Environment Committee on June 16th, 2026

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

The abandoned vessels problem is an issue right across the country. It's more of an issue in British Columbia. I couldn't give you an accurate number on how many vessels are identified as abandoned. I can tell you that I think it's a few thousand, but I bet you the actual amount is 10 times that, probably.

It's a bigger issue on the west coast, because we have milder winters and more examples of people who live there throughout the winter. There are more pleasure crafts, whereas on the east coast you have more commercial harvesting vessels. It's a bit different. There are certainly issues on the east coast as well. A colleague from Îles-de-la-Madeleine was bringing up pictures, showing me some examples in his riding. It's just that the state of these vessels is different. There are more commercial vessels on the east coast and more pleasure crafts on the west coast. I would venture to say that there are probably some issues in the Arctic as well.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

Oftentimes, people will see an opportunity. I remember watching The Beachcombers when I was growing up. Is there a beachcomber opportunity for enterprising people with the right equipment and skill to help solve this problem?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I love that example, because that show was filmed in my riding, in Gibsons. It's the most-watched Canadian show of all time.

I think there's absolutely an opportunity to do that. Part of the challenge right now is that you have to know whether a vessel is actually abandoned. You have to give the person 30 days' notice before you can do anything about it.

There's a better way of dealing with these problem vessels. Right now, in our program, they take out individual boats. It's very expensive. If you had someone deal with all the abandoned boats in one region at one time, it would be much more affordable. That could be a fix in the program design, going forward. There's certainly a market for that, because there are valuable materials that can be recovered. Right now, though, we don't have the resources or the proper disposal facilities to deal with it.

[Bruce Fanjoy, Liberal, Carleton, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much, Mr. Fanjoy.

Thank you, Mr. Weiler, for your time.

We're going to suspend very quickly to switch the officials. If everyone stays in their seats, we'll probably get through at least one opening statement, if not two, before we have to vote.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

We're going to start this up again.

We have just enough time for our first speaker. I will introduce the witnesses by department as we go by speaker.

First, we have, online, Josée-Annie Verville, director, monitoring and compliance, Canadian Coast Guard.

Josée-Annie, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Josée-Annie Verville, Director, Monitoring and Compliance, Canadian Coast Guard]

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

My name is Annie Verville and I'm director of monitoring and compliance at the Canadian Coast Guard. Thank you for inviting me to participate in the discussions on Bill C‑244.

The powers conferred under the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act are shared among the Minister of Transport, the Minister of National Defence and the Canadian Coast Guard. The Coast Guard handles cases involving hazardous vessels, while Transport Canada is responsible for impacts on navigation, as well as abandoned and derelict vessels. We both work closely with all other levels of government, as well as with indigenous and coastal communities, since certain areas where problematic vessels are found involve multiple jurisdictions. We also work closely with our colleagues in the small craft harbours program. This program falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Fisheries when vessels are in a designated harbour.

The Coast Guard acts as a single point of contact for reports of problematic vessels submitted to the Government of Canada, receiving reports on vessels of concern. Each vessel is assessed based on the risk it poses to the marine environment, the public and infrastructure. The vessel is then added to the Government of Canada's national inventory, a publicly accessible registry that is regularly updated and available on the Canadian Coast Guard's website. If the vessel poses no danger, the case is transferred to our colleagues at Transport Canada.

The Canadian Coast Guard works closely with vessel owners to ensure they fulfill their responsibilities when their vessels pose a hazard. We also hold owners accountable, including by imposing administrative monetary penalties when they fail to comply with orders. Canada applies the “polluter pays” principle, under which those who cause marine damage, such as pollution, are responsible for the costs of removing the hazard and restoring the site. If the polluter is unable to take direct action, the Canadian Coast Guard intervenes to address the hazard and then recovers the costs from the owner or their insurer.

The intent of Bill C-244 aligns closely with the Canadian Coast Guard's responsibilities regarding hazardous vessels. The provision targets risky vessel transfers at the point of sale, which will help reduce future cases of hazardous vessels or wrecks. It aims to discourage owners from transferring vessels to individuals who cannot manage them responsibly. Preventing problematic transfer could lower the number of vessels requiring costly intervention, monitoring and remediation, sometimes at the cost of the Canadian taxpayer.

