Evidence of meeting #12 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vehicles.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
You can do it now, Mr. St-Pierre. You can go forward with that if you want.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Thank you for allowing me the time.
I'll bring the subamendment. I'm glad that my colleague agreed with the assessment.
I'll bring a subamendment to replace the words, “Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency” with “Impact Assessment Agency of Canada”. That will be my subamendment.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Yes. I'm sorry. We're getting these motions quite last-minute.
It's to replace the words “Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency” with the words “Impact Assessment Agency of Canada”.
Liberal
The Clerk of the Committee Leif-Erik Aune
For reasons of scope, the subamendment must relate to the amendment. The only section that you can further amend is the section that Mr. Bexte proposed in amendment. Mr. Bexte proposed adding to the end of the motion to invite Dawn Farrell, the CEO of the Major Projects Office, to appear and provide a briefing before the end of November 2025.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that scope.
I would just like to ask if I can get Mr. Bexte's amendment in writing. I would love to be able to see that, and ideally in French, too.
The Clerk
I took notes in my own shorthand, sir. I understand that your amendment was to add to the motion, not to delete any words but to add, “and that the committee further invite Dawn Farrell, Chief Executive Officer of the Major Projects Office to appear and provide a briefing before the end of November 2025.”
I took that note in shorthand.
Liberal
Liberal
Bruce Fanjoy Liberal Carleton, ON
On this motion to include Dawn Farrell, I think Conservatives have made it clear that they would like to have the CEO of the Major Projects Office here on a regular basis. She's been here recently and will be here again soon, at some point.
I think what we're witnessing right now.... The future of the copper redhorse fish, which is a recognized endangered species, should not be subject to one person's schedule to come and appear before the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.
I oppose this amendment, simply because it will delay conversations that need to happen more promptly. I'd like us to go in that direction.
I'd be happy to hear further debate.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
I'd like to thank the clerk for drafting this very quickly, and for your patience in all this.
I have two quick questions for my colleague from Bow River.
First, you say “invited to appear”. It's a question of for how long. Could you speak to the length of the appearance?
Second, you say “provide a briefing”. I'm curious about what you mean by “briefing”. Is that a study? Is it a note? Can you describe your expectations a bit more as to the briefing? I'm sorry. These are clarification questions, but I feel language matters.
Thanks.
November 3rd, 2025 / 1:30 p.m.
Conservative
David Bexte Conservative Bow River, AB
Sure.
To respond quickly, it's a briefing in the style to which the committee has become accustomed: Come and speak to the questions that are posed. A typical segment would be an hour. I'd love to have her here for two hours—for the whole day.
Conservative
Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
To respond to Mr. Fanjoy's point, this is a species at risk. When it comes to protecting species at risk, we should be using every tool at our disposal.
One of those tools is the committee, so I support the motion.
Conservative
Gabriel Hardy Conservative Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC
I'll be supporting this motion as well. We must do everything we can to protect endangered species.
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
If it really could happen tomorrow, as Monsieur Bonin says, this committee is not the right tool for an injunction around the potential risk to an endangered species. It's 100% not the right tool. I think there are many other tools that could be explored.
In terms of the amendment, Mr. Bexte, you said in your response that it's typical of what we do in committee, which is to answer the questions we ask. I don't consider that to be a briefing.
If you really want Ms. Farrell to come and talk specifically about this issue, I think that something would probably have to be prepared around that, with details. She may not know the answers, because she is probably really high-level, with a big machine under her. I can envision it occurring as it did in the past visit, when questions were asked on all kinds of things about major projects, climate, Canada, etc.
I would encourage a refinement of the language or a reconsideration that this is potentially out of scope for this motion.
Conservative
David Bexte Conservative Bow River, AB
When we invite people to committee, they're always invited in context. They have five minutes of prepared time ahead. They can prepare appropriately for the context. That's good enough. Answer the questions at a high level. That's exactly what the committee is asking for.
There's a species at risk. This is important.
More importantly, we need to ensure, as this new reality or potential reality evolves, that we understand how this process is going to work and how all of these moving parts are going to interact. That's the nub of what we're getting at. There is an urgent issue that we can use as a case, and that's how we should proceed.
The wording stands in the amendment as proposed. That's it.