Evidence of meeting #114 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 see.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Olivier Champagne  Legislative Clerk, House of Commons
Jean-Sébastien Rochon  Counsel, Department of Justice
Christine Loth-Bown  Vice-President, Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Brent Parker  Director, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Division, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Jeff Labonté  Assistant Deputy Minister, Major Projects Management Office, Department of Natural Resources
Terence Hubbard  Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Can you suggest another term that would be appropriate to help Mr. Reid out?

6:20 p.m.

Counsel, Department of Justice

Jean-Sébastien Rochon

In terms of legal Latin maxims, not that I have found, but we would probably need to look a bit more into what the intent is. I understand the issue is that the intent is for the board member not to vote. The board member may be nominated in an advisory capacity, and might not be working on the report. Perhaps that's what's being contemplated, but I'm speculating.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Mr. Viersen is next, and then we're going to end this conversation.

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB

I was just thinking about the other committee I sit on, where there are two Liberal members who are members of the committee but don't participate. I'm not sure how the wording is on that one. Is that non-voting in that case?

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Yes, but we're back to the voting issue again, and we're trying to stay away from the voting issue. There was a suggestion, potentially, that it could be in a non-official capacity.

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Advisory capacity?

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

An advisory capacity, if you want to say it like that.

It's really not up to me. It's your amendment.

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Right, but I do have to ask the question to make sure this can be done procedurally correctly.

Would it be possible then to remove the word that I had suggested be added in? Also, assuming that we don't put those words into line 30, but what we now say is that, on line 26, “two of the persons appointed under subsection (1) must be appointed, in an”—and I forgot what the word was....

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Advisory.

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

“advisory capacity, from a roster”.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Madam Chair, are we at the five minutes on this clause?

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Yes, we're done.

This is what we're voting on. It's an amendment that is going to go in at line 26, and it says, “under subsection (1) must be appointed, in an advisory capacity, from a roster established under paragraph 50(d)”.

It's inserting “in an advisory capacity” after “appointed”.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL

Madam Chair, if I could interject here, we've already voted on the CNSC, CER, and the CNSOPB. Quite frankly, I'm shocked that the Conservatives would be advancing this, because this is a direct attack on the C-NLOPB from my perspective.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

I understand.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL

I think it's an affront to the C-NLOPB.

Back in Newfoundland and Labrador, folks are not going to be happy with the CPC that they would participate in this kind of an amendment. I fully intend to vote against it.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Okay, I hear you, but we're just trying to get what it is that you're voting against. I think we have it clear. We're inserting the words “must be appointed, in an advisory capacity, from a roster established under paragraph 50(d)”.

Shall the amendment carry?

Do you want a recorded vote?

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Please, yes.

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Mr. Reid, who were you voting for?

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON

Apparently I'm not on here because I was replacing him. He's back, so I have to replace somebody else.

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

We have to be official.

When you're voting, it's really important. Are we all straight?

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

We're going to LIB-78.

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC

Madam Chair, this one is very similar to LIB-76 that we've already discussed. It's simply ensuring that it respects this role for the Canadian energy.... They're the life-cycle regulators, but they don't have a majority of members on the panel.

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Okay. I think that's clear.

Shall the amendment carry?

6:25 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

I'd like a recorded vote.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Shall clause 7 as amended carry?

It's a recorded vote.

(Clause 7 as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte

Shall clause 8 carry?