Mr. Speaker, I have a few problems with the recommendations just made by my colleague across the way. Allow me to explain.
When he wants to see the links between the provinces and the federal government reinforced in order to better protect the environment-and no one would oppose such a goal, I too want to be sure the environment is protected-in the fervour I thought I detected at the end of the member's speech, when he said he would like to see mechanisms reinforced in the areas of safety and monitoring of implementation, I take this to mean a form of partnership with the provinces to ensure that everyone does their job and that everything goes well, how will all this work?
I keep coming back to the same two points. I would remind members that what we are now talking about is the fisheries bill of the century. I would also remind them that, 100 years ago, environmental law was not mentioned in the Constitution. Therefore, the founding nation, Quebec, has just as much right to define its environmental law as does the rest of Canada. But since we are talking about partnership, since we are talking about the bill of the
century, I say that Canada has no more right over the environment than Quebec.
How dare they tell us, in clause 58(1), that the federal government may delegate powers to a province? And how, in a context of wanting to reinforce monitoring mechanisms rather than dictating how they will be set up, will agreement be reached in order to ensure that everyone wants the same degree of purity of water, air and the ecosystem?
This is immediately followed, in clause 58(3) by coercive measures. It says that federal environmental law will take precedence over provincial environmental law.
This is, I would remind you, the law of the century when it comes to the fisheries. One hundred years ago, when the two founding peoples came together to write the Constitution, it did not exist. Today we are being told: "Shove over, you little guys, we are the bosses here". I find that the minister has not done his homework.
First of all, as my colleague for Laurentides has already said, there is a lack of cohesiveness, an overlap between the federal departments themselves, between the federal Department of the Environment and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Now what they are planning is to stir up quarrels and to give themselves all of the rights with clause 58(3), saying: "We are going to declare the delegation of power mil if we feel it is not right". Where is there any partnership in that? Where is the desire to create stringent measures of control, mechanisms to ensure a pure environment?
Clause 58(3) thumbs its nose at the rights of Quebec and the other provinces.
We will not understand each other if one side says "If you do not do what I tell you, I will cut off your rights." What entitles the provinces to additional rights? This is the law of the century, I say again.
When the Constitution was drafted 100 years ago, this was not in it. Now, if we wish to rejuvenate the Constitution, to get more modern, let us speak of how the mechanisms of harmonization rather than of coercion will be used.