Environment Committee on May 22nd, 2018

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

Good morning, everyone. Welcome back.

We are again doing clause-by-clause on 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.

We have assisting us today, from the Department of Natural Resources, Jeff Labonté, Assistant Deputy Minister, Major Projects Management Office; and Terence Hubbard, Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch.

From the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, we have Christine Loth-Bown, Vice-President, Policy Development Sector; and Brent Parker, Director, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Division. Welcome.

From the Department of Transport, we have Nancy Harris, Executive Director, Regulatory Stewardship and Aboriginal Affairs.

Thank you very much for being with us today.

Mr. Rochon, thank you very much for being with us from the Department of Justice.

As I had mentioned to committee members, in my zeal on Thursday to assist with amendments and subamendments I had stepped out of bounds and had moved to clause 6. We moved a LIB-76 amendment. I would like to ask the committee's agreement to reverse that decision. I should not be moving on anything outside of the clause we're studying right now, which is clause 1. If we could reverse the decision on the LIB-76 subamendment and the LIB-76 amendment as amended, I would very much appreciate that.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you very much.

At the end of Thursday, the last one was amendment NDP-40.

(On clause 1)

Ms. Duncan.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have an amendment that needs to come before the next one. I have prepared it in English and French. I gave one to the Liberals and one to the Conservatives.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We're checking with the legislative clerk to see whether this is appropriate for this area. It doesn't have a number.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I would call it NDP-41.1.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Why doesn't the clerk let everyone know his thoughts on this?

[Olivier Champagne, Legislative Clerk, House of Commons]

If you look at your bill, you see the amendment would go under “Decision-Making”. It wouldn't amend line 22, which is under “Rules in Case of Termination”.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

After line 22, it should say...and just before “Decision-Making”.

[Olivier Champagne]

If you look at LIB-39, you'll notice it's really specific to—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It's LIB-43.

[Olivier Champagne]

We're at LIB-39 right now.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Yes, I know, but LIB-39 comes after where I'm putting this. I would put this in right after the heading “Decision-Making”.

[Olivier Champagne]

Exactly. And LIB-39 is relevant to the part of the bill that is above “Decision-Making”.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It's above “Decision-Making”? Okay.

[Olivier Champagne]

LIB-39 adds new proposed subsection 60(3), right after proposed subsection 60(2).

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Oh, okay. That's fine. I'm happy to go second.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

All right.

We'll go back to where we were. LIB-39 would add a new proposed subsection to proposed section 60, “Subject to section 119”.

Shall the amendment carry?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I would like a recorded vote.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

We have PV-54.1, and then we'll get to Linda's.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Yes. Ms. May's is first.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Ms. May.

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

This amendment was proposed in the evidence of the Canadian Environmental Law Association.

The existing proposed subsection 59(1) talks about the assessment by a review agency, and continues on with the effects in the report. The report sets out what are, in the agency's opinion, the effects of the designated project.

This adds new proposed subsections 59.1(1), (2), and (3), which break out what the minister says must be done with the report. There's an independent review of their operation to be undertaken. Then the minister must cause a report to be laid before the House within two years after the day on which this section comes into force. As well, if an act of Parliament amends it based on a review, the next report is to be tabled within two years.

The effect of all this, Madam Chair, is to enact the recommendation of the expert panel on environmental assessment and to establish the agency as the single quasi-judicial authority that conducts the assessments and makes decisions under the act on behalf of the federal government.

I appreciate the creativity of the Canadian Environmental Law Association in coming up with this. It's an extremely elegant way of ensuring that Bill C-69 meets the aspirations of the thousands of people, as well as the expert panel, who worked so hard on preparing the expert panel on the impact assessment report to the federal government.

This is an extremely important amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Shall the amendment carry?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I would like a recorded vote.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])