Transport Committee on Oct. 4th, 2016

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I want to thank my colleague for sharing his time with me. I understand that about four minutes are left.

Minister, four minutes should be enough for me to ask you at least one question. I appreciate the fact that you gave me the time to say something earlier. So I will put a question to you. I will not just use this time to continue to explain what my thoughts and conclusions on the committee's work are.

Minister, the letter you sent to our committee mentions consultations the two departments will undertake. I think that should be the preliminary step before this kind of a request is sent to our committee. It would be very useful to know what consultations the Department of Transport will hold and with whom the department will meet, so that we don't ask those people to talk about the same issue twice.

The letter even talks about a website where people could share their comments. Could you give the committee members some information on that and tell us what the status of your department's consultations is and how the website implementation process is going?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

We are currently not holding formal consultations. We have received a lot of comments from many people who had something to say about the piece of legislation put into force in 2014. Many of them did not agree, others did, and they said so.

We believe in democracy. You said that this issue had already been dealt with and asked why, in these conditions, we were pretending to consult the committee. But as I told Mr. Aubin, the issue has not been dealt with, on the contrary. Provisions that were implemented as part of the 2014 amendments could be reconsidered and potentially reintegrated in the legislation, but others could disappear forever because the amendments made no sense.

We are asking you to do this work. It's up to you to decide whether you will do it and, if so, how you will proceed. This is an all-party committee, and that is a reflection of democracy. As you already said, you have many other important issues to address, and I am happy about that, since many of them have to do with transport.

At the end of the day, I am very happy you have decided to dedicate some time to a study on the Navigation Protection Act.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

It should be noted that we were not all in agreement, around the table, to study these amendments. We felt that the Canadian Transportation and Logistics Strategy was more of a priority. I was surprised to hear you say that there was no consultation currently underway. However, that was very clear.

Here is what the letter the committee received says:

In addition to the proposed review to be undertaken by the Committees, our Departments will also undertake consultations with the public, Indigenous peoples, stakeholders, and provinces and territories to complement the work of the Committees.

It's very clear. So I'm extremely surprised to hear you say that no consultation is currently underway. Once again, it would have been much more beneficial for us, in committee, for you to first hold consultations, so that we could have their conclusions before we begin considering these amendments.

What would have happened if the committee had refused to study these proposals? Would you have held consultations, as is the case for all bills?

As we know, practically all departments are now consulting the public.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

In reality, we always hold consultations as a general rule. We have a group that works with the provinces, with the goal of getting their views on those projects and the legislation. I consult first nations a great deal on certain issues. The Navigation Protection Act is something that comes up fairly often, since aboriginal peoples have their say on the issue.

In reality, we are always in consultation because a piece of legislation, even if it is adopted, can eventually be amended. In addition, as this is a democratic process, various interest groups always have a say. Consultation continues to be part of the life of a government.

In this case, we are asking you to consider this legislation and make the amendments you consider useful and justified. I personally appreciate the fact that you have agreed to do the work.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Iacono, you have six minutes.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister Garneau, for making the time to come to our committee to clarify some issues.

Madam Chair, I would also like to give up some of my time to my friend on the other side, Mr. Robert Aubin.

I have just one little question for you, Minister.

One challenge of this committee is to separate navigation issues from environmental issues. Do you have any advice?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

As the Minister of Transport, I thank you for your question.

My focus is on the act itself, but, as I mentioned in a previous statement, one of the things that you may wish to consider is one of the changes that was made in the past. When a request was made to build a structure that would potentially impede navigation, there was a trigger that existed for an environmental assessment to be conducted at the same time. That's something that used to exist. It's your call whether you think that that continues to be something.... You may wish to bring that matter up with the expert panel that is studying the issue of environmental assessment.

The two are separate in the sense that they each come under different jurisdictions, but when a project does come forward, it may have implications on both sides, both with respect to navigation and with respect to the potential impact on the environment.

It's your judgment that I'm looking to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Aubin, for the next three and a half minutes.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Minister, thank you for the clarification on pipelines, but perhaps my question was not clear.

If the committee undertakes this study, I don't think we will spend a long time arguing over the issue of culverts. In fact, I wanted to know whether infrastructure as important as pipelines, which cross dozens and dozens of rivers and larger waterways, is included in the wording of modern safeguards that could be included in the act?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

My answer won't differ from the one I already gave you. The National Energy Board is responsible for assessing a pipeline's entire route, whether it crosses waterways or simply runs underground. We think that it is important for an integrated assessment to be carried out in such cases. Transport Canada is always ready to give its opinion if the National Energy Board asks for it. That said, the board controls the process.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

If I may, I would point out that you are telling me that, on the one hand, the decision has been made, and, on the other hand, concerning another issue, that the government is in ongoing consultations, that not everything is cast in stone and that things can change. I am having a hard time reconciling those two positions. As far as I understand, if things go in the direction you want, they can change, but if they do not go in that direction, they are halted.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Perhaps I should clarify that pipelines are handled by the National Energy Board.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I understood that.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

We are relying on a memorandum of understanding established with the National Energy Board when it comes to transportation or the potential impact on navigation. The Board is responsible for the review. It does not fall under the Navigation Protection Act directly. We are asking that the act be reviewed in line with what is included in the mandate of the act.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

I have no further questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

There's still a minute and a half remaining.

Does Mr. Tootoo have a question that he would like to put on the floor? There is a minute and a half left on the Liberals' time.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

On a point of order, I don't know who is giving time to Mr. Tootoo. It's not your role to give time to an independent member on our committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

It certainly is, and he had indicated he had a question for the minister.

It's Mr. Iacono's time—

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

It's my time.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

On a point of order, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay, remember that the minister is here for approximately five minutes, the way I look at my clock.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

I think if you ask the clerk he'll say you need unanimous consent to allow that to happen.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

It's Mr. Iacono's time, so, Mr. Iacono, what would you like to do with the last minute remaining of your time?

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Madam Chair, I'd like to give my last minute to Mr. Tootoo.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Yes, Ms. Block.