I want to directly address Mr. Cullen's plea for us not to be directed by the ministry. There's nothing that could be further from the case.
Our motion proposes issues that are not in the mandate letter, specifically, with the exception of aspects around recovery strategies and species at risk. We listened to each other last week and we heard Mr. Eglinski and Mr. Fast speak about priorities around air and water, speak of priorities, and presented notices of motions on migratory birds, wetlands....Conservation is clearly a priority on your end.
We were really listening. That's my honestly held belief that we were really listening. I seek to behave in a manner, or I wish upon this committee that we behave in a legislative manner. I don't deny the importance of engaging in a conversation of clean tech; I just think that we have to be strategic about when and how we do that, so this is a prioritization exercise that we're going through.
I don't think that we're acceding to some ministerial demand here. We're saying there is a process that's going to happen. It's going to be expert-driven and it's going to be reflective of the entirety of Canada. Let's let that process take its course, and if and when they come up with material that we can benefit from to determine how we could build on that, then we're doing much more strategic work. By contrast, the three aspects that are presented in this motion go to distinct legislative opportunities that we have.
With respect, Mr. Eglinski, I disagree that we don't have time to do them. We have 14 more meetings between now and June. We wouldn't get through all of this, but what I was trying to do with this was encapsulate a series of interests that were shared by all, that reflect Canadians' interests, to address Mr. Cullen's earlier point around what Canadians want us to address.
At the same time we would want to ensure our independence because manifestly addressing the lack of legislative review of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, the cornerstone of environmental protection laws federally in Canada, and engaging in a review and reporting back to Parliament on that review, is not only squarely in line with Canadians' interests in maintaining clean air and water, but is a top priority, along with climate change.
That is something that isn't being touted by our government as their top agenda item. We would be moving in our own independent direction. I absolutely agree with Mr. Cullen that we need to be mindful of leadership of past committees. I think of people like Charles Caccia, Clifford Lincoln, Karen Kraft Sloan, and we could name others from other parties, tremendous leaders who demonstrated an independence.
This motion seeks to demonstrate an awareness of what all committee members are interested in, while at the same time being independent of what the government is seeking to do.