Evidence of meeting #42 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
This is a private member's bill that is being introduced—
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
You just said that national strategies don't direct government action, so what's the point of a national strategy?
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
As I think we discussed in previous appearances, the idea of this national strategy is to catalyze and to bring parties together to develop a national strategy for flood and drought forecasting.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Then all of the government's national strategies ultimately may have no bearing on what the government does. Is that...?
You just said that national strategies don't direct government action.
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
In the way in which the elements of the strategy are included, the strategy must contain certain elements and the government must table the national strategy and report on its effectiveness.
Liberal
Will Greaves Liberal Victoria, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the officials for sharing some time with us this morning.
To clarify some of the intent behind my colleagues' questions, I'm wondering if you could specify in quite simple terms whether you would agree that the amendments proposed today would allow the government to develop a more comprehensive strategy for flood prevention and drought prevention.
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
Yes.
Liberal
Will Greaves Liberal Victoria, BC
Thank you.
Does this amendment, in your view, give officials like you better tools to do what this legislation is asking you to do?
Director General, Policy, Planning and Partnerships Directorate, Department of the Environment
Yes.
As my colleague outlined, as part of the assessments identified in the first three parts of the bill, it's possible that gaps will be identified that need to be addressed that are outside the flood forecasting service as mentioned here.
One example that was already mentioned is interoperability of data. It's entirely possible that in the course of the assessment, we would identify some gaps or challenges across provinces and territories and the federal government that may need to be addressed for this to happen. Broadening the strategy's language in this way will enable us to address some of these potentially fundamental issues that need to be addressed before there's a national flood forecasting capability.
Bloc
Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Lane, I share my colleague's concerns about what this strategy actually achieves; we've discussed this.
I'd like to understand one thing. In your opinion, from a legal standpoint, does the addition of “may take” make it optional, compared to the wording used initially? Was it certain that a proposal would be prepared?
Is my understanding correct?
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
Subsection 3(3) and paragraph 3(3)(d) state that the strategy must include measures. However, the use of “may take” reflects the fact that it is not yet known what gaps the strategy will identify. This provides flexibility to include reasonable measures.
Bloc
Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC
Okay. That said, do you agree that the current wording will necessarily lead to the preparation of a proposal to create a national service and system? That's a fact.
By adding the words “may take”, we may be opening the door to other options, but we can no longer be certain that the preparation will take place. Am I correct?
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
That's correct. If, according to the strategy, it is not necessary to create a proposal, then it will not be included if this wording is used.
Bloc
Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment
I don't know if you want to include more, but, as I said, this strategy was developed in collaboration with the provinces and territories, and it takes into account feedback from stakeholders and indigenous peoples. Therefore, it's best to leave some flexibility regarding the measures that will be proposed in the strategy.
Bloc
Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC
We are talking about a decentralized federal-provincial model. What I've heard—and I don't necessarily share this opinion—is that everyone who came to testify seemed clear on the fact that the preparation of a proposal followed a decentralized model. However, what you seem to be saying is that, ultimately, as public servants, you aren't sure that this is necessary or important.
Director General, Policy, Planning and Partnerships Directorate, Department of the Environment
Allow me to add a comment.
What we're saying is that we don't want to presume the results of the assessment that will be done based on what is described in paragraphs 3(3)(a), 3(3)(b) and 3(3)(c), if I'm not mistaken, and we want to leave the door open to a range of measures that could address the gaps identified through those assessments.
Bloc
Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC
I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying. The bill talks about “the preparation of a proposal for the establishment”. We haven't even reached the establishment itself yet, but simply the preparation of a proposal.
It's hard for me to understand why we wouldn't move forward by preparing a proposal. It seems like such a minimal and watered-down proposal to me. I admit I'm a little surprised this morning.
Director General, Policy, Planning and Partnerships Directorate, Department of the Environment
As my colleague mentioned, the idea here is to be more general in order to be able to address the gaps identified. The preparation of a proposal is still recommended, in particular, but, of course, it will move forward only if, according to the strategy, it is determined to be the measure to be implemented.
