Environment Committee on May 10th, 2018

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I think that may have been already passed by a Liberal amendment, but in a different way. They just put it in a different place. I'm adding that as....

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You're putting it in a different place.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

They put it in as 1.1.

Let's see what the Liberal one said.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Can you tell me the Liberal amendment that passed that did that, please?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I am trying to find it. I thought that was the one that Mr. Bossio just spoke to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Maybe 38, line 25. This is after line 31.

I think it has the same intent, but you're doing it in a different way and on a different line. Are you withdrawing this one?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I'm trying to fine that one. What page was Mr. Bossio's on?

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

It's page 160.

It's just doing it in a different way. You can say it again, or do you want to just delete it or withdraw it?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I don't think I need to bring it forward, because I think it's already been passed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. Certainly the intent....

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That was supported by the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, British Columbia Assembly of First Nations, and Cold Lake First Nations. They'll be happy that's in.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Great, and they'll be happy.

Okay, on CPC-5.4 please.

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

What we're recommending, on page 36, is replacing line 27 with a fairly minor adjustment. It would read:

“54 Except as otherwise provided for under this Act, a review panel may determine its own procedure but must, to the extent that it is consistent”

Then, it would continue on with the general application of the rules, procedure of fairness, natural justice, and so on.

It just gives the review panel more flexibility in determining its own procedures and helps with proponent and witness engagement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. That's clear.

Shall the amendment carry?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Can we have a recorded vote?

(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We are on PV-54.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First, committee members, when you're looking at this, the pertinent proposed sections are on page 38, line 9. We're looking at the considerations in a case for termination. So, setting yourself in the timeline here, the minister is deciding under proposed subsection 58(1) to terminate the assessment by a review panel at the suggestion of a number of environmental law witnesses before us.

I am adding a new proposed subsection 58(4), to be found on page 38. Again, the section starts at page 37 and goes over to page 38. What I'm doing here is suggesting that the minister may, at any time during an assessment, make an order to direct the review panel to suspend its assessment until assessments under proposed sections 92, 93, or 95 are concluded. Those sections are found at page 50 and relate specifically to regional assessment and strategic assessments.

So this is giving the minister flexibility when it becomes apparent that a regional assessment or strategic assessment is collecting information that's directly pertinent to a project review. The minister would have the discretion and ability to say, “Okay, that specific review over there of a project is so tied up in this larger strategic and regional review that I'm going to ask the panel to suspend until we get the review wrapped up on the strategic or regional assessments”. Otherwise, the minister can only end a review as opposed to suspend it.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I'd like a recorded vote, definitely, on this one.

(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We're on NDP-40.

Ms. Duncan.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have about one second before the bell rings.

This is on page 38 at line 22. Similar to amendments brought forward by the Liberals that I agreed to, it would add subsection (2.1) after line 22, which would read, “The report must also set out how traditional knowledge”—I will change that to “Indigenous knowledge”—“of the Indigenous peoples was taken into account and utilized in the impact assessment of a designated project.”

That was called for by the Athabasca Chippewyan First Nation, the British Columbia Assembly of First Nations, and Cold Lake First Nations. It appears consistent with what we already amended to another part of the review.

It's simply saying, again, that at this point the report must also set out how indigenous knowledge that was presented is taken into account.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay. I think we've had some good discussions on that already.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Can I have a recorded vote?

(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

There was lots of co-operation on that.

We'll do one more, LIB-39.

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

Yes, Madam Chair. Once again this goes to indigenous knowledge. I was going to say—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Madam Chair, we're out of time, I think.