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.
6:35 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I take offence to the suggestion that the committee has been flexible in adding days. I have already given up all of my responsibilities. I am the critic for another portfolio. I have not—
May 22nd, 2018 / 6:35 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I've been unable to deliver my other responsibilities in my portfolio because I am dedicated to trying to improve this bill.
A number of things that Mr. Fast said are a hundred per cent true. I've put the question to the minister many times. We've put the question to Minister Carr many times. We asked, “Will you be accepting amendments to this bill?”
In good faith, we worked diligently. The public worked diligently. First nations, Métis, and Inuit worked diligently. Industry worked diligently. Lawyers, law firms, and the law schools worked diligently. Yet every one of those amendments are being voted down, not even with consideration.
I find it absolutely astounding that this committee, which is essentially the environment and sustainable development committee.... We do not deal with the Navigation Protection Act. It was already reviewed by the transport committee. It would have made more sense for that part of this bill to go to that committee. They could have done an efficient review, having reviewed it already. We don't deal with the CER. That's the natural resources committee.
So here we are, and I think we went through fairly efficiently the review of the first part of the bill, which should have been our responsibility. We should be continuing this review. We should be giving due respect to all the people who participated, for two and a half years, when the government asked for input on reforming the NEB, reforming the Navigation Protection Act impact assessment. We are giving short shrift to the last two parts of this bill, and I find it absolutely outrageous.
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Linda, thank you.
We have two and a half hours. I'm hoping we can really get into the work that still needs to be done, so let's get to it.
6:40 p.m.
NDP
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
6:40 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Let's do a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We're on CPC-10. Its a big one.
This amendment, and many others that follow the same logic, are consequential to CPC-25; therefore, a vote on CPC-10 will apply to CPC-16, CPC-25, CPC-27, CPC-28 to CPC-34, and CPC-42. There are a lot of Conservative amendments wrapped up in this one.
Who would like to speak to it?
Mr. Fast, go ahead.
6:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I'll gladly talk to it, Madam Chair.
The purpose of this amendment is to make a consequential word change to the French version of the definition section of the “Interpretation”portion of the act to account for changes made by amendment 9774628.
Effectively, that amendment removes the decision-making power given to the Governor in Council in the “Where certificate required” section of the “Designated Interprovincial Power Lines” portion of the act.
6:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Once the phrase “The Governor in Council” is changed to “The Minister”, the French word for “order” must be changed.
Project proponents and investors need certainty if they're going to invest in Canada. There are some concrete timelines that the process needs to provide that certainty. As I have mentioned before, energy investment in Canada is fleeing our country because of the uncertainty.
The proposal that I've made is effectively cleaning up language on the French side. I don't think it should be in any way controversial.
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Okay. Just so everybody knows, CPC-25 is on page 384. That's consequential to that substantive amendment. CPC-16, CPC-25, CPC-27, CPC-28 to CPC-34, and CPC-42 all deal with the same subject matter.
Shall the amendment carry?
6:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I would like a recorded vote, please.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
That means CPC-16, CPC-25, CPC-27, CPC-28 to 34, and CPC-42 are defeated.
Now we have amendment PV-83, Ms. May.
6:40 p.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Madam Chair, as I mentioned a moment ago, the amendment that I suggested for a definition of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples would be handy, because here at line 30 on page 93 we're in the section of definitions that relate to indigenous governing bodies, indigenous organizations, indigenous peoples of Canada, and so on. I'm inserting that “indigenous peoples” be referred to by both the Constitution Act and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
6:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I would like a recorded vote, please, definitely.
(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
This is very similar to other discussions we had on the previous part of the bill. I don't think any further discussion is needed.