Evidence of meeting #25 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 health.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:10 p.m.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Environment
I don't know if my opinion is relevant in this situation.
6:10 p.m.
Liberal
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
That's why I put my question to Ms. Farquharson, since she's with Legislative and Regulatory Affairs. I thought she was the best person to answer.
Basically, should we guarantee rights to a healthy environment for all, or should we divide each right?
In Quebec, it's a quasi-constitutional right because of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
If I may, even though certain rights are set out in charters, we want to give ourselves analytical tools to ensure that those rights are respected. I think the nuance is there. That's my opinion.
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I totally agree with you, Mr. Chair. It's the regulations that must make it possible to apply the legislation properly.
Ms. Farquharson, could you expand on that?
6:15 p.m.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Environment
We try to use a number of tools in almost every societal issue we deal with.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I come back to Bill C-28, which states the right to a healthy environment and the protection of vulnerable populations. Do we not have tools there to deal with injustices?
6:15 p.m.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Environment
We have tools under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses.
I'd like to start out by picking up on a theme in your presentation. You talked a fair bit, Ms. Farquharson, about vulnerable populations. What struck me was the contrast between that and what we were hearing from Dr. Waldron when she talked about disproportionately affected communities. To me the term “vulnerable populations” makes it sound as if there's an inherent weakness that makes them especially prone to the impacts, whereas what I was hearing from Dr. Waldron was more that the sitings of these toxic sites are intentional policy decisions made by decision-makers.
I'm wondering if one unique contribution to this private member’s bill that Ms. Zann has brought forward would be the introduction and proliferation of different language around these communities that are disproportionately affected.
6:15 p.m.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Environment
That is a really good point.
I suppose we're at the beginning of these discussions as a society. Different language is being used to describe the same thing or slightly different things.
On the development of that definition of “vulnerable populations”, I might turn to David to describe where that came from, if that's of interest.
6:15 p.m.
Director General, Safe Environments Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Department of Health
Absolutely. If it's of interest, I can certainly provide elaboration on that.
Essentially what we did was we embarked on a consultation to get a sense of what exactly vulnerable populations are, from a Canadian perspective. We had the work that we do under CEPA and under the chemicals management plan. We established a vulnerable populations panel. We brought forward a range of different representatives who represented different groups of vulnerable populations. We listened to them. We heard them. We also looked internationally to get a sense of what other jurisdictions identified as definitions of vulnerable populations. We essentially then pulled together a consultation document that went out for discussion, in terms of vulnerable populations. That is, ultimately, how we landed on the definition that we currently have, or that is proposed, with regard to vulnerable populations.
The purpose behind that was to really get a sense of the different age groups and the different categories of Canadian people who could be vulnerable, and also get a sense, from an exposure perspective, of what this could mean.
6:20 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I appreciate the comments. I would argue, however, that, certainly from the description we've received from Dr. Waldron, they're not vulnerable; they're discriminated against. I think there's a marked difference between those two concepts.
This discussion really highlights for me why this bill makes such an important contribution to our understanding of how decisions around the environment impact communities that have been subject to systemic racism over time.
Maybe just shifting the focus a little bit, all of our witnesses are public servants and they look at these bills through a unique lens. Part of that is the practicality of implementing them and having the bills' contents reflect a change in the way the government makes decisions and in the way that government decisions are experienced by Canadians and by the environment.
When it comes to the contents of the bill, are there specific areas that you feel could be strengthened to make the bill more easily implemented by your department? That questions is for any of the witnesses or, I suppose, Ms. Farquharson.
6:20 p.m.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Environment
I can address that.
I would say that, in reviewing it, a few things struck us. When I think back to your point about vocabulary or terminology, “environmental justice” is possibly a term that's used in the bill, but perhaps that might be something....
I suppose there are other aspects [Technical difficulty—Editor]
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
There's not much time left. There's maybe just time for a comment, Mr. Bachrach.
6:20 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I appreciate the comments we received.
Perhaps I'll just ask Ms. Farquharson if she'd like to finish her thoughts, and I'll end with that.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
6:20 p.m.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Department of the Environment
I guess I can say that, in general, in bills it's striking a balance between being specific enough so that you know what you want to do but being flexible enough so that you don't end up in a situation of box checking or exploring avenues that aren't within the jurisdiction or that don't have longevity. You want to make sure that you have something that will last. Those are probably the key points.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We will go to a second round. Instead of five and two and a half minutes, we'll do four and two minutes.
We'll start with Mrs. McLeod, followed by Mr. Bittle.
