At the request of the chief government whip, the vote on the motion is deferred until Monday at the conclusion of the time provided for Government Orders.

The Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Catterall Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think you will find that as a result of discussions between the parties there is an agreement pursuant to Standing Order 45(7) to defer the recorded division just requested on the motion of the member for Prince George—Bulkley Valley until the end of Government Orders on Tuesday, May 16, 2000.

The Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is there unanimous consent to further defer the division until Tuesday?

The Criminal CodeGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Species At Risk ActGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Windsor West Ontario

Liberal

Herb Gray Liberalfor the Minister of the Environment

moved that Bill C-33, an act respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in Canada, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Species At Risk ActGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Paddy Torsney LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, it is a real honour for me to rise today to speak in favour of the species at risk act, the first specific piece of federal legislation in Canada to ensure protection for all species of birds, fish, mammals, plants and insects at risk. This bill, an important part of a balanced and comprehensive package, will ensure that species and their habitats get the protection they need.

Our top priority in drafting this legislation was to consider the needs of Canada's species. Home to a rich diversity of plants and animals, Canada has over 70,000 known plant and animal species, many of which are only found in this country. Given the vast size of our land and the unique wildlife within our borders, the government believes that we have a moral responsibility to present and future generations to make sure that our precious diversity is protected.

Globally we are losing species at an alarming rate due to human activity. In Canada today we have at least 352 species classified as being at risk. We must all work to turn this around to ensure that species will not become extinct or endangered in Canada because of our human activities. With this bill we are choosing an approach which is already working on the ground where it means the most and where Canadians are already hard at work.

Bill C-33 has been seven years in the making. In 1992 Canada signed the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. In fact Canada was one of the first countries to ratify the convention, as was already mentioned in question period today.

In 1996 governments across Canada supported the accord for the protection of species at risk and agreed to bring in species protection legislation in their own jurisdictions. Many provinces and territories have already fulfilled this obligation and commitment. Now it is time for the federal government to step up to the plate.

Protecting wildlife in Canada is not an academic exercise. This bill will protect species currently endangered and it will prevent other species from becoming endangered. The approach taken in this bill is balanced and practical. It recognizes that we must all work together if we are going to maximize our successes.

Introducing a Canada-wide comprehensive species at risk act was challenging. It required listening to many voices. The Government of Canada engaged in a thorough process of study, consultation and planning. It involved environmental groups, landowners, aboriginal peoples, other levels of government and thousands of individual citizens.

We have examined and benefited from the experiences of other jurisdictions, other provinces and other nations. We have taken what works and avoided what does not. The result for forests today is a strong bill, a bill which balances many important but sometimes conflicting interests.

The species at risk act before us is an effective bill which, when passed, will ensure the job gets done. Bill C-33 will help save species and protect their habitats on all lands in Canada.

To quickly outline what is contained in the bill, the species at risk act provides for independent scientific assessments of wildlife species by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, COSEWIC; an accountable listing process for species based on that scientific assessment; and a comprehensive process for planning and implementing species recovery. The bill also provides for strong prohibitions against the killing or harming of any species at risk and its residence, and the power to protect species' critical habitat on all lands, public and private, in Canada.

Under the act the assessment of wildlife species will be the responsibility of COSEWIC, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. COSEWIC is an independent body of scientists and other experts. It will continue to operate at arm's length from the federal and provincial governments. For the first time, however, COSEWIC is given legal status and will be given the budget to continue its work.

COSEWIC will assess whether a species is threatened or endangered and that COSEWIC assessment and the reasons behind it will be made public. All Canadians will have access to that information. There is nothing politicized about the assessment process. When COSEWIC independently determines that a species is threatened or endangered, that decision is automatically reported.

COSEWIC's scientific assessment will be the basis for the government's list of wildlife species in Canada established under SARA, the species at risk act.

Once a species has been added to the legal list, prohibitions on the killing of individuals of a species designated as threatened or endangered immediately come into force, as does protection for the residences of individuals of the species. A comprehensive process for recovery planning is initiated. The use of land that is part of a species habitat may be affected and a wide variety of other economic, legal and social consequences may come into play.

Decisions taken under the act can have serious economic, social and legal consequences for many Canadians. It is essential that there be political accountability for these decisions. That is why this act gives cabinet the legal responsibility to establish and amend the legal list of wildlife species at risk in Canada.

