Environment Committee on June 7th, 2021

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, there was a bit of a lag there. I certainly appreciate the opportunity to speak on this and to ask a few questions.

First of all, I'd like thank Madam Pauzé for giving a full explanation of what the legislation is trying to do.

I'd like to ask Mr. Moffet.... I believe you'd be the best person to answer the question.

Again, if you look at subclause 20(1) on the establishment and mandate of an advisory body, it doesn't mention the word “independent”. What would the change be if BQ-18 was adopted to include in this subsection, “There is established an independent expert committee whose mandate is to provide the Minister with advice”?

[John Moffet]

I'm not sure that there's significant change as a result. It would emphasize the independent nature of the committee, but the committee as described is something that is established under law. Its performance and advice cannot be dictated by the minister, the government or Parliament.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Does it change...?

The next subclause—again, if I'm going a little too far ahead, that's fine; we can address it later—says:

(2) The Minister may determine and amend the terms of reference of the advisory body.

That, to me, seems to say that the minister can, given his mandate, do whatever he wants. Does adding the word “independent” really change any of that? Usually when something's independent, the minister just can't switch the terms of reference around.

[John Moffet]

I'm not sure I agree with that. The independence of a committee relates to its ability to conduct studies and provide whatever information and advice it collectively deems appropriate. A committee always has terms of reference.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Let me ask this so that I'm abundantly clear: By adding the word “independent”, as Madam Pauzé has done, does that change the committee whatsoever?

[John Moffet]

I think the objective of the amendment is to emphasize that there is an expectation that the committee's advice will be independent.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

However, does it actually do anything that's different from subclause 20(1) as it's read in Bill C-12 currently?

[John Moffet]

Again, you're essentially asking a legal question. I don't think there's anything in subclause 20(1) that indicates that the committee's advice will not be independent, and there's certainly nothing in the bill that indicates that the minister can influence or dictate what advice the committee provides.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

I think the terms of reference can change what kind of advice the minister wants to hear—by just changing the terms of reference—but that's debate on another area.

Mr. Chair, I will just hang back and listen to see what other members have to ask about Madam Pauzé's amendment. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

Mr. Redekopp.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One of the things that I heard Madam Pauzé say—and hopefully this was correct—is that she wants to strengthen this area to compel the minister and not just.... I can't quite remember the words that she used. However, essentially, the idea is that this would strengthen it to make the committee more powerful towards the minister and maybe force some things to happen.

I guess maybe, Mr. Moffet, you could answer this question: Does the amendment, in your view, compel anything of the minister, or does it just, more or less, clarify some things in the existing legislation?

[John Moffet]

I don't think the amendment changes the minister's obligations in any way.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

It's mostly just a tweaking of the words, then. It's not really changing the meaning of this section. Is that what you're saying?

[John Moffet]

That's correct.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Albas asked about “independent”, but I guess I'm going to ask about “expert”. Does that change anything either?

[John Moffet]

I'm seeing that Madam Pauzé wants to jump in here.

I think the answer to that likely depends on other amendments that would determine what is meant by “expert”. In other words, an expert in what?

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

That was my next question. It needs to be defined somewhere what exactly “expert” means.

What you're saying is that we need to define “expert” if we're going to have it in here and that may or may not change the intent of the legislation. Am I understanding that correctly?

[John Moffet]

Yes.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

In other words, “expert” isn't defined at the moment. Is that correct?

[John Moffet]

It's is not defined by this amendment, per se.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

I'll leave it at that for now, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Madam Pauzé.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yes, Mr. Moffet just sort of answered Mr. Redekopp's question. The amendments form a whole. We are proposing amendments, but there will be follow‑up to those amendments. A little further on, we will see what the role of the independent expert committee is.

Where I disagree less with Mr. Moffet is on the difference. He doesn't think it makes a big difference, but it makes a big difference for us because the bill talks about an advisory body. This organization will consult with the general public, organizations and industry members. However, for us, it isn't just about consultations. The expert panel will consult, but then it will analyze them and advise the minister. The two roles are very different.

This is what the witnesses told us; you have to distinguish between the two roles, the advisory role to the minister and the consultation role. That's what the amendment is intended to do, and I think it adds a lot to clause 20 and really strengthens it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Albas, you have the floor.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Perhaps I have failed to do this over the time we've spent together at clause-by-clause. Hopefully, I can ask for the indulgence of Madam Pauzé.

I clearly understand (a) and I've asked Mr. Moffet for his views on (a).

In regard to your changes to (b), by replacing line 13 on page 8 with the following.... It really is just activities “related to achieving the targets set under subsection 7(2)”. Can I ask why you feel that is a better fit than what is currently envisioned in the bill, where it states, “activities related to achieving net-zero emissions”?

Could you tell us the difference, please?