Evidence of meeting #24 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was structures.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
I just want to advise the committee that the acceptance of this amendment to clause 2 will be consequential to clauses 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, basically along the same lines. The amendment will go up to and include clause 7. I just wanted you to be aware of that.
Is there any further comment?
Mr. Keddy.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
I think Mr. Blais was asking for the entire clause to be read to see how the change fits into it.
In English, the entire clause would read:
“heritage lighthouse” means a lighthouse designated as a heritage lighthouse under this Act, and includes any related building that is included in the designation.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
My interpretation of that is the same as yours.
Is that okay, Mr. Blais?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
Okay. I wasn't sure if he was agreeing or not. He wasn't nodding his head.
Are there any other comments or questions on the amendment to clause 2?
(Amendment agreed to)
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
All those in favour of clause 2 as amended.
(Clause 2 as amended agreed to)
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
You can go as fast as you want, Mr. Chairman, but you definitely can't go as far as I hear. There's a delay between the moment you ask who is voting nay and what I hear. Give me the time to understand what the interpreter says. I sort of understand what you mean, but I want to be sure I've clearly understood. So there will definitely be a delay between the moment you ask me for my opinion and the moment I express it.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
I look forward to our hearings in Newfoundland on Monday. It should be an interesting day.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
I'm down to about 60 kilometres now. Anyway, we'll go ahead to clause 3.
Mr. Blais.
(On clause 3--Purpose)
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Thank you.
I'm speaking once again to the witnesses. The question somewhat concerns the bill as a whole. We're talking about Clause 3, but, in this case, it could be any clause. I'd like someone to give me more details on the amounts that were presented to us concerning the transfers and eventual maintenance. I would like someone to tell me what the bill entails in financial terms for the department and also what the bill as amended means in financial terms. I imagine that will take some time. The transfers won't be made from one day to the next.
The transfers will also concern the organizations that will eventually become the new owners, and I would like to know what that entails for them as well in financial terms. I suppose an estimate has been made. I've already heard some figures, but I want to make sure I understood correctly.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
Sorry to interrupt you, Monsieur Blais; we can come back to your question.
We passed the first amendment in clause 2, but there's also a second amendment in clause 2 that's consequential to the first amendment. Were we passing that automatically, or do we pass that separately?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
We just did. All the amendments, right up to clause 7, have been passed.
Conservative
Gerald Keddy Conservative South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS
I understood that, but I wasn't sure if the consequential amendment was literally passed.
Conservative
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
Okay.
I'm sorry, I forgot to welcome our witnesses back this morning. It's nice to be back, I'm sure.
Director, Policy and Government Relations Branch, National Historic Sites Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
Two departments are involved: the Parks Canada Agency and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. In the case of Parks Canada, costs will be associated with the administration of the act, that is costs supporting a program, the appraisal of lighthouses, petitions and the evaluation of projects proposed once a lighthouse is designated. Those costs won't change at all, or very little, whether the amendment is passed or not. These are procedural costs. Parks Canada owns some 12 lighthouses. Some lighthouses are also managed by Fisheries and Oceans.
In the case of the management of light stations, the amendment has an impact on the costs associated with passage of the act. When the designations to be included in the act are made, they may concern not only the lighthouse itself, but also the buildings associated with it. If there is no amendment, structures could also be included. Costs will be associated with the maintenance of each of those structures. So, if the amendment is passed, we will only have to concern ourselves with the lighthouse and buildings that have a historical value identified in the lighthouse designation. If the bill is not passed, there will be costs associated with the lighthouse, the buildings and the support and access structures. The amendment thus has the effect of increasing the number of structures that must be maintained under the act and the number of standards associated with the maintenance of historic structures.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
That's where I find it hard to understand. At first, I thought I understood that, but, in view of what was subsequently said—and in French— it seemed to be the reverse. That's why I'm asking for clarification.
You're telling me the reverse of what you told me earlier. Earlier I understood that the amendments were going to reduce the costs.
Director, Policy and Government Relations Branch, National Historic Sites Directorate, Parks Canada Agency
That's it: the amendments will reduce the costs.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
But, from what I've just heard, you just said that they would increase the costs. That's what I understood.
