Evidence of meeting #89 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 right.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
—to get down to the detail about the departments of natural resources or public safety or agriculture or national defence.
Liberal
NDP
Director General, Sustainability Directorate, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of the Environment
Sorry, sir. Yes?
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Through you, Chair, would you like to comment on whether this proposed amendment is actually addressing a problem that exists, or whether we are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist?
Director General, Sustainability Directorate, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of the Environment
I can describe it in terms of what we do right now.
During that four-month consultation period, we're commenting on the draft strategy, which includes the contribution of all of the entities under the act. It includes any of the goals and proposals put forward. It does include the dimensions of all of the departments under the strategy.
By way of process, we receive comments, we undertake the consultations, and we work with departments to identify key stakeholders in their constituency area. We undertake the consultations. That feedback is centralized with us, but we distribute it to all of the departments. Then, when we—the collaborative “we”—draft the final strategy for consideration, all of those departments have had an opportunity to weigh in and demonstrate how they will address concerns that are raised on topics that are very vast in terms of the range of issues that we receive comments on. That's what currently happens right now.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Chair, that was my understanding.
There is already a process for consultations in place, and they are taken into account. That renders the proposed amendment moot, because we already have that process taking place, whether it's stipulated legislatively or not. The department and the agencies and all those who are covered under these requirements are in fact doing consultations and taking those consultations into account.
Why are we introducing something that is already happening? We're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Can I just make a comment?
Let's go by what the law says. With all due respect to Ms. Brand, section 11 of the act says that within one year after the final Federal Sustainable Development Strategy is tabled in the House, the designated entities must develop their individual strategies. They're not developed before the FSDS is tabled; they are developed after the final FSDS is tabled in the House.
The process of developing the individual entity strategies happens after the FSDS is set in stone. That's when the details of.... The fisheries department has different people they might want to confer with. Agriculture has different kinds of interests that they want to confer with.
Anyway, I rest my case, but that is the process by law.
Liberal
Liberal
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Ms. Brand was challenged, and I think we owe her an opportunity to respond, if there is a response.
Director General, Sustainability Directorate, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of the Environment
I have no comment. Thank you.
Liberal
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Can we have a vote on the subamendment to the amendment?
Once again, it's changing the language of the amendment to say—
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
—it takes into account the comments made under subsection 9(3) and/or subsection 9(4) and....
December 7th, 2017 / 10:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
I just wanted to address Ed's comment and statement.
If you read it, paragraph 11(1)(a)—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
I know. You have it right in front of you. If you read it, it is talking about “after”—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
—so it is trying to be prescriptive on something that we understand is probably already happening. All these other points may be superfluous as well, based on your comment.
Let's look at it as an entity that we want to change.
Go ahead.
Liberal