Evidence of meeting #116 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
Yes.
I am a member from Quebec. Right now, it is really the caribou communities and the Quebec communities that are affected. Isn't that limiting? When the meeting takes place, there may be others.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
You're right. It is not limiting, but, since we are talking about the woodland caribou and this problem is happening in Quebec, it goes without saying that the witnesses will testify about their reality on their territory, the provincial territory.
That's why this is a provincial matter, not a federal matter. Why? It's because the realities are different from other....
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
Thank you very much. You've clarified the point I raised.
I understand very well that this issue is unfolding in Quebec at the moment. However, we have a federal piece of legislation. A member of the Quebec Parliament already knows that there is a Species at Risk Act and that it falls under federal jurisdiction.
Am I mistaken, Mr. Deltell?
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
I don't know. We may be getting lost in jurisdictional issues. The species at risk act does exist.
Liberal
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
That is a federal statute. Mr. Deltell is saying that it's not a federal statute.
Liberal
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
We are talking about the impact on communities in Quebec.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Even if the measure is taken within federal jurisdiction, it can have an impact on the ground—
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
Mr. Chair, that's not what I'm saying.
We fully agree that the impact of this decree, under federal law, is being felt in Quebec. As a member from Quebec, I was wondering whether such a decree had an impact on caribou outside Quebec. Right now, that is not the case.
I was just raising a point of clarification. My colleague has clarified everything, and I sincerely thank him for that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Yes, we are talking about Quebec communities.
Can we vote on Mr. Deltell's amendment?
Other members want to comment.
Mr. Boulerice, you have the floor.
NDP
Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
There are three main topics in this important discussion we're having today.
First is the protection and defence of workers.
Second is adequate consultation with the affected indigenous communities in the spirit of reconciliation. Moreover, on June 21, the Superior Court of Quebec ruled that the CAQ's Quebec government had not adequately consulted indigenous communities. We have to keep that in mind as well.
Third is our responsibilities for the protection of endangered species and other species at risk, and biodiversity.
I see that my colleague's amendment focuses on only one of those three topics, whereas we have responsibilities, as parliamentarians, to protect endangered species and biodiversity. There was a lot of rhetoric at COP15 in Montreal, but at some point, that must also apply in real life. Furthermore, not only does the amendment refer to only one of the three topics, but more importantly, it is somewhat redundant to what is already in the initial motion moved by the Bloc Québécois, which obviously talks about the impact on jobs and economic activities in a number of regions of Quebec.
So I could vote for or against the amendment, but I get the impression that it is not really relevant and that it adds nothing essential to the motion, which already takes into consideration the interests of the industry, the regions and the workers.
Liberal
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
Just very briefly, any species at risk or endangered species is entirely the jurisdiction of the federal government, and when caribou cross territorial and provincial borders, they don't have to surrender any papers or anything like that at the border. It's the same as with water pollution and air pollution: Caribou do not respect provincial and territorial borders.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Chair, I would just like to clarify something for my colleague Mr. Boulerice.
First of all, the reason it doesn't say caribou is that it already specifically mentions the animals under item i, where it says “the issues that threaten the caribou”. However, what is not addressed in the current motion is the issue of the emergency decree, and that is what we want to add to the arguments. So it's not redundant. It adds a reference to it being an emergency decree. Had the minister not been so aggressive and imperialistic in interfering in provincial jurisdictions with this decree, we may not have been here today. However, since we're talking about a decree, that's at the heart of the debate, so we want to add that reference.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
As I don't see any other raised hands, we can go to a vote on Mr. Deltell's amendment.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
Conservative