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.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We're not going to change the 12 months to two years. There's no consensus. I can sense that.
We'll go to Ms. Collins. At some point, we'll have to vote on the 12 months.
Go ahead, Ms. Collins.
4 p.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to quickly correct the record. Mr. Bittle misrepresented my words. I clearly stated that I want this bill to be strengthened to include provisions for hazardous waste and waste for special consideration, since the Liberals have refused to ratify those Basel Convention amendments. I would like to strengthen the bill to make sure that Canada no longer uses loopholes to get around its international commitments when we're exporting to the U.S.
If the Liberals truly cared about addressing the issue of exporting our waste to poorer countries, they would have voted to bring this bill to committee and they would have voted in favour of my amendments to strengthen the bill. I am concerned, because of the tactics that were used in our last committee meetings and what I think I'm seeing here again, that the Liberals are just trying to delay this.
I think that Madam Pauzé's amendment is a reasonable one. I'll be voting in favour of it. I hope we can quickly move to that vote and move on, so that we can keep on with our committee business.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I guess I'm here to announce the death of irony, in the opposition accusing us of delaying things while the House of Commons is backlogged, while opposition parties put up dozens of speakers for amendments. I'm a little surprised at those allegations. All of my comments have been based on questions to officials.
Again, Ms. Collins has not addressed any of the concerns raised by officials, which is surprising. These are hard-working civil servants who have brought forward their concerns, and the lack of willingness to meet them is surprising.
All of my comments and all of my colleagues' comments have been based on these concerns. We want to see this strengthened. We want to see more action. We want to see better action on plastic waste. Just because this isn't the proper vehicle to do it....
We asked for a few more witnesses. We asked for a bit more time to have all the evidence in front of us. That was denied. We're not delaying this.
I think Mr. Albas accused me of being a professional filibusterer. That may have been suggested last time. Having sat through months on PROC, through amendments to the Elections Act from one particular opposition party—months and months of filibuster—I can appreciate it. However, none of that was substantive. None of that was based on any evidence from officials.
We're raising our points. We're raising concerns. We're raising concerns from industry. We're raising concerns about actually delivering on what Parliament is seeking to do. Again, though, we don't see the.... We've raised our concerns with respect to the bill. At the end of the day, the Government of Canada will be required to enact these provisions. If we're not doing so in a way that is meaningful and provides a clear path forward, where are we and what are we doing?
I've just been raising concerns. The members of the committee may see this as delay. We're getting near the end of the bill. It's not much of a delay if it's been a few hours that we've been debating it. I know when Mr. Albas's party puts up 80 speakers on a bill, they say they need more debate, but when the Liberals want to talk about it for an hour or two, based on evidence from government officials on the issues with the bill, we're engaged in a horrific filibuster against the environment.
Again, perhaps it's the death of irony in this meeting, Mr. Chair, but I appreciate the opportunity to raise those concerns.
I see that Mr. Albas would like to respond, so I will yield the floor.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate Mr. Bittle's yielding of the floor for a whole host of reasons I don't have time to get into.
I would just say this. On the subject of irony, this government, I believe, has had legislation fly through to which changes have been necessary, but I would also point out that this is a piece of private members' business. There was debate in the House of Commons. There was, and it's an accelerated process, so if he doesn't like it, maybe he can speak to his House leader as to whether or not those changes in the standing order should happen.
Second, as a former parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, I do recall, with respect to temporary foreign workers, that there were many concerns by many parliamentarians from all parties in 2012, and the government quickly moved through the gazette process, right to the Canada Gazette, part III, skipping the normal process, because government has to be able to act on certain things when it is required to.
I think what Madam Pauzé has put here on a three-clause bill.... This is not like changes to an entire regime like the Safe Food for Canadians Act regime, which the Harper government put in place and which took many years because it materially changed the nature of how the regulator regulated. This is just a very minor change, adding to the CEPA regime.
Again, I would say that if members have problems with the way CEPA currently works, perhaps the government should get on with the 2017 review and the 80-plus recommendations that this committee made at that time, but which it has chosen not to bring before this Parliament.
Mr. Chair, I am simply going to say that we believe 12 months is enough time for a very minor change. [Technical difficulty—Editor] to do it, we'll be able to do it excellently. We know we have excellent public servants who want to see good things happen in the public interest.
Let's bring this to a vote so that we can move on and talk about committee business.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Seeing as there are no other speakers, we'll have the vote on this amendment.
The amendment says that “12 months after the day on which this Act receives royal assent”. It's an amendment to Ms. Saks's motion.
4:05 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Mr. Chair, just to make sure that we are on the same page, the committee will vote on the subamendment, regarding the 12 months, and after that they will vote on the amendment as amended.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
That's right.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
Wow, we have unanimity.
Now we vote on—
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
I know it's hard. You have a lot to keep track of there.
I wanted to propose an amendment. I don't know if I'd call this an amendment or a subamendment. I'm open to being told which is the correct terminology, but I'd like to propose an amendment to the amendment we just voted on, which would change 12 months to 24 months.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Maybe the legislative clerk could provide some guidance here.
Can we amend the subamendment that was just adopted?
4:10 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Yes, Mr. Chair, it's an admissible amendment, a subamendment.
4:10 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, I have to backpedal a little bit. The committee has made a decision on 12 months. There's no possibility to change this. I'm sorry about this.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We're talking about months now. Once we've decided on 12 months, we can't keep going on about the number of months. Is that what you're saying?
4:10 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Exactly. The committee has made a decision. The committee has decided 12 months and that is it. We cannot change the decision.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
That's right.
Now we'll vote on Ms. Saks's amendment as amended. Is that correct?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Okay, so we'll have a vote.
Madam Clerk, can you count the votes?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
I'm sorry, Chair, but can you clarify again? Are we voting on Ms. Saks's original amendment?