Evidence of meeting #1 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
As long as Ms. Collins doesn't mind me just kind of just being like a bull in a China shop with her motion, then I think we should just to do that so that everyone has certainty as to what we'll be doing first thing as a committee. The one thing I wanted to make absolutely clear, though, is that, regarding the routine motion that was passed in terms of witnesses, I believe that the environment commissioner would be treated somewhat akin to a government department. We're not going to be saying, “I want this assistant of the environment commissioner as a witness” because that's not the intent here. The intent here is to have the environment commissioner, and he can choose who he brings in.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Ms. Collins, would you agree to go ahead and move your motion before the subcommittee meets; then we can decide right away to invite the commissioner?
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Yes, I am. That sounds like a good path forward, and thanks to all of the committee.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Could you move your motion officially?
Just to repropose the motion—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Okay, good.
Would you like to propose your motion formally, and then we'll vote on it? There seems to be unanimous consent here.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I move:
That, for the second meeting of the committee, the committee invite the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to provide a briefing on the office and role of the commissioner and the 2021 Fall Reports of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, and that the meeting be televised.
(Motion agreed to)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Congratulations on proposing the committee's first adopted motion of the 44th Parliament.
Madame Pauzé.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will move a motion that follows up on what was done in the previous Parliament. All my colleagues have received it on their P9. I will give a short history for those who were not on the committee before the election. The first motion we dealt with was on electric vehicles, a federal carbon-neutral law, and other things. We also dealt with infrastructure. Witnesses appeared for four days. We studied the report for three days, but not full time. There was unanimity. Before the election was called, there were three days left for the minister to respond. During this period, the elections were called. All that was missing were those three days. Today, I ask the committee to consider the motion I will read. It is the most appropriate one that we have from the information we received from the clerks. I remind you that it was unanimous. I will read it to you.
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of zero-emission vehicles; That the evidence and documentation received by the committee during the 2nd session of the 43rd Parliament on the subject be taken into consideration by the committee in the current session; That the committee adopt the report entitled “The Road Ahead: Encouraging the Production and Purchase of Zero-emission Vehicles in Canada”, adopted during the 2nd session of the 43rd Parliament and tabled in the House of Commons on April 13, 2021; That, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request the government to table a comprehensive response to the report.
It is a matter of picking up where the work left off on April 13. The 120 days ended three days after the election was called. So it's just a matter of going back and giving the minister a chance to respond to us on this again. In any case, it was an election commitment by all parties. There is an urgent need to act, because these laws are being prepared everywhere. Manufacturers are not stupid; they can build in Ontario and send their vehicles to the United States. But Canadians do not have access, because in the United States there are laws in certain states that prevent them from doing so. So I am motivated by the urgency of the situation.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to offer my thanks to Madam Pauzé for bringing this forward. It was an excellent study, and I do think that it merits a response from the government. That's our way of making sure that the government is held accountable.
There is one question I would ask, Mr. Chair, and perhaps you can consult with the clerk. It's my understanding that we would need to have some sort of period for a dissenting report, whether or not any committee members want to submit. Maybe you could just check with the clerk whether that's the case.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
If I understand it, you want to reopen the report that we did in order to include a dissenting report.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
In any report that goes to the House of Commons, there's usually an opening for dissent. Whether a party chooses to do it...because it was an all-party—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I'm trying to understand. I've never been through this process before of reintroducing a committee report.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
My understanding from consulting on our side is that, any time you have a new report that's going to the House of Commons, it's just fair play; it's due process.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I understand. Did you already do a dissenting report on the last one?
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
No, but again, I'm a stickler for details, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
If this does happen again, then we would just simply ask for that same opportunity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Okay.
The issue is this—and you'll correct me if I've misunderstood—Madame Pauzé would like to get a response to the committee's report, which makes a lot of sense, but to do so we have to basically readopt the report and retable it in the House, which I think everyone is in agreement with. Because we're tabling the report, essentially, it's treated like a new report. In fact, we could change the whole thing if we wanted to, presumably, but Mr. Albas is asking that we allow for dissenting reports. This would be an amendment to the motion. We would have to vote on the amendment to allow for a dissenting report.
That's what we're debating now, and that's what we're going to vote on. Do we want to allow parties to—
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Just before we begin, Mr. Chair, the concern that we have is that, if this is used in the future, that would be waving the ability for any party to be able to have a dissenting report in it.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
We're not planning on putting in our own dissenting report. It's more about the process that's being used.
