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.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
It will say, “The Commission may designate” rather than just “designate”.
That's one change.
NDP
Liberal
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
It says, “The Regulator may...” in line 1. I don't understand what you're saying here.
Director General, Petroleum Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
It's just a quick nuance.
The “Regulator” within the bill refers to the entire organization, whereas the specific responsibility to delegate here rests with the commission. This is just clarifying that it's that part of the organization that has the ability to designate.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
We're completely getting rid of proposed paragraph 116(1)(c) and creating a whole new proposed section?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Yes.
That's one piece of it. Then you move to the other sections.
Shall the amendment carry?
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I'd like a recorded vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Thank you.
This is on page 143, under the current proposed section 135. It allows the regulator to make public the nature of a violation and so on. I'm deleting that section in order to create an opportunity to say, “The Regulator must make public the orders made under subsections 95(1) or (2), the notices of non-compliance issued under subsection 108(1) and the notices of violation”. It both removes the discretion to make such reports public and expands the number of things that the regulator has already decided, which it must make public.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Thank you very much for that.
Mr. Fast has asked for a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 8; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
I mentioned before the last break that we have 15 minutes for the experts to be with us, and I want to make sure that if anybody has any questions about anything that's still to come, they have a chance to ask the question. Do we have any challenge or any issue that's not clear?
Go ahead, Mr. Fast.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Yes, there is a challenge. I think everything is clear and that is that the government is intent on shoving this legislation through without regard for proper timelines. We have a whole number of—
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I'm speaking now, John. Give me the courtesy of articulating what is in the hearts of many of us at this table, and that is about the sham of a process that we're going through. We have many more amendments—you can see them right here—that we still have to go through and that will not be discussed or debated. You will have seen on our side of the table that goodwill has been shown. We've supported some of the Liberal side's amendments. We have supported some amendments coming from Ms. Duncan, from Ms. May. That is the way a committee should work, and we should have the time to do that work properly.
Unfortunately, because the government has indicated that it wants this pushed through within a certain time frame that is not appropriate for the scope of this bill, it will be Canadians who will be cheated out of this process. They will have a bill that is way less than satisfactory.
Secondly, Madam Chair, I don't want you to take this personally, but under whose authority are the timelines for this committee's work being shortened? Who imposed the timelines? Did this come from the Prime Minister's Office? Did it come from the minister's office? Did it come from Mr. Wilkinson, who's the parliamentary secretary? Did it come from Kyle, who's providing directions to the members on the Liberal side? Maybe Kyle is a super-powerful guy like Gerry Butts.
Liberal
