Evidence of meeting #54 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was may.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Okay.
You've heard the comments from Ms. May on amendment PV-6.
Are there any further comments?
Ms. Block.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We will be opposing this motion for the simple reason that it would negate the liability regime that underpins this bill.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you.
(Amendment negatived on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
In this I'd be replacing, as you see, a few lines. The effect is to insert the concept that an aboriginal governing body would become a category of entity that could be reimbursed for reasonably incurring expenses in relation to a release.
As things now are listed, the only entities eligible to receive reimbursement for expenses that were reasonably incurred because of a release would be Her Majesty in right of Canada or a province, and then it includes “or any other person”. But “person” doesn't seem to incorporate the notion of a first nation. That's why the amendment reads “aboriginal governing body” and then “or any other person”.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to ask our officials to comment on this specific amendment that Ms. May has made, if they would.
Conservative
Jeff Labonté Director General, Energy Safety and Security Branch, Energy Sector, Department of Natural Resources
I'll at least give it my best effort. How's that? Thank you for the chance to comment.
The amendment proposes to insert what has been defined at the beginning of the bill as a term: “Aboriginal governing body”. By including the term here, it would, as member of Parliament Ms. May has pointed out, include that an aboriginal governing body could be reimbursed for expenses they may incur in responding to an incident, presuming that those expenses were reasonable and recorded.
In this particular area, it certainly would expand, if you will, that particular aspect of the bill. However, it is established in the beginning part of the definition stage of the bill exactly what it would include.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
No. I have a question to ask whether I can make an amendment to the amendment.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
It's a friendly amendment, so we would have to agree to my amendment, right?
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I would respectfully like to amend this provision, consistent with amendments I suggest later on, so that we add in, after “province”, “municipality”.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
The reason I'm adding this is that many of the pipelines, including abandoned pipelines, run through municipalities, and they are going to incur the expenses for damage to their lands. I think it is appropriate that.... I don't know why we would remove that order of government, which may incur expenses “in taking any action or measure in relation to the release”.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
You have heard the proposed subamendment. Would anyone like to comment on it?
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Do any of the officials want to comment on what the proposed subamendment to amendment PV-7 would do?
Director General, Energy Safety and Security Branch, Energy Sector, Department of Natural Resources
As the proposed amendment before us is an additional amendment to the amendment, it would obviously expand the groups. But I'm not an expert as to whether a municipality in different circumstances...and what the definition of that is. My understanding is that municipalities in law are part of the “province” in the provincial.... I would expect that not including it would not preclude a province from pursuing the costs that were incurred by a municipality, but may negate this. However, it's recognized that aboriginal governing bodies may have different distinctions between municipal and recognition under federal law.
