakeholders by retaining a role for the life-cycle regulator, which is appropriate. They do have expertise to bring to the table, but it's also to ensure that the panel membership is appropriately balanced. We certainly agree that there should not be a majority of life-cycle regulator members.
My colleague may have a subamendment.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
I do have a subamendment, Madam Chair.
In doing this as well, I would like to indicate that this subamendment would apply to LIB-30, LIB-33, and LIB-76. It would apply to all three of those. I'm hoping that once people have heard the subamendment....
I do have copies of the subamendment that can be shared as well—of all three.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
I'll speak to it in the meantime.
We have heard from many stakeholders the concern about regulators being overrrepresented within the review panels and within the agency. Our government has set out to separate the agency and the regulatory function. We recognize that there is expertise within the regulators. Therefore, it makes sense to have regulator representation within the panel, but not a majority of the representation. I truly believe that if we want to restore the public trust, we need to also ensure that the regulator is not the chair of those panels.
This subamendment would set out that the regulator would not be the chair of the panel. We've seen, as I've said, a lot of testimony around this, including from the expert panel itself. It made it very clear that the accountability of the commission would be for assessment alone and would not be mixed up with regulatory accountability. The resulting transparency would make it easier for the federal government, proponents, and participants to hold the single authority to account. For financial discipline, there should be one independent agency that conducts and oversees federal EA, and that agency should not be the regulator.
To obtain more credibility and regain public trust, participants proposed that EAs be conducted free from political and proponent influence by an independent and impartial body.
Once again, there is evidence after evidence that supports this. I hope that the members will support this subamendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
You're requesting that we look at amendments LIB-30, LIB-33, and LIB-76 to make a subamendment to those. Let's do that.
Mr. Fast.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I want to remind Mr. Bossio that his subamendment is actually excluding from the process arguably the most knowledgeable, capable, and experienced people from these projects. I don't know why we would do that.
These are people who have a high level of expertise and who can help the assessment process come to the right decision. We're slowly, but surely, limiting the number of those individuals who can participate in this process.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We're just going to focus on the subamendment at the moment. I don't want back and forth on this. That subamendment is specifically referring to the chairperson. It's not being appointed from those groups.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I think there's a mistake, because you're saying, add subsection 46(1) after line 8 on page 89. Section 46 is on page 32, so I don't know what you're doing here.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
It's a subamendment. Where it's fitting in is right. We're just going to do the subamendment that's applying to LIB-30, LIB-33, and LIB-76 right now.
I'm being advised that we do them individually. On the subamendment to LIB-30, please.
Mr. Rogers, please.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
Madam Chair, I appreciate the spirit of what my colleague is trying to accomplish here, but I cannot support that subamendment. I think it's an injustice to groups like the C-NLOPB and others that have been in this business for 30 years with impeccable records.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Thank you.
Let's not debate it across the floor.
Let's move the subamendment to LIB-30.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I would ask for a recorded vote.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Let's do the same thing for subamendment to LIB-33.
Sorry. Procedures are very important.
We need to now move on the amendment LIB-30, as amended.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I would ask for a recorded vote.
(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
