Evidence of meeting #3 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Terence Hubbard  Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Brent Parker  Acting Vice-President, Strategic Policy, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Ian Ketcheson  Director General, Crown Consultations Division, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Jennifer Saxe  Director General, Regional Operations, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Alison Clegg  Committee Researcher
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Alexandre Roger

9:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi

Thank you.

Madame Pauzé, you may have two and a half minutes.

9:40 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Do the joint assessment committees that were in the old act still exist in the new act?

9:40 a.m.

Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

9:40 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

When you choose the members of the committees—you mentioned this in your answer to my colleague's question—does the proponent participate in that choice?

9:40 a.m.

Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard

No, that's not the proponent's role.

9:40 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Okay.

I would now like to talk about public interest. The old act talked about national interest, but what I saw in what you have shared with us is public interest.

Are there criteria determining what public interest is? Could you define “public interest,” please?

9:40 a.m.

Acting Vice-President, Strategic Policy, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Brent Parker

If I'm understanding the question correctly, the national interest test that was in the former legislation was actually in the National Energy Board Act, whereas in our legislation it was always a decision around significant adverse impacts.

In the Impact Assessment Act now, it has changed to being a decision of public interest. Because of the expanded scope of the act, it is is looking at sustainability, the impacts upon indigenous peoples, environmental obligations, climate change, commitments—those five factors that are in section 63.

This shift allows us now to look at the project holistically at all of the project's positive benefits as well as the negative impacts. This change allows us to look at it in a different manner that better reflects the project as a whole.

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi

You have 10 seconds left.

9:45 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

So no specific criteria help you define public interest. It comes after the analysis of all the assessments related to health, biodiversity, and forests. Is that correct?

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi

Thank you, Ms. Pauzé.

Ms. Collins, you have two and a half minutes.

9:45 a.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

Going back to Teck for a moment, when the proponent withdrew its proposal, it cited the need for a framework that reconciles resource development and climate change, which I think speaks to the desire for more certainty. Canadians are also wanting more certainty that Canada is going to live up to its climate commitments.

We spoke to Environment and Climate Change Canada last week. They're developing a strategic assessment of climate change, but the draft really wouldn't adequately link individual project decisions to Canada's international obligations.

I'm curious as to what the agency is doing to ensure that there's a transparent and credible framework for assessing whether a project is going to help Canada meet its international climate obligations.

9:45 a.m.

Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard

There is a specific factor within section 22 of the legislation that obligates us to examine our international obligations.

You specifically referred to the strategic assessment of climate change. We have been working with colleagues at Environment and Climate Change Canada. It will be an important tool to provide guidance to proponents and to the agency on how to assess those climate impacts as we move forward.

Currently we are leveraging and utilizing the draft assessment as the basis to support the discussions with promoters, but as the analysis and that guidance evolve through the development of the final documents, we will be looking to incorporate the guidance into our discussions with proponents.

9:45 a.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

While the SACC is being developed—and some have said with minimum public engagement—what is the agency's role and what is it doing to ensure that future strategic assessments engage the public early, that the engagement is meaningful and that it's really in the spirit of the Impact Assessment Act?

9:45 a.m.

Acting Vice-President, Strategic Policy, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Brent Parker

The strategic assessment provisions in the act require certain obligations, in terms of the process itself. We've been building a policy framework around that requirement. There are thus provisions around public participation, indigenous engagement, indigenous knowledge. All of those have now been built out into a policy frame, and we're working with a number of experts, including an advisory group set up under the Impact Assessment Act called the technical advisory committee, which reports to the president of the agency.

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi

Thank you. Can you wrap up, please?

9:45 a.m.

Acting Vice-President, Strategic Policy, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Brent Parker

Sure.

This is going to be published later this year for public comment, to drive all strategic assessments going forward.

9:45 a.m.

NDP

Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC

Thank you.

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi

Mr. Aitchison, you have five minutes.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

I have a couple of questions that will stem from this first question.

Is there a sunset clause on approval by the assessment agency? Once you've received approval, if a project doesn't proceed imminently, how long is the approval good for?

9:45 a.m.

Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard

Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, we didn't have the ability to put sunset clauses into our conditions and our decision statements. Under the new legislative framework we have the ability to do so; we just haven't gotten to the point of any projects reaching that point in the process so as to have any decision statements in place under the new framework.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Specifically we've been talking a lot about Teck today. Does the Teck Frontier project, for example, have a sunset clause upon its approval?

9:45 a.m.

Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard

Speaking specifically to Teck Frontier, the proponents wrote to the Minister of the Environment to withdraw their application before it got to the point in the process of a final decision that would have issued a decision statement and any conditions that would have been associated with it. It didn't get to that point in the process.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Okay. Would they have to reapply and go through the impact assessment from the very beginning, if they, let's say a few years down the road, decided to start up again and you somehow found some balance and stability within the effort to balance environmental protection and economic development and they felt it was worth trying again? Would they have to start again at the very beginning of the process?

9:50 a.m.

Vice-President, Operations Sector, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Terence Hubbard

If a project is withdrawn from the old framework, it would need to apply under the provisions of the new framework, going forward.

That said, the agency can take into consideration information and studies that have already been prepared and that are in existence. Thus, as the agency prepared its guidelines, in terms of the requirements, it would consider information and studies that have already been done and completed, including any regional studies that might have been done.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON

Would the consideration of those previous studies accelerate the timelines?