Evidence of meeting #46 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.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Mr. Chair, could I suggest that we have unanimous consent, out of consideration, to amend this to what it was originally intended to be?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
This is a subamendment. It's not that Ms. May is not presenting PV-15.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
No, and I'm not trying to, in any way, change Ms. May's intended amendment.
She had intended to originally submit this amendment. There was a transcription problem, so her amendment was missing the first half of what she had intended.
Liberal
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
No. I'm presenting a subamendment to her amendment to return it to the original intention.
Liberal
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Mr. Chair, perhaps you'll allow me to say that I do hope that, out of generosity and in the spirit of good working together, even if members don't support the amendment itself, they will at least allow it to be fixed for the record to what it should have been.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Do we need to discuss the subamendment?
Yes, we have Ms. May.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
As you know, I find it really unfortunate that my rights are restricted in this way when I could normally have fixed this on the floor of the House at report stage, had this committee not passed the motion that restricts my rights.
I know that under the rules you've passed, I'm not allowed to speak to another member's subamendment, nor am I allowed to amend my own motion. That's why we're here. That's why the subamendment from Ms. Collins fixes something in PV-15 that needs fixing.
It's a very straightforward measure. It's just to say that, “Despite subsection 71(1), the Minister must exercise the powers under that subsection in relation to a substance and a product that” and then it replaces as it continues here. This is, again, about ensuring that we have adequate testing of toxic substances.
That's the framework of PV-15, and we did have a glitch in the way it was drafted.
I hope that all makes sense now.
Liberal
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
I would suggest, looking around the table, that there is unanimous consent to see the subamendment adopted.
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Thanks, Damien and all members of the committee.
In the interest of time.... I have described it. It's now fixed. It's before you in its proper form.
Although my and Laurel's previous efforts to make sure testing is mandatory and more complete.... This is basically a continuation of a framework of amendments put forward by the Green Party to make testing mandatory where existing information is insufficient.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Does anyone else want to speak to PV-15 or can we go to a vote?
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
I'm sorry, Chair. I just have a question for the officials.
Some concerns were raised in testimony about the administrative burdens of a few things. I am just wondering if the officials could give us some feedback on this amended amendment and whether or not it's solving something that needs to be addressed.
Laura Farquharson Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
Right now, if there is information missing to assess the substance, the departments use various tools. If there are information gaps, they might do the testing themselves. They might do monitoring and partnering with academia, or they might leverage data from other jurisdictions. They use the powers in this section to gather information and gather what they need.
The answer is that it's not clear that anything is broken here. I think by making it mandatory, you're creating a situation where you're asking for.... It's not necessary. That's what I would say.
There are two people from the science side of things on this call, so they might want to expand on that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I can't see everybody who is on the screen. Do any of the other officials want to speak to this?
Ms. Gonçalves, do you want to speak to it? Go ahead.
Jacqueline Gonçalves Director General, Science and Risk Assessment, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
Just very briefly and to reiterate what Ms. Farquharson said, in any instance where we feel data is missing to help complete a risk assessment, there are many mechanisms we can use, including requesting data from industry to complete those risk assessments.
Thank you.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
If I may, the department should not be troubled by an amendment that says that, if the information that is available is not sufficient, their answer is that they'll always find a way to make sure the information available is sufficient.
The amendment covers a circumstance that is plausible: that the information available is not sufficient. In other words, this poses no disruption to the department's response of how they'll always be able to find the information. They'll look at it themselves. They'll search out other researchers and academics—
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
This is just to say that, if they happen to find themselves in a situation where the information is not sufficient, it becomes mandatory.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Does anyone else want to speak to this amendment?
Shall we go to a vote?
(Amendment as amended negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Chair, I assume you are getting ready to put clause 19 to the vote, but I have a short amendment to propose.