Evidence of meeting #23 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
It is 3:30 p.m., so we will get started. I now call the meeting to order.
At the end of our last meeting, we were discussing Mr. Albas' subamendment to Ms. Saks's amendment.
Mr. Bittle had the floor, and I'm not sure whether he had finished speaking. The next speakers on my list were Mr. Baker, Ms. Saks and Mr. Saini, in that order. Do I have that right?
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Chair, I'd like to move a friendly amendment. May I do it now or do I wait until everyone has had their turn?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
You'll have to wait until we get to you. I see you've clicked on the “raise hand” feature, so I will add you to the list.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
If Mr. Baker is on the list, I'll let him take over from here.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thanks very much, Chair.
I want to reiterate my support for the amendment proposed by Ms. Saks.
At our last meeting, we heard from the Environment and Climate Change Canada officials. We also heard from members of the waste management and recycling industry all over the country. The public servants are the experts; they are the ones working every day to keep the system robust. I trust them and I trust what they told us when they appeared before the committee.
Mr. Albas has proposed in his amendment a timeline that is not achievable for a number of reasons. There is a range of deficiencies in the bill.
Namely, I'm referring to the lack of clear definitions, the inaccuracies in certain definitions, the fact that it's impossible to [Technical difficulty—Editor].
For example, if Bill C-204 were implemented, plastic waste that would normally be sent to another country would remain in Canada. However, according to what witnesses told us, we don't even have the capacity to dispose of the plastic here, in Canada.
If it were even possible to fix that, the government would need time to remedy all the deficiencies—
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I have a point of order on relevance.
Mr. Chair, he's speaking to other elements of the bill. We should only be speaking to my subamendment, for proper debate. Otherwise, like in the last meeting, we will be talking endlessly about the same tired points that the Liberals are trying to hide behind.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Mr. Baker, are you essentially trying to address the change that Mr. Albas is proposing to Ms. Saks's amendment? In other words, Mr. Albas is saying that the coming into force should be six months after adoption. Is that what you're speaking to, Mr. Baker?
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Yes. I think what I was saying is perfectly relevant, Chair.
To respond to the point of order, the time and all of the things I'm raising are relevant in determining what an appropriate time for implementation would be. If you need to correct deficiencies in a bill, you need time to do that. I'm explaining what some of those deficiencies are for the purpose of explaining why we need more time than what Mr. Albas has proposed.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Okay, I understand. Yes, that's relevant.
Are you finished your intervention?
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Okay.
Just to recap, there's a series of deficiencies in the bill. I just finished listing them, which is I think what Mr. Albas was objecting to. However, even if it's possible to correct all this, the government would need time to correct the deficiencies.
At the last committee meeting, Mr. Albas, himself, acknowledged the work that needed to be done to correct the bill's deficiencies and the fact that it was the government's responsibility to make those corrections. The government needs time to do that, however.
Given what the department officials told us when they were here on Monday, it would be extremely difficult to implement the bill immediately. They told us that it usually took two years to make regulatory changes. The process can be shorter, but it can also require up to two years. With all due respect to my fellow member Mr. Albas, I think his subamendment fails to take into account the reality.
It's easy to picture where this subamendment could lead if we tried to shorten the coming into force time frame. It's almost certain the government would not be able to correct the deficiencies I mentioned in six months. On top of that, Canadians might not have an opportunity to fully participate in the consultation process, and companies might not have a chance to explain their circumstances. Frankly, I think it would be a disaster.
What Ms. Saks is proposing, I think, is to take into account this reality. Ms. Saks's amendment is about ensuring that the government has time to correct mistakes in the bill and to pursue the regulatory process correctly, which, as the officials highlighted for us, needs to be undertaken to implement the bill properly. By doing this, we can ensure that we make the most of this bill and protect our environment, or at least not cause further damage.
