Environment Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is it long? Is it something that—

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

It is long.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Could you send it in writing to the clerk?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Chair, could we just take a quick pause—would that be all right?—so members can partake of some of the food that I ordered on your behalf.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Which you ordered well.

Yes, we'll do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The meeting is resuming.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

These are relatively minor changes to the honourable member's amendment. I will highlight where the changes are.

Under the proposed subsection:

Plan — priorities 73 (1) The Ministers shall, within two years after the day on which this section receives royal assent, develop and publish a plan

add the words “including timelines”, and it would continue:

(a) that specifies the substances to which the Ministers are satisfied priority should be given in assessing whether they are toxic or capable of becoming toxic;

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

It's all the same as what's there. The only changes are in proposed subsection 73(1), where we're just adding “including timelines”.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Yes, in proposed subsection 73(1), we add the words “including timelines”.

Then in proposed subsection 73(2) we add.... I'll read the whole sentence. It currently says:

(2) The plan shall also include the period after which the Ministers will review the plan.

We would add to that line “The period must be no longer than eight years.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

A written version was sent.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Terry, the only change is that last sentence there. Is that right?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

There's also a change to proposed subsection 73(1), in the first sentence, that would add “including timelines”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We don't have it yet.

Okay. We'll just wait for the written version.

We now have the subamendment, but it is only in English. However, we can reread it.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

It's very short.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Don't we have it in French?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The clerk received the subamendment only in English, so he cannot distribute it, but it will be reread.

Can you reread it, Mr. Duguid?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

The first line of the proposed subsection reads:

73(1) The Ministers shall, within two years after the day on which this section receives royal assent, develop and publish a plan

Then we add the words “including timelines”.

Proposed subsection 73(2) will now read, “The plan shall also include the period after which the Ministers will review the plan. That period must be no longer than eight years.”

The NDP amendment suggested five years. We've changed that to eight.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just to clarify.... The subamendment changes it from a proposed five-year review but also adds a timeline for when the plan has to be published. Effectively, you're clarifying how long the minister has to release the report and then extending...making it say, effectively.... Eight years after the report is released is the new timeline being proposed in the subamendment.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

That's my understanding, unless [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

There's a bit of confusion. We're going to suspend for a minute.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It's important to understand what is happening with the subamendment, so I invite the legislative clerk to explain it to us.

[Philippe Méla, Legislative Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to try to explain what the government amendment and the NDP amendment do at the same time. I would propose different writing for those, so that it reads like this, since it's a subamendment.

It is that the amendment be amended by, (a) adding on line 25, page 15, after the words “a plan”, the words “including timelines”; (b) that Bill S-5 be amended by adding on line 2, page 16, after the word “plan”, the words “That period must be no longer than eight years”; and (c) by deleting paragraph (a) of the amendment.

That paragraph deletes lines 1 and 2 on page 16 that the subamendment intends to amend. You can't have it removed and amend it afterwards, so we should remove that last part, which is paragraph (a) of the amendment. That will solve that problem and it will also solve the problem of Ms. Pauzé's amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I didn't know there was a problem with the amendment by Ms. Pauzé.

Is that pretty clear to everyone? Is there any debate on the subamendment?

I have Ms. Collins and Mr. Longfield.

Ms. Collins.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Maybe just to start, I just want to confirm that the additions to this will not impact future amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The answer is no.