Evidence of meeting #89 for Natural Resources in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clauses.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Sure, if we'd like to do that. I just felt that it was 5:30, Mr. Chair, but of course, that is your prerogative and your call, as always.
I will move this amendment. It is that Bill C-49, in clause 125, be amended by adding after line 25 on page 89 the following:
(5) Any evaluation of offshore renewable energy projects should be done similarly to evaluations of offshore petroleum projects.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm not supporting this particular amendment because the members know that the bill has already leveraged the expertise of offshore regulators. They've had sound regulatory practices to establish known and reliable processes. The regulator has the same mandate to evaluate all aspects of safety and environmental protection for proposed projects for offshore renewable energy as it does for petroleum projects, even recognizing that the technologies used will be different.
I think it's similar to CPC-5, which was previously defeated. To ensure consistency between Newfoundland and Labrador versions of the bill, I oppose the motion, and I suggest that we vote against it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
Thank you, Ms. Jones.
Do we have any other speakers? No.
We'll now vote on amendment CPC‑10.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)
Shall clause 125 carry?
(Clause 125 agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)
No amendments have been submitted for clauses 126 to 130.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Chair, it is after 5:30, and I have another meeting to go to—
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
Oh. Maybe we can bring her back. We do have resources until 6:30.
If there is a motion to adjourn for today, we can entertain that, but I do need a motion from the floor.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, the notice that was given to this committee said 3:30 to 5:30. It was not 4:30 to 6:30. The official notice on the record says 3:30 to 5:30. You do not have unanimous consent from multiple parties in this committee to continue this meeting.
If you want to extend past 5:30, you need UC to do so, but you don't have it. It's done.
Liberal
John Aldag Liberal Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Just as a point of order, you don't need UC to extend.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
Yes, we don't need UC to extend, Mr. Patzer, if you'll listen to what I have to say, but it was advised—and all the clerks were aware of what was happening today in the House—that meetings would start late and we would have resources to continue.
I will ask members whether they would like to end at this time. If there is a motion from the floor and somebody would like to bring forward a motion to end our meeting at this point, we can entertain that. I'm happy to have committee members determine whether we want to continue or whether we want to end.
I'm giving it to you to make that decision at this point. That's a vote we will have, if that's what happens.
Now, Mr. Angus, I'm going to go to you.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you, Chair.
It happens once every third St. Patrick's Day, or the day after, that the Conservatives support me, so this is that day. I'm going to take advantage of it. I do want to thank you for your excellent chairing, but I move that we end the meeting.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal George Chahal
We have a motion by Mr. Angus to adjourn the meeting for today.
Could you please call the roll, Mr. Clerk?
(Motion agreed to: yeas 8; nays 0)
The motion is carried.
Thank you, colleagues, for a great day of work at committee. See you next day.
The meeting is adjourned.