Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My amendment NDP-19 is that Bill C-47, in clause 2, be amended by (a) by replacing lines 39 and 40 on page 39 with the following:
(b) a review is not required if the Board determines that
(b) by replacing lines 15 and 16 on page 55 with the following:
has issued if the responsible Minister determines that any of paragraphs (1)(a) to (c)
(c) by replacing lines 37 and 38 on page 79 with the following:
(b) the Board determines that the activities may proceed without such a review.
These aren't spelling issues. These amendments replace the vague word “opinion” with “determines”. The legal definition of “determines” means to come to a determination, which is defined as:
After consideration of the facts, a determination is generally set forth by a court of justice or other type of formal decision maker, such as the head of an Administrative Agency. Determination has been used synonymously with adjudication, award, decree, and judgment. A ruling is a judicial determination concerning matters, such as the admissibility of evidence or a judicial or an administrative interpretation of a statute or regulation.
This amendment was requested by Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
What we have here is a situation whereby once again we're improving the language so the board has the responsibility not simply to outline its opinion, but to come to a judgment on these issues. That's a significant difference.
Having sat on these boards, I know an opinion could mean that around the table we said to forget about something.There's an opinion. It may not be adequate. Certainly in many cases it will not be adequate. What we have here is an opportunity to set the legislation forward in a good fashion that provides the right language for the type of decisions that are being made on this matter. Not to approve an amendment such as this simply.... I would ask the government witnesses why “opinion” was chosen rather than “determination”.