Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-441, an act respecting the protection of wildlife species in Canada from extirpation or extinction.
This bill is almost identical to Bill C-65, which died on the Order Paper. Some changes were made regarding the role of provinces, but the bill still does not respect provincial jurisdictions.
The purpose of this bill is to protect wildlife species at risk. It provides for the establishment of a list of designated species as well as a recovery process. The designation of species, the scientific criteria used to include a species on the list and the recovery plans will be among the responsibilities of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, or COSEWIC. There will be a complete restructuring of this organization from its current form. It will be made up of nine members appointed by the Minister of the Environment, and they will be paid.
Bill C-441 will apply to the so-called federal species such as migratory birds and aquatic species. It also deals with transboundary species as well as all species found on federal lands, and their habitats.
This bill prohibits anyone from killing, harming, disturbing, harassing, capturing or taking an individual of a species at risk as defined in the bill. Also, no person shall destroy its residence, its den or its nest. Those who contravene the act will face heavy fines and penalties.
Bill C-441 directly threatens the provinces' jurisdiction in environmental matters. In fact, on the pretext of meeting the requirements of the international convention on biodiversity, the bill introduced by the hon. member for Davenport interferes in areas under provincial jurisdiction.
Bill C-441 does not respect the constitutional division of powers with regard to the environment because it is based on a much too broad interpretation of the definition of territory and because it does not respect the joint responsibility of the federal government and the provinces with regard to certain species.
The bill gives the Minister of the Environment broad discretionary powers, in particular regarding appointment of the COSEWIC members, listing by COSEWIC of threatened or endangered species and the authority to implement or not recovery plans, etc.
It should be noted that even if there is an amendment to section 5(3) regarding admission criteria, our concerns remain basically unanswered. The Minister of the Environment still has discretionary power.
One fundamental fact we must remember is that, since 1989, Quebec has had legislation on this and that the legislation works well and has had good results. We should avoid creating more bureaucracy and useless duplication—I am sure the member for Davenport will agree on that—and we should also use our energy for what we believe is important, that is the fate of threatened species.
This bill, rather than allowing provinces to participate in the designation and recovery process of threatened or endangered species, excludes them.
In its preamble, the bill tries to demonstrate that the protection of biological diversity is a fundamental issue, so important that it is a national concern. Hence, the bill introduced by the member for Davenport tries to grant the federal government powers that would allow it to intefere in what is clearly provincial jurisdiction, by putting forward the necessity to abide by the biodiversity convention. The bill validates interference by federal government.
In our view, the federal government cannot justify such interference by putting forward the necessity to abide by a convention, because it is the provinces that have to implement the convention on their own territory.
I would also like to raise another point and that has to do with the definition of federal land. I have a problem with that, because the definition in the bill is much too general. It defines federal land as land, including any water, that belongs to Her Majesty, and the air above that land, the internal waters of Canada as determined by the Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act, including the seabed and subsoil below and the airspace above those waters, and any other lands that are set apart under the Indian Act.
You will understand why I cannot subscribe to such a broad definition which implies that the seabed, the subsoil, and the airspace above internal fresh waters, which normally come under provincial jurisdiction, will be managed by Bill C-441. The definition of federal land refers to other legislative texts giving jurisdiction to the federal government over the fisheries and shipping on internal waters.
As a result, this bill gives the federal government much greater and broader authority over everything connected with these lands, including the protection of endangered species.
I want to clarify by describing in greater detail the division of powers regarding the protection of the environment, especially wildlife, under the Constitution. As could be expected, the protection of wildlife and its habitat is not provided for in the Constitutional Act of 1867.
However, under this act, the provinces have jurisdiction over the management of public lands, they belong to the provinces—subsection 92(5), property and civil rights—subsection 92(13), and generally all matters of a merely local or private nature—subsection 92(16). These powers are specific enough and broad enough to allow the provinces to legislate with regard to wildlife on provincial public lands as well as on private properties.
The use of the term “federal species” is confusing because this notion does not take into account the territory where those species are found. Under Bill C-441, migratory birds are considered federal species, even though they have always been recognized as a joint responsibility of the federal government and the provinces.
The bill states that, under the Constitution Act, 1867, the federal government has jurisdiction over sea coast and inland fisheries—section 91, paragraph 12—and may therefore appropriate any power with regard to the protection of fish, marine mammals and marine flora found in Canada's territorial sea and internal waters, including the subsoil below and the air above. Nothing less. Similarly, this bill gives the federal government jurisdiction over the habitat of migratory birds, whether the said habitat is on provincial land or not.
Combined with the definition of “federal land” and with section 35, which deals with transboundary species, this is certainly one of the most questionable provisions of this bill.
So the bill gives the federal government the power to intervene with wildlife species and their habitat, aquatic species and their habitat and migratory birds.
I would have added a lot more things, but I can only congratulate the member for Davenport for having introduced this bill to the House. I know how interested he is in everything that concerns the protection of species at risk and the environment.
The Bloc Quebecois criticizes this bill primarily because it totally changes the rules of the game by not establishing a species' territory and confirms direct meddling in areas of provincial jurisdiction.