Evidence of meeting #48 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, I'm just curious about where the additional amendment should go.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
NDP-30 is that Bill S-5, in clause 22, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 21 the following:
(3) The Minister shall include in the annual report required by section 342 a report on the progress made in developing the subsequent proposed regulations or instruments.
Again, this is around accountability and transparency.
Liberal
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Thank you very much, Chair.
This question is for the officials.
It's my understanding that the conversations around integrity, accounting and timelines are all somewhat interconnected, including when we had a segue into the debate on the amendment that will be moved next.
This one deals with the annual report, which is, to my understanding, a mechanism that currently exists.
I'm wondering if the officials could have an opportunity to outline the reporting and accountability mechanisms that currently exist. What would this change represent?
Could you comment on the conversation around having that two-year requirement for an update and whether or not there's an impact associated with that?
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I am so sorry. NDP-30 and NDP-31 are identical, and I had meant to move NDP-31. What I read out was the exact text for NDP-31. I'm wondering if we could have unanimous consent to remove NDP-30 and just deal with NDP-31.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you. We're on the same thing that I just read out. It's NDP-31.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
You read out NDP-31. Okay.
Is there any more debate on this? No.
We'll go to a vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
That brings us to your amendment, Ms. Collins.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you.
I'm wondering if I can direct the committee. At least in version 4 of our package, it's G-13.1 on page 88.1. This is for a clause that has already passed. It has a French version, and the amendment that I've put forward has only a few words that are different from this motion.
You'll notice that the line number and the page number are different, as well as the words dealing with a statement or an amended statement under subsection (1) or (2). This one, G-13.1, has “a statement under paragraph (1)(a)”.
The other difference would be at the very end of the paragraph. It says “time frame” in mine. It says “estimated time frame” in G-13.1. Then, of course, “the statement under paragraph (6)(b)” has been changed to “each of the proposed regulations or instruments”.
This amendment is almost identical to G-13.1. The parts that are changed are really just indicating the measures and the instruments used, rather than the risk management statement, which has to do with that time period between the draft and the final assessment, so it's the full suite of risk management tools.
I'm not sure if that helps with my French colleagues' interpretation of it, but there is a French version with just the topic changed, if that is helpful.
NDP
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Mr. Chair, even though it is a few words, it's still the issue that Mr. Deltell raised, so—understanding, of course, where Ms. Collins is coming from—I think we will have to stand the clause.
It is exactly the issue you mentioned, Mr. Deltell.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Mr. Chair, my legislative assistant has also sent a quick translation to the clerk. If that is in any way helpful, we could distribute it to the committee.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Can we pause for a moment, Mr. Chair, and take a small recess?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
The amendment is available in both languages now for everyone, so we can debate it and vote on it.
Go ahead, Ms. Taylor Roy.
Liberal
Leah Taylor Roy Liberal Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to ask Laura to explain a little bit about what's already been published in the annual report. We heard that with these risk management measures, there's already something being published in the annual report every year.
I don't want to add administrative burden onto the department for no reason if we can use the annual report that's already being published to meet these same objectives.
I'm curious if Laura could explain.
Director General, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Protection Branch, Department of the Environment
Yes, I think you've just passed an amendment that would explicitly require the annual report to provide that update on progress on these risk management instruments. That is where Parliament could hear about what progress is being made on the timelines that have been set out in the statement at the time the first risk management instrument is published on those subsequent instruments.
It is a question of whether you need to.... At this point, one method is saying that if two years have passed and you still haven't done all the risk management instruments, then you have to publish something in the Canada Gazette. The other method is that in the annual report, you will report in sum on the progress on all the risk management instruments.