The cost of removing and disposing of hazardous vessels can range from tens of thousands to several million dollars, depending on the vessel's size, condition and location, and the presence of pollutants and hazardous materials. The process is complex due to the need for the safe and environmentally sound management of these substances, limited access to appropriate recycling or disposal facilities, and the high cost of transporting vessels, particularly in remote or northern regions.

The Canadian Coast Guard has clear equities in this bill, as we regularly observe cases of irresponsible owners selling hazardous vessels at a low price to avoid the costs associated with proper end-of-life disposal. These types of transactions often lead to vessels being abandoned or becoming hazardous, which creates environmental, safety and financial risks. These sales can also make it more difficult to find the responsible owner, resulting in delays to enforcement and remediation actions under the WAHVA.

While the Canadian Coast Guard supports the intent of the bill, enhancing the enforceability of its provisions is key to realizing its purpose. As drafted, we have identified the following considerations.

The bill may be interpreted as requiring owners to determine whether a prospective buyer has the capacity to manage a vessel appropriately. In practice, this could present challenges, as it may involve assessing the likelihood of future actions, such as the potential for vessel abandonment, and evaluating factors such as intent and financial means. This may raise questions about the extent to which an owner could be held accountable for the subsequent action of another party.

The provisions may present practical challenges from an enforcement perspective as well, including demonstrating what an owner knew about a buyer's circumstances or intentions and establishing a clear connection between that knowledge and eventual outcomes, such as a vessel becoming wrecked, abandoned or hazardous.

Thank you. I welcome any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much.

We're going to suspend briefly so we can diligently vote, and then we will resume.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

I call the meeting back to order.

Thank you, everybody.

Thank you to all of our officials for being with us this afternoon as we discuss Bill C-244, an act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, and the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act.

We've already heard from Josée-Annie Verville from the Canadian Coast Guard. I'd like to introduce the rest of the witnesses who are here today.

From the Department of the Environment, we have Stephanie Lane, executive director of legislative governance; Daniel Wolfish, director general of environmental protection operations; and David Taillefer, national manager of marine programs.

From the Department of Transport, we have Sean Rogers, executive director of legislative, regulatory and international affairs; Michelle Sanders, executive director of navigation protection and environmental programs; Paula Vieira, director general of environmental policy; Colin Henein, director of marine environmental policy; and Joanne Weiss Reid, director of operations and regulatory development.

Thank you all very much for being here.

I believe we have two more opening statements.

We'll go next to Ms. Lane from the Department of the Environment. The floor is yours for five minutes.

[Stephanie Lane, Executive Director, Legislative Governance, Department of the Environment]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Honourable members, as introduced by the chair, my name is Stephanie Lane. I am accompanied by my colleagues Daniel and David.

Thank you for the invitation to discuss Bill C-244.

As its sponsor has stated, if passed, Bill C‑244 will amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. The parts of the act that would be amended are administered by Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Before discussing the amendments that the bill would make to the act, I will briefly describe the current disposal at sea regime established under the act.

The disposal at sea provisions establish a comprehensive framework for protecting the marine environment. They prohibit the disposal of waste or other matter from ships, aircraft, platforms or other structures at sea. The provisions of that act do not apply to land-based activities. The act sets out over 10 specific prohibitions related to disposal at sea, including in subsection 125(1), which this bill proposes to amend. These prohibitions can be lifted only by permit, and only for a small, limited set of low-risk wastes listed in schedule 5 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Returning to the amendment in the bill before us, we understand from the sponsor that the intent is to clarify that disposal at sea under subsection 125(1) is a strict liability offence and, therefore, does not require proof of intent. The proposal, as MP Weiler indicated in the last hour, is intended to prevent a recurrence of the not guilty finding in the 2018 MV Marathassa decision, which stemmed from a 2015 oil spill in Vancouver's English Bay.

