Evidence of meeting #39 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 video is available from Parliament.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you, Ms. Pauzé.
We'll now vote on amendment BQ‑23.
(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We go now to BQ-24.
Madam Pauzé.
5:55 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you.
Regarding amendment BQ‑24, you won't be surprised to hear me repeat that the body's role must be strengthened and consolidated. Right now, what we have bears no relation to what exists in other places, where climate governance works. It doesn't work in Canada. We've been told this a number of times. We're back to say that it must be strengthened.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
I just want to check with the officials whether there were any translation issues or whether we got that properly done on this one.
5:55 p.m.
Vincent Ngan Director General, Horizontal Policy, Engagement and Coordination, Department of the Environment
We just want to confirm that there is no difference in meaning given that federal legislation is co-drafted, meaning that both versions are being drafted concurrently, in English and French, at the same time, and not translated from one language to another. It means that both language versions of a statute are drafted. Therefore, there is no variance or difference in meaning.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We'll go to the vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1)
PV-29 was withdrawn.
We go now to BQ-25.
Madam Pauzé.
6 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Once again, with amendment BQ‑25, we're looking at the independent expert committee. I certainly understand based on the voting pattern so far how the vote on this amendment will turn out. Again, effective climate governance is being rejected here.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you.
We'll proceed to the vote on amendment BQ‑25.
(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1)
We go now to BQ-26.
Madam Pauzé.
6 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
We believe that amendment BQ‑26 is an important addition. Of course, the name “independent expert committee” should be replaced with the name that prevailed.
This is an important addition, which relates to the financial resources available to the committee, or advisory body. This committee must have sufficient resources to hire staff and must operate as a true public organization. The committee's work can't be accomplished without considerable resources. The lack of resources in the office of the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development has already been discussed in our committee meetings. The committee created by Bill C‑12 must be given the financial resources to carry out its mission.
Once again, I want to say that the United Kingdom's committee accomplishes its mission with an administrative support structure at the organizational level, with analysts and researchers. The United Kingdom's committee has 35 full‑time staff who help the committee. A support team is important. It's necessary to support these roles. The roles provide the technical, scientific, social and economic expertise required to sort out the issues, with sufficient and protected resources so that the team can determine and carry out its own work program.
Again, in the United Kingdom, where climate governance is effective, 35 people can help this committee. What will happen with amendment BQ‑26?
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Unfortunately, based on the same logic as amendment BQ‑21, amendment BQ‑26 is out of order. I can read you the advice that I received, word for word. Basically, the reason is that, if the House passes this amendment, it takes over a financial power. Yet the House can't do that, according to the rules.
The amendment is out of order.
6 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I'm still wondering why the Bloc Québécois amendments were allowed to appear on the list of amendments and why amendment BQ‑26 wasn't ruled out of order earlier.
Moreover, I just want to remind you that amendment BQ‑21 recommends that the Governor in Council, rather than the minister, fix the remuneration. This doesn't involve the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, but the Governor in Council. In my opinion, the amendment was in order.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
If you wish, you may appeal the chair's decision. We'll then vote on this.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Amendment PV‑30 has been withdrawn. We'll now move on to amendment BQ‑27.
You have the floor, Ms. Pauzé.
6:05 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I'll move amendment BQ‑27, because we value the effectiveness of the process. To ensure effectiveness, we must have independent experts who are separate from the minister.
6:05 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Chair, because we have called the advisory body the net-zero advisory body in several [Technical difficulty—Editor], I'm wondering whether all of a sudden referring to it as the “independent expert committee” is going to cause confusion or technical issues in the interpretation of the bill. Perhaps—
6:05 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Sure. Maybe Mr. Moffet could clarify.
I know there are a number of amendments that deal with the same thing. It seems to me that referring to the body as two things within the same bill would, at the very least, be confusing and could possibly cause issues in its interpretation.
6:05 p.m.
Director General, Horizontal Policy, Engagement and Coordination, Department of the Environment
Go ahead, John.
June 9th, 2021 / 6:05 p.m.
John Moffet Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
To be clear, there are actually two terms now in the bill. There's the lower-case “advisory body” which has still been retained in a number of provisions, and then there's the new formal title that's been given as a result of the amendment that was passed. I can't tell you that there would be a definitive legal problem, but I think your observation that introducing a third term might create some confusion.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I don't want to belabour a point, Mr. Chair, but I believe we've decided that on all parliamentary committees, even when we are virtual, we want to have neutral backgrounds. I take no exception to what Mr. Moffet has up, but we should have a consistent rule that's applied across all virtual committees.