Environment Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Amendment PV-15 was just defeated.

Do you want to propose an amendment to clause 19?

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Go ahead.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I would just like the word “peut” to be removed, on line 29 in French. Instead of “peut préciser les initiatives”, it would say “précise les initiatives”.

The same amendment would be made in the English by removing “may”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Do we agree? It seems to be pretty straightforward.

I think we have unanimous consent for the wording to be amended.

(Amendment agreed to)

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We thank you.

We'll go to NDP-17 and Ms. Collins

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is a very straightforward amendment. It just adds the line:

and publish a plan with timelines

This is just an explicit requirement to ensure that there are timelines required, that there is a plan with timelines being published. I think it's a straightforward amendment that I hope most people can support.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Are there any comments? Is there any reaction to the tabling of this amendment? Shall we go to a vote?

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Congratulations, Ms. Collins. NDP‑17 is carried.

Who would like to propose G‑13?

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to propose G‑13. Again, it's referring to animal testing. Basically the motion would just amend clause 19 by replacing lines 37 to 41 on page 15 with the following:

the development and timely incorporation of scientifically justified alternative methods and strategies in the testing and assessment of substances to replace, reduce or refine the use of vertebrate animals.

It is just basically making it consistent with what we did earlier, that there's a requirement that the plan of chemicals management priorities address vertebrate animal testing as well. The text of this clause is not consistent with the language used in other provisions in the bill regarding vertebrate animal testing, so the three Rs—the “replace, reduce or refine”. We need to put it in this section as well. It's really just making it consistent to allow that to happen in the end.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Kurek.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you. For my own clarification, just so I understand.... I think we've all shown support for the intent to see animal testing phased out where “practicable”, which I think was the word used in the previous amendment.

I'm wondering if I can get the words defined maybe by Ms. Taylor Roy or the officials or both. It says “testing and assessment”. I'm just curious about understanding the difference between those two things. Are there reasons to define them as two separate things? I'm just wondering in the context of this amendment what “testing” means and what “assessment” means.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Sure. I can defer to the officials, but “testing” is obviously for whether substances are toxic or not or what the effect is. The “assessment” is in terms of the minimum quantities, so it's assessing the quantities and doing more of a full assessment on them. It's essentially the same thing; it's just expanding on it. However, if one of the officials would like to add and clarify that, that's fine too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Would any of the officials like to add to that, or was that a good explanation?

Mr. Carreau.

[Greg Carreau, Director General, Safe Environments Directorate, Department of Health]

Thank you very much.

Indeed, just to build on what MP Taylor Roy indicated, assessing isn't just looking at the toxicity of a chemical and its risk to health or the environment. There's also an element of validating new approaches and methodologies that would replace animal testing, and that is also the context in which testing comes into play.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Does anyone else wish to comment on G-13 before we vote?

Go ahead, Ms. Collins.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

With this amendment, again, there are things about it that I like. I understand that it's a bit of a housekeeping one, where it's putting it in alignment with the approach used elsewhere, but I do have some concerns about that approach. I think, given my opposition to the last amendment, I similarly see this changing some of the amendments by the Senate that were really trying to strengthen some of these pieces of animal justice, so I will be opposing it despite the addition of some valuable points.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Shall we go to a vote?

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 9; nays 2)

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Now that amendment G-13 has been adopted, we are moving on to amendment BQ-4.

Ms. Pauzé, go ahead.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

The amendment proposes to add, after line 41, the following:

(1.1) The plan shall include timeframes not exceeding five years for implementing the measures set out in the plan.

Through this amendment, we seek to ensure that the plan's measures will be implemented within a set time frame. We just want to avoid this dragging on indefinitely.

I have nothing further to add, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Would anyone like to put a question to Ms. Pauzé or make a comment?

As no one would like to speak, I will ask the clerk to proceed to the vote.

(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2)

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We now go to amendment NDP-18.

Ms. Collins, you have the floor.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

It is a different section, but it has the same intention. You'll notice that it requires the minister to “review the plan within five years after it is published and every five years after that.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Are there any comments or questions? Can we go to a vote?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to propose a subamendment, and I can read it out in its entirety.