Indeed, disposal at sea offences in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, as with most offences under the act, are already interpreted as strict liability offences. This is made clear by the availability of the due diligence defence in section 283 of that act. It is a defence that is available only for strict liability offences. While the court in the MV Marathassa case does not appear to have addressed this section, I can confirm that the department treats the disposal at sea offences under the act as strict liability offences.

Thank you, members of Parliament. I believe my colleagues will also make a few opening remarks. We will be happy to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lane.

Now we will go to Mr. Rogers, from the Department of Transport, for five minutes.

No. I'm sorry. It's Ms. Vieira. Okay.

Go ahead. Thank you.

[Paula Vieira, Director General, Environmental Policy, Department of Transport]

Thank you, Chair and committee members. Good afternoon.

My name is Paula Vieira. I am the director general of environmental policy at Transport Canada.

My team was responsible for the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act and helped create the national strategy to address wrecked and abandoned vessels. The pillars of this have guided Transport Canada and the Coast Guard's work to address this issue.

I am joined here today by my colleagues from the navigation protection program and marine safety and security at Transport Canada, as well as by operational colleagues from the Coast Guard, who are responsible for the implementation and enforcement of portions of this act. They will all be available to take your questions.

Since 2016, the Government of Canada has been advancing the national strategy to clean up existing wrecked and abandoned vessels while working to prevent the introduction of new ones.

For example, since 2016, Transport Canada has removed almost 900 wrecked, abandoned or dilapidated vessels from Canadian waters, and since 2019, the department has also issued orders or warnings to more than 450 owners, as well as issuing three administrative monetary penalties.

Additionally, the government has made enhancements to its pleasure craft licensing systems that will allow for better owner identification and hold owners accountable for their vessels.

We are pleased to be here today to discuss the vessel-related provisions of Bill C‑244.

Transport Canada is aware of concerns relating to the transfer of end-of-life vessels from an owner or seller to a buyer, who is not able to maintain, operate or dispose of the vessel in accordance with the act.

Transport Canada understands that this bill would prohibit the transfer of a vessel from a buyer who “lacks the ability, resources [and] intent to maintain, operate or dispose of” it in accordance with the act.

The department has reviewed the text of the bill, which we understand is focused on the transaction between the buyer and the seller and would not involve the government in the process of determining ability, resources and intent, which would not be feasible.

Transport Canada has identified four main considerations that the committee may wish to take into account in its study of the bill.

First, it would be challenging for the seller to determine the buyer’s ability, resources and intent, as this would require access to information that is not normally in the public domain. As currently written, the bill does not require the seller to disclose the condition of the vessel to the buyer.

Second, the proposed amendments would present enforcement challenges, as they would necessitate proving the seller’s knowledge or recklessness and assessing the buyer’s ability, resources or intent. These concepts are inherently subjective and may lead to differing interpretations and disputes.

Third, the requirement for a seller to assess a buyer’s abilities may result in inconsistent or risk-averse decision-making, potentially leading to differential treatment of certain individuals or groups. This could raise concerns from a human rights perspective.

Fourth, the provision would apply to all vessels regulated by the act, from small motorized pleasure crafts up to and including the largest commercial cargo ships. This might create an undue burden for Canadians, especially for vessels that may pose a lower risk of becoming derelict or abandoned following a sale.

Transport Canada remains committed to advancing efforts with our partners to protect Canada’s coastal waters from the consequences of vessels of concern. We look forward to answering your questions about this bill as we support the work of the committee on this important issue.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you very much, Ms. Vieira.

We will now go to questions by the committee. We will begin with Mr. Arnold for six minutes.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank all of the department officials for being here.

It's interesting to see how this bill crosses over three different departments of government. We saw that in our studies at the fisheries committee on derelict and abandoned vessels.

This is a question for either Ms. Verville or Ms. Lane. Are there any other statutes in Canada that require the seller to verify or qualify the capacity of the buyer to maintain property or tangible assets?

[Colin Henein, Director, Marine Environmental Policy, Department of Transport]

I'm sorry to answer that I don't know to the first question that you're asking, sir. We haven't done a full study of all the other legislation. We would have to look into that question.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Okay, so it can't be verified.

