Evidence of meeting #49 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 substances.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We have a straightaway, and we'll try not to get a speeding ticket.
Shall clause 23 carry?
(Clauses 23 to 28 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 29)
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
That brings us to clause 29 and PV-18.
Ms. May, please go ahead.
11:50 a.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is to continue efforts by the Green Party that have previously been defeated. Thank you for the support from the NDP and the Bloc on amendments to try to stop the splitting of schedule 1, and the removal of the title of the schedule as a list of toxic substances.
People may wonder why I'm continuing to bring these forward. Under the rules this committee created for me—which I still do not enjoy, and about which I never made any such request...I wish you would get rid of this motion—I do not have the power to remove my own amendments, even if I should choose to do so because they're obviously about to be defeated.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is about safer substitution.
I've spoken to this concept before, in order to ensure that when we recognize that certain substances are dangerous, we're not just replacing them with other dangerous substances—we are moving towards safer alternatives. You will see that the language says, “respecting preventive or control actions, including actions that lead to the use of safer or more sustainable alternatives”.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Chair, amendment BQ-9 is almost identical to amendment NDP-32, but we were proposing “more sustainable for the environment or human health”.
So I would like to move a friendly amendment to include the words “for the environment or human health” in amendment NDP-32; we can vote on it together.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
If I am not mistaken, you could move a subamendment on that instead.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Yes, but I think it would be easier for everyone if you read exactly what you want to insert in NDP-32, including punctuation.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
All right.
In Amendment NDP-32, after the words “that is safer or more sustainable”, I would add “for the environment or human health.” That's it.
Can I present my argument?
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I find that these two amendments, which are very similar, tighten up the list of toxic substances a bit. There's nothing political about it. It seems to me that there is no reason to oppose this, since we just want to tighten up what already exists.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I very much support the subamendment Madame Pauzé proposed. I just have a question for the clerk.
The substitution says that NDP-32 is replacing line 37 on page 24, whereas BQ-9 is amending line 2 on page 25. I wonder why there would be a conflict.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
I see. Either way, I very much support the direction Madame Pauzé is taking and appreciate the subamendment.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Is there any more discussion? No.
We will go to a vote on the subamendment.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Since amendment NDP-32 was adopted, amendment BQ-9 cannot be moved.
I now call the question on clause 29 as amended.
(Clause 29 as amended carries, on division)
(Clause 30)
Noon
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm moving this one. I won't speak too much about it. It is, again, about publishing within specified time frames. I think we can move forward to a vote.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I want to say that if NDP-33 passes, amendment BQ-10 cannot be introduced.
Does this suit you, Ms. Pauzé?
Noon
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Yes. It is only a matter of minutes or hours before we get to this amendment. However, we will vote for amendment NDP-33, because it is comparable to amendment BQ-10; the objective is the same and our intentions are the same.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Are we ready to vote on amendment NDP-33?
Did you speak to your...?