Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise following the member for Davenport. Group No. 7 contains 15 motions.
I will summarize the position of the Bloc Quebecois with respect to these motions. We oppose Motion No. 53 by the member for Nanaimo—Alberni, which concerns clause 56 and deals with the requirement for pollution prevention plans.
With Motion No. 53, and Motion No. 153 to amend clause 118, the Reform Party is transferring to the governor in council the responsibilities of the Minister of the Environment in the publication of notices to implement a prevention plan for a substance or a group of substances.
Once again, with these amendments, the Reform Party is attempting to limit the action of the Minister of the Environment in matters concerning the environment.
I will now address Motion No. 187, which also originates with the Reform Party and seeks to amend clause 166 of the current bill, dealing with international air pollution. We oppose this motion. We also oppose Motion No. 191, which concerns clause 176 on international water pollution.
With these motions, the Reform Party is once again trying to put the responsibility of the Minister of the Environment in the hands of the governor in council. I share the view of the member for Davenport, who opposes this practice, since we know that Cabinet proceedings are kept secret.
When we ask this government, or other governments that will succeed it, I hope, in the future, “Why”, they will say “We cannot answer you. This is a matter for Cabinet and it is confidential and secret”.
I am surprised to see the Reform Party doing this. I would had never thought that it would go so far in order to fight the powers that a minister responsible for a matter must have with respect to pollution, which affects such vital areas.
There is also Motions Nos. 201, 202 and 203 with respect to clause 188, also moved by a member of the Reform Party, which would remove the words “non-hazardous waste” from the plan for reducing imports and which excludes waste exported from the United States. Yet, we know that the vast majority of our export trade is with the United States.
It is essential that there be a plan for compliance with the regulations and that it be enforced. What is going on? Are people going to be allowed to do as they please with hazardous waste? Are they going to import and export such waste freely, because nobody will be required to have plans and regulations any more? It will be anarchy. Is that what the Reform Party member wants? I object and I hope that all members of the House will object.
I turn now to Motion No. 151 moved by the NDP member for Churchill River to amend clause 116 with respect to nutrients by adding “hormone disrupting substance”. Clause 43 already defines hormone disrupting substance. Why have redundancy within the bill? There is enough confusion as it is. I can understand why this would be interesting for people in the legal profession. This bill will no doubt lead to lawsuits.
I am going to speak about Motion No. 154, with respect to clause 118, and Motion No. 185 with respect to clause 116, moved by the Minister of the Environment. They are along the same lines as the motions moved by the Reform Party member. I cannot understand why the Minister of the Environment is bringing in amendments that will limit her powers. This one will take away her own power to act under the legislation.
She is limiting her actions and, on top of that, she is asking for the agreement of the governor in council and recommending that he give her permission. My goodness, this motion is more than just nebulous, it is unacceptable.
Let us also look at Motion No. 186 with respect to clause 166. We are also opposed to this motion, because it goes along the same lines as the one I have just addressed. It puts the responsibility of the Minister of the Environment onto the governor in council.
Then there is Motion No. 192 to amend clause 176. This amendment would have the minister report to governor in council. It being along the same lines, we also object to it.
We presented Motion No. 198 to amend clause 185 as an addition to the section on import, export and movement of hazardous waste and other substances. We want a sub-clause (1.1) to be added, which would read as follows:
—exempt from the application of subsection (1) any person who imports into, exports to or conveys in transit to a province substances described in subsection (1) where an act of the legislature of the province is in force that governs the movement of such substances.
This motion would do away with the duplication in the application of this provision and would do away with all the confusion for people, who do not know whether the federal or the provincial legislation applies. We have plenty of duplication already. Enough, now some very positive action must be taken.