This bill recognizes that the destruction or the degradation of habitats is the main threat to these species. In the last 200 years, we have completely transformed the environment. Wildlife habitats were not spared, be they wetlands, forests, lakes, rivers or prairies.

Habitat lost threatens more than 75% of the species now classified as being at risk. Obviously, if we want to protect these species, we have to protect their habitat.

This bill on species at risk provides for the necessary authority to prevent the destruction of these habitats. It provides for the necessary authority to prevent the destruction of habitats critical for the survival of species at risk across Canada. This bill allows us to take emergency measures rapidly.

When a species is listed as threatened or endangered, the recovery planning process will identify what needs to be done to recover that species, including the identification of that species' critical habitat needs. As I mentioned earlier, this act provides the Government of Canada the legal authority to ensure that all critical habitat areas are protected whether it be federal, provincial or private land.

Our first line of defence will be to protect habitat by encouraging landowners to undertake voluntary conservation measures often in co-operation with other governments. The Government of Canada will provide incentives to promote habitat conservation because we know this approach works on the ground to effectively protect species.

In the last federal budget this government committed $180 million over five years to implement our strategy to protect species at risk. A sizeable portion of this money will fund habitat stewardship measures.

In many cases the habitat important for species at risk will be in a province or territory, and we respect their authority. We expect these governments to bring in habitat protection measures. This bill will complement existing or improve provincial and territorial legislation, not compete with it.

Make no mistake, where voluntary measures do not work, other governments are unwilling or unable to act, the federal safety net will be invoked. If a province does not have complementary legislation the Government of Canada will act to protect Canada's heritage, to protect our species on provincial and private lands.

Where the federal safety net is used to protect critical habitat on private land there will be provisions to compensate for unexpected losses caused by unforeseen restrictions on the normal use of that land. The compensation provisions, however, will not create perverse incentives to inhibit voluntary habitat protection measures in hopes of receiving future compensation.

It is all a question of balance. To find this balance the Minister of the Environment has asked a distinguished Canadian expert on conservation issues, Dr. Peter Pearse, Professor Emeritus of Resource Economics at the University of British Columbia, to review the issues and to provide him with advice.

Some people would say that this bill is an infringement on property rights. They are misguided. Their criticisms are based on horror stories about the very different experience of the United States endangered species act. The Canadian species at risk act is fundamentally different. While it certainly gives the government the power to protect species on private lands, we have gone a long way toward meeting the concerns of land owners and land users.

Perhaps what is most important about the bill is that it must be used and accepted by the people on the land who make decisions affecting wildlife every day. The bill recognizes that while we need strong measures for those who would break the law, we need a co-operative approach on the front lines. This in fact is what will protect our species.

For this legislation to be effective all affected stakeholders must be engaged. Reality and experience dictate that to get the job done we need land owners, conservation groups and other levels of government working together.

Aboriginal communities in Canada are especially important in the effort to protect species at risk. Many threatened or endangered species are found on aboriginal lands. Aboriginal people will be involved in the species at risk act recovery efforts at every step. The assessment and recovery processes will incorporate the wisdom of aboriginal traditional knowledge as well as local community knowledge. We will work closely with and respect the role of wildlife management boards established under land claims and first nations agreements to ensure the protection of species on traditional native lands.

We know from experience that all governments and stakeholders working together can help species recover. Already we have made progress on the swift fox, the white pelican and the peregrine falcon. We have learned from these successful efforts and now we must focus our efforts on saving species still in danger, such as the beluga whale, the Vancouver Island marmot—the minister's particular favourite—the burrowing owl and the leatherback turtle. To prevent other species from being added to that list, as a government, as citizens and as stewards our goal must be to protect species on the ground.

The new species at risk act is part of a comprehensive approach to accomplish this goal. Combined with the accord signed with the provinces and territories, and extensive stewardship activities already under way, we are confident that species and their habitats will be protected in Canada.

I invite all hon. members and all Canadians to join with the minister in taking this important step toward protecting wildlife species and their habitats in Canada. After seven years of debate it is time to focus our attention on protecting and recovering wildlife.

Bill C-33 is designed to work not merely in the courtrooms and the classrooms, but where it counts, in the fields, forests, wetlands and open waters of Canada. Effective species protection, not costly litigation, must be our primary goal.

