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.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
We're now on to LIB-71, which is a new version, so the old one comes out and the new version goes in.
Maybe we can have Mr. Rogers, while that's being handed out, point out what's different.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
Madam Chair, LIB-71, LIB-72, and LIB-73 address transition provisions. They provide for consistent transition measures across the three acts. Clearly there is a need for certainty around which environmental assessments currently under way would continue under the current legislation and which would follow the new process and requirements. We've heard from a number of the stakeholders that the subject of the bill could be improved and I am proposing these three amendments.
This one in particular, LIB-71, would increase certainty by establishing an objective criterion: the notice of commencement for determining which projects will continue under CEAA 2012. LIB-71, with its long detailed information, is pretty self-explanatory in terms of achieving these objectives.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
The difference between the old one and the new version is a slight difference in proposed subsection 181(4), right?
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
It's a little bit of a longer version than the short one, which is “Despite subsection (1), at the request of the proponent”. We now have “Despite subsection (1), at the request of the proponent of a designated project referred to in that subsection that is made within the 60 days after the day.”
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Can we put the three together if they're close enough?
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I have a question about this. I know that industry is concerned about the transition period, but presumably the former agency isn't going to exist anymore. There's going to be this whole new entity, so how do they deliver an assessment under the previous legislation when supposedly we have a whole new process? Does that mean the public will have less rights to participate? There are a lot of changes that the Liberals claimed are coming forward. I'd like to have an idea of how many projects we think this may apply to, and how we're going to make sense of the fact that they're revamping the system completely and creating a whole new agency. What happens to the old agency?
5:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Just to talk about the agency currently, the agency is currently operating assessments under the 1992 legislation, which is still carried forward, as well as the 2012 legislation. Therefore, the agency is quite familiar with operating under different pieces of legislation as we transition through. With the proposed transition amendments we are trying to ensure that any projects that still exist under 1992 that have been stale for more than three years would be limited. That would get us into a world of delivering under CEAA 2012 and the new proposed act should it be passed. That's first and foremost, that the agency has a lot of experience in operating under different legislative parameters based on projects.
Second to your point with respect to new features of this particular piece of legislation and how that relates to others, I just want to note that the interim principles that were put in place in January 2016 apply along with CEAA 2012 and that has added additional factors with respect to participation in indigenous consultation.
With respect to participation and other things, we are already undergoing practices to have open public participation under CEAA 2012 and there would be nothing precluding us from having those same types of things for others.
5:35 p.m.
NDP
5:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
The transition provisions for the NEB and the CER are dealt with in another piece of legislation, but there's also a piece that says those projects that are currently being undertaken by the NEB and the CER under CEAA 2012 would remain under CEAA 2012 and would be completed under the existing legislation.
5:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
There are provisions within the proposed CER to transition the NEB and carry forward things. My colleagues can speak to that in more detail.
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
It's clear as mud. I didn't get an answer, though, on how many projects we think are going to—
5:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Policy Development Sector, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
We've gone and looked at how many projects are currently in the system and we estimated where they may be. We're probably looking at approximately 30 projects.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
No, I think I've figured it out.
It was described as a slight addition. It's actually pretty substantial—
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
I would like a recorded vote, please.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
On LIB-72, we have Mr. Rogers.
You were trying to lump them all, so I think you've already explained generally what you were trying to do.
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
Yes. The only comment I want to make was this one pertains particularly to the establishment of a review panel. Other than that, it's just the transition process again.