Transport Committee on June 6th, 2006

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Given that the entire amendment is going to be studied, I would like to reflect on the scope of the word “consultation”. Does that imply that approval must be sought? To me this word is a bit nebulous in relation to all the stakeholders mentioned in the context of consultations. Does the government decide, in the end?

[Éric Harvey]

According to my understanding of the amendment, the current structure, whereby the minister makes his decision, remains. We wish to add other parties, however, to the consultation before the minister makes his decision. I do not understand, from my reading of the proposal made, that it is intended that the minister’s decision should be conditional on the approval of the people consulted. These people will have the opportunity to express their interests before the decision is made, but in the end someone has to decide. From what I understand, the minister would continue to do so, as the current provision stipulates.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Monsieur Carrier, the situation is that the courts have interpreted what consultation means--particularly in relation to aboriginal communities, but it would be used overall in common law that there is a positive requirement to consult. And consultation means that they would have to actually get the opinion and weigh that opinion in an impartial manner. That's my understanding. But aboriginal law has transgressed to such a point, for instance, that this would be a requirement. And I think it's already in law what “consultation” means.

It's the normal, practical meaning, but it has to be more than just telling them what's going to happen. That's what happened in aboriginal cases.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Harvey, could I ask that once you have this drafted you forward it to the clerk's office to distribute among the members of the committee? Thank you very much.

We do have another amendment, NDP-8. Once again, I am taking the advice of counsel and suggesting that it is inadmissible. It's beyond the scope in imposing a tax.

Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

It's not a tax. It's a percentage of the total revenue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Scott.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

And a percentage of my income isn't a tax either.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

That wasn't my intervention.

Perhaps with 10 minutes remaining and with a genuine desire on the part of some members of this committee to speak to the general issue of consultation, as being someplace between where we are before this bill and where we are with this bill, to compel an environmental assessment,not through other legislation, as has been cited, but rather because the Government of Canada wants to take charge of these international entities, it strikes me that this is a positive development. It should require, however, that they engage the affected communities. We haven't even begun to discuss where the bridge ends and the road begins, and all those kinds of issues. You're going to need goodwill.

Therefore, I would suggest that we take the time that's necessary so that perhaps the government could come up with something that is admissible, that would satisfy that, and then not have to deal with these problems later when the communities feel they haven't been engaged. I'm thinking of post offices, just for the moment, but it does happen from time to time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I think that's where, at the end of the day, not just my community but I think all communities want to be. The reality is that it doesn't always happen unless it's actually included in the specific statements. It gets lost, and over time the awareness of it, so it doesn't happen elsewhere. That's my genuine concern, and I think it should be part of due process at some level.

I think it's helpful for the government to have that type of accountability, and that's what I have been attempting to seek through these amendments today, because it is a shift.

Be careful what you ask for, because this is a very complicated situation, not just in my municipality but in others, not only in terms of the way vehicles flow to and from our border crossings but also legislation on the U.S. side that affects the rates and the response. Hence, people on the actual ground floor, who are working for the citizens there, really need to feel the comfort that they have a direct process and involvement.

We've actually had some agreement on some things with regard to the border. Stage one, which the City of Windsor had signed off on--and for many of those initiatives we actually had final approval of projects go forward--is quite different from stage two, which the City of Windsor was outside of. Hence, that's where I would like to see, at least at some point in time, something not ruled out that has explicit notation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Are there any other comments?

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

If the amendment itself were forwarded to me from the department, I would be more than happy on Wednesday afternoon or before the meeting to sit down with Mr. Masse and go through it and see whether it meets his approval. If we have people from opposite ends of the spectrum of political will going through it, it might be that we could just come and circulate it and have it passed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

But again, I would ask that it be circulated for all members at the same time.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Absolutely.

We can try to alleviate any lengthy discussion, if you would like to do that, Mr. Masse.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Do we want to continue on to one more clause?

[An hon. member]

Adjourn.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Then I would suggest that when we come back on Thursday we will finish up new clause 15.1 and move forward with clause-by-clause at that point for the rest of the bill.

The committee is adjourned.