Evidence of meeting #43 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 right.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Now, I'm just unclear on procedure, Mr. Chair. She's put a motion on the floor. Is that correct?
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
No, the motion as it is in your package was not moved. An alternate motion was moved, which is basically identical, except the word “uphold” is where the word “apply” was.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Okay.
Mr. Moffet previously spoke at this committee about the rights of future generations that we're trying to build into this bill, so can I speak to him again?
If the principle of intergenerational equity is the same thing we voted down earlier, I'd like his input on how his interpretation is different from what he spoke about earlier on respecting the rights of future generations and intergenerational equity.
December 9th, 2022 / 2:45 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
I'll start. I might need to be supported by my colleagues.
The basic difference I want to bring to your attention is the difference between giving a right to future generations versus putting an obligation on current decision-makers to account for the interests of future generations. Intergenerational equity refers to the latter concept in the way it's constructed in CEPA now, so it requires us when we make decisions today to consider the impacts on future generations. That's not the same as giving a right to a future generation.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Does that answer your question, Mr. McLean?
It does. Okay.
Is there anyone else?
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Chair, I'm curious on behalf of my francophone colleagues. The motion that was moved was moved in English and there was concern about translation and whatnot. I want to hear from those who are—
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
How do we work with that? Will that be taken care of?
Yes, the legislative drafters will use the appropriate French term.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Do we have an acceptable definition of “non-regression”? I've seen several different definitions of non-regression.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
That's a good question. Does anyone know specifically what that means?
Ms. May, do you have an answer to that question?
2:50 p.m.
Green
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Can you help us with the term “non-regression”?
Can you help us, Mr. Moffet?