On Monday, I said that this was not a good bill. I think the Conservatives missed an opportunity to produce a good piece of legislation that addressed the problems around the recycling of plastics. If the bill were to pass, I think Ms. Saks's amendment would be reasonable, because it gives the government a chance to remedy the flaws that have been identified. I think Mr. Albas' subamendment fails to take into account the reality.
Liberal
Liberal
Ya'ara Saks Liberal York Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank my colleague Mr. Baker. I also want to thank Mr. Albas for being open to discussing my amendment. As he's put forward his subamendment, I'd like to speak to the reason that I put my amendment forward.
I'm a fan of getting work done that is done well, with due diligence and with the proper process that we need to go through, so that we come out at the other end with a bill that really does what it's meant to do. It should serve the community and the various industries and municipalities that will be impacted by the piece of legislation we are debating, discussing and breaking down.
Officials have said to us that the process to get Bill C-204 to the point where it would be implemented well will take somewhere around two years. I hesitated to put a timeline on this, but I did so to give the Governor in Council the flexibility they need to do the work they need to do to get the bill in order. Without this, we aren't doing a process of due diligence.
My concern is that we get it right. That's why I put this amendment forward for colleagues of the committee to consider. At the end of the day, we all want a good piece of legislation to go forward. That's really why we're here. That's certainly why I'm here. As a rookie MP, I can feign ignorance, perhaps, on some things, but I know that I came here to get good work done, and I'm committed to that.
Good work takes time. It's not a process of hurry up and wait. It's not a process of hurry up and hurry up. It's a step-by-step process of taking the time to discuss things, to see where the deficiencies are in what's being proposed and to make sure that we get this right. Ultimately, it's not for us. It's for Canadians. It's for the industries that will be served by the bill and what they're able to achieve to move an environmental plan forward that works well for Canadians and communities. It's so that we don't have backups in landfills and don't have plastic being shipped off to other places that will cause harm in other parts of the world.
We want this to be a win-win. Wins don't happen by trying to ram something through the system. Wins happen when they're done step by step, with the intention and mindfulness that needs to come with moving through a process and really unpacking it properly.
That was my intention by putting the amendment forward. I certainly hope that colleagues will get behind it so that we can get good work done.
Liberal
Raj Saini Liberal Kitchener Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I believe that, with the testimony we've heard and the comments from the officials, this could take up to two years. My worry is twofold. One worry is the domestic situation that would occur. We've received correspondence from multiple stakeholders expressing their concern. I also think this is not only a domestic issue. It would affect us internationally with our trade agreements.
We need to make sure that it not only aligns domestically but also aligns internationally. That's important to look at because this bill will not only affect our domestic industry or domestic recyclers, but also impact any trade agreements we have internationally.
Liberal
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I have a friendly amendment to Mr. Albas's subamendment.
Just over a year ago, the Basel Convention was amended, and those amendments just came into force. That means the government had a year to take action and make sure companies knew what was coming. If companies are to change their behaviour, they need a predictable environment. The government could have started the work a year ago.
Be that as it may, I agree the deficiencies in the bill need to be corrected. I therefore propose a coming into force period of 12 months, instead of six.
The government has done nothing for a year, so it's time to speed up the process. The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment didn't even discuss the issue when it met in July. We've already lost a year, so we have to move forward now. In the next year, we could help companies; we could build a plan and work on it with the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment since this is an area that falls under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces.
I support helping companies. We've received letters from people sharing solutions that are in place in a number of provinces, solutions to turn plastic waste into a resource.
For that reason, I am in favour of Ms. Saks's amendment to include a coming into force date in the bill and allow for greater predictability. I move that the coming into force period be 12 months.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I gather you are asking Mr. Albas whether he would accept a friendly amendment to his subamendment, to change the time frame to a year from six months.
Mr. Albas, do you accept the friendly amendment?
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Yes, Mr. Chair, and if there's an opportunity to speak to it, I will gladly take the floor when you specify.