Madam Speaker, Bill C-222 is a rather odd bill. In our opinion, all it does is deny that climate change can lead to disasters that require emergency action.
Accordingly, if Bill C-222 is passed, the government could never invoke the emergency of the expropriation for the purposes of restoring a former natural habitat or the direct or indirect management and variability of the climate.
Expropriation comes from the Latin ex proprium, which means dispossess or deprive of property ownership. Unlike in the United States, the right to property is not enshrined in the Canadian Constitution, as the hon. member noted. However, in Quebec, that right is protected by law.
The Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms stipulates that, “Every person has a right to the peaceful enjoyment and free disposition of his property, except to the extent provided by law.” What is more, the civil code stipulates that, “No owner may be compelled to transfer his ownership except by expropriation according to law for public utility and in return for a just and prior indemnity.”
Does the hon. member understand the difference between the civil code that is applied in Quebec and common law?