We look forward to the committee process where all concerned citizens will see exactly how effective this bill can be.

We have an opportunity to pass strong legislation, legislation that is needed and is long overdue. I sincerely hope that all members of the House will assist in this monumental responsibility.

Species At Risk ActGovernment Orders

5:50 p.m.

Bloc

Suzanne Tremblay Bloc Rimouski—Mitis, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think you will find that there is unanimous to say that, it being 6.06 p.m., the time provided for government orders has expired.

Species At Risk ActGovernment Orders

5:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

The hon. member for Rimouski—Mitis has asked for the unanimous consent of the House to see the clock at 6.06 p.m., which would bring to an end Government Orders for today. Does the House give its unanimous consent?

Species At Risk ActGovernment Orders

5:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Species At Risk ActGovernment Orders

5:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

It being 6.06 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's order paper.

The House resumed from April 7 consideration of the motion that Bill C-206, an act to amend the Access to Information Act and to make amendments to other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Access To Information ActPrivate Members' Business

5:50 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I rise to speak to Bill C-206, an act to amend the Access to Information Act by defining more precisely what records held by governments are to be disclosed and providing more severe penalties for those who would wilfully circumvent the intent of the legislation.

First, I am very supportive of this legislation, as is our party. It is a step in the right direction. The updating of this act, which was introduced and served its purpose well during less complicated times, is long overdue. Clearly the act needs to be updated and strengthened at this very critical time.

It is notable that the government of the leader of my party, the Right Hon. Joe Clark, first introduced the freedom of information legislation in Canada in 1979. It is in that tradition that we are supportive of improvements to the act at this time to bring it up to date with today's circumstances.

Under the current Access to Information Act the government almost got away with what was perhaps the most egregious abuse of government power recorded in a long time, perhaps even at any time during the country's history, and that was the HRDC scandal. There was an obvious abuse of the public trust and mismanagement of public funds, which ultimately uncovered innumerable counts of unethical or at least dubious uses of taxpayer money to buy electoral support. The improvements brought forward in Bill C-206 would help to guard against this and perhaps bring to light these types of abuses earlier.

One thing we have to consider is the degree to which the government is privatizing many of the government services which previously were the exclusive purview of government departments. Whether this is within the new Revenue Canada agency, the new money laundering agency or any of the new arm's length agencies that are separate from government, we have to ensure that we are being vigilant in ensuring that we continue through the Access to Information Act to have an opportunity to seek information that should be in the public domain.

It is a fear which I have and which others validate that sometimes when we see these new agencies access to information may be compromised. That is something we have to be awfully careful of, particularly given the degree to which the trend in government service provision in Canada is to that sort of agency model. I would urge all members of the House to consider this very carefully to ensure that as this trend evolves we do not see a compromising of the access to information mechanism.

One of the most glaring concerns with the legislation is that it proposes to prohibit access to information to users who make frivolous and abusive requests. As a member of the fifth party in the House of Commons I would certainly hope that the hon. member, or any member of the governing party, would not see requests coming from my party as being frivolous or abusive.

Access To Information ActPrivate Members' Business

5:55 p.m.

An hon. member

Suspicious.

Access To Information ActPrivate Members' Business

5:55 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Scott Brison Progressive Conservative Kings—Hants, NS

Suspicious perhaps, but never frivolous or abusive.

Whenever we get into nebulous descriptions there is the potential to use what I refer to as weasel words to benefit perhaps the governing party. I think we have to be clear that, by and large, any request for information through the Access to Information Act should be considered to be more important than would be deemed frivolous or abusive. Clearly a sound opposition on any number of issues has been based on access to information and the ability to receive information that perhaps other parties were not smart enough to ask for. There are some concerns about that.

We also pose as some concern the requirement of payment from individuals who use the ATI service frequently. Again, clearly we do not want to create a system whereby ultimately access to information is more achievable by people with means than people without means. That is something we should consider.

We are supportive of Bill C-206. I commend the hon. member for Wentworth—Burlington for his continued diligence in bringing to the House erudite and well thought out contributions. While I differ with him periodically—in fact often—I generally respect his opinions, even when those opinions are frivolous or abusive. I commend the hon. member for a well thought out piece of legislation which is very constructive at this time.