Environment Committee on Oct. 24th, 2023

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm delighted with my colleague's motion. Being a Montreal native myself, I grew up near the river and am aware of its importance. All Quebeckers agree that the river is a true gem and that this study is an important step toward protecting this Quebec jewel, among other things. In recent decades, much has been done to protect our rivers, streams and lakes, as a result of which I've seen increasing numbers of beaches previously forced to close opening up again.

I'm also concerned about certain problems, and I would like to know what else can be done. We can't deny that it's our responsibility to leave our children healthier aquatic environments than what we have now. That's our duty, which is why this study it is so important.

Being a Montreal native, I witnessed the dumping of wastewater into the river in 2015, although it actually started in 2014. This is a concern for all Quebeckers, particularly those living along the river.

I know that it's for Quebec to decide, but I'd like to know what would have happened if the City of Montreal hadn't received that authorization in 2015. What were the issues?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Pardon me; I have a point of order.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Yes, I don't understand what we're doing here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We are debating a motion.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

We're debating a motion, but the witnesses are here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, because debate might raise some questions.

I would like to point out that an authorization in 2015 has been mentioned twice, but from what I understand from Ms. Blais, it wasn't an authorization.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

My question concerns the Government of Quebec. As I understand it, Quebec's environment ministry gave the City of Montreal that authorization.

Was that in fact the case?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I don't know. Perhaps Ms. Blais could answer the question.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Whatever the case may be, the City of Montreal had options, such as repairing the infrastructure network. I'd like to get a clear understanding of the circumstances. Montrealers and everyone living along the river may not understand either.

Would you please tell us more about that, Ms. Blais?

[Caroline Blais]

Of course.

Going back to 2015, I'll start with the part about the Quebec government's authorization.

Yes, the City of Montreal was in possession at the time of permits issued by the provincial government. That was 10 years ago, and the federal regulations had been in force for only a few months. It wasn't yet clear to the municipalities that they had to contact the federal government to acquaint themselves with the regulations.

A stop-work order had been issued so the federal government could form a clear idea of what was going on in Montreal.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, is this—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, this is extremely relevant, Mr. Mazier, to Mr. Deltell's motion, and I'm going to listen to Madam Blais.

[Caroline Blais]

The other part of the question concerns what happened and the city's choices. The City of Montreal had some work to do because the pipes where all the sewers converged were damaged. A lot of debris had built up and the city had to discharge water in order to clear the pipes and remove the debris.

The city had its works planned at the time, had all the necessary labour and equipment and was able, for example, to control the number of days to be allocated to the work. Failure to perform that work would have been risky because any breakage would have resulted in a spill in any case, and the city wouldn't know how much time was needed and wouldn't necessarily have the required equipment.

As regards the third part of the question, the final order, which the government issued under section 31 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, included conditions that the City of Montreal had to meet if it decided to proceed with the discharge. It wasn't an authorization to proceed with the discharge.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Please continue, Ms. Chatel.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

The department amended the waste-water regulations to permit certain repairs to the sewers, as you mentioned.

Would you please explain the reasons for the amendments to the regulations and the current state of those amendments?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

We are supposed to be debating the motion and whether we want to have the motion or not. If we're all in violent agreement, let's have a vote on it and let's continue with interviewing our witnesses who are here today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Well, I think—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

It doesn't matter if it's relevant or not. This is a committee discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Yes, but when we're discussing a motion, there is no time limit. Madame Chatel can take—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

We're supposed to talk amongst committee members, not with witnesses who happen to be here from the street.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I think the witnesses can enable us to make a more informed and enlightened decision. This is why I want them to stay.

Is this a point of order?

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

It's in response to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Well, I don't think I can entertain a response to Mr. Mazier's point of order.

It's your right to raise a point of order, Mr. Mazier. I acknowledge that.

Madame Chatel, could you finish with Madam Blais? Then, we have Mr. Mazier, Mr. Bachrach, Madame Pauzé and so on.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I still have a question. I'm asking my colleagues for a little patience. I want to make sure I really understand the nature of the motion that's been introduced.

I'd like to know whether, since that incident in 2015—

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I have a point of order.