We're all concerned about the potential damage caused by derelict, abandoned and wrecked vessels. We want to see this cleaned up, but we want to see it done efficiently and, most of all, effectively.

Currently, the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act, or WAHVA, has loopholes. People are finding ways of avoiding accountability. If we're creating more legislation, we want to make sure that it is both enforceable and workable for average Canadians.

I've heard two different pieces of testimony saying that there are concerns and challenges regarding the enforcement. I believe it was Ms. Verville, from the Coast Guard, who spoke about the challenges of enforcement.

[Josée-Annie Verville]

I would like to direct the question to my colleagues at Transport Canada. On the amendment as written, Coast Guard currently does not have any enforcement role.

[Joanne Weiss-Reid, Director, Operations and Regulatory Development, Department of Transport]

I am Joanne Weiss Reid, director of protection of navigation, and I'll talk about how we do enforcement.

We have a graduated approach to enforcement. A vessel identified as hazardous would go through the Canadian Coast Guard. They would then do their assessment to see if it was hazardous. If it was not hazardous, it would come to Transport Canada. We deal specifically with abandoned vessels and dilapidated vessels and wrecks. If a vessel is identified, we make attempts to identify the owner as the first step. We engage either the owner, if we know the owner, or our stakeholders—community and indigenous groups and the municipality—to find out more information about the vessel.

In the event that there was a vessel owner—

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

Would this bill improve that?

[Joanne Weiss-Reid]

With this bill, it would be aligned with the accountability—with the owner or the seller of the vessel—but in terms of vessel ownership, I might turn that over to my colleague.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies, BC]

It sounds like this could be a complicated question, so perhaps you could provide that in writing.

I'd like to pass the rest of my time over to Mr. Leslie.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

This is a fascinating topic. I have learned more than I expected to so far. The government doesn't seem to support this bill, which is interesting. Various departments seem to take issue with that.

All of that is to say, Madam Chair, that I would like to move the motion that I had put on notice on June 11 in the aftermath of the net-zero body members who appeared before the committee and talked a lot about the challenges of the functionality of the net-zero advisory body. I went ahead and had a look at the original act that enabled that body to function. It was the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, which they criticized throughout that testimony.

All of that is to say that, importantly, within that act, there is a provision that a review of the provisions and the operation of the act be undertaken five years after the act comes into force. That happened to be on June 29, 2021. My intention with this motion, which you should all have in your committee binder, is that immediately following the disposal of Bill C-244, once we come back, the committee look at the government's progress towards the 2026 interim objective, the 2030 target and the 2035 target, the transparency and reliability of the government’s emissions modelling, costing and reporting, and whether amendments to the act are required; that the committee hold three meetings on the topic, including inviting the Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development; and that the chair issue a press release inviting stakeholders and interested Canadians to provide written submissions to the committee.

It just so happens that the five-year timeline for statutory review is something that this committee should undertake within five years, or at least very soon after. I would like to move this motion today, so that immediately after finishing up with this bill in late September, we get on with the important review of this legislation.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you, Mr. Leslie.

Mr. Bexte.

[David Bexte, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this. I think it's very important that this take priority in our studies. The statutory reviews serve a very important purpose in ensuring that legislation remains whole, that legislation remains relevant, that legislation fulfills its intended functions and that it maintains its responsiveness to a changing world.

This act needs to be looked at. It's relevant to today as much as any other act or any other issue that is currently on our docket to study, and it should take some priority. We need to be able to ensure that it is fulfilling its purpose. We need to ensure that there is appropriate accountability and the opportunity to change and make suggestions to the act so that it doesn't become stale and so that we don't become victim to unintended consequences—not just we here, but Canadians in general across the country. Probably one of the worst things we could do would be to be complacent about our duties to attend to legislation and make sure we maintain its relevance over time.

For those reasons among many others, I fully support this motion. It behooves all on this committee to vote to support this motion, when it comes time, and to proceed to this with all haste.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shannon Miedema]

Thank you, Mr. Bexte.

Mr. St-Pierre.