Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to talk about division 9 of part 4, which removes the Parks Canada Agency's obligation to produce an annual corporate operations plan and the obligation of presenting an annual report on the agency's operations to be tabled before Parliament. It also changes the period between reports on the state of heritage areas and programs from two years to five years. We have another concern. Division 9 amends the act and increases the period between departmental reviews of management plans for national historic sites, national parks and marine conservation areas from five years to at least 10 years.
I am going to talk about my own personal experience. Unlike Mrs. Glover, I am not a police officer, but I was a scout when I was younger. I appreciated the parks a great deal, and they were part of my childhood. So parks protection is very important for me. In my former life, I wasn't a soccer mom, but I was a scuba diving instructor. Marine conservation areas are also very important to me. The period between departmental reviews, intended to inform the ministers about what action to take, is changing from five years to 10 years. A delay is also being added between the drafting of the report and the government's actions. I see a problem here.
If we really want to protect the environment, which is very important to me, we need to monitor what is going on in the parks and marine areas. Despite the explanations I've received, I don't think changing the period between reports from five to 10 years is fostering environmental protection.
Furthermore, the Auditor General will not receive an annual report from Parks Canada. That is really moving in the direction of a lack of transparency and accountability. Why remove that protection and attack the environment? The justifications I've received are not enough. That is why we will vote against division 9.