Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  No, I don't think so. You're right. There are no obligations here to consult. But if I may, let's just remind the committee of what the implications of designating a significant area are. There's no massive new power to intervene with new regulations here. It's to “identify pr

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I don't think there are interpretation problems with the language. It's a bureaucratic and political hurdle that the minister has to cross before designating the area. Again, I would remind members that what we're getting at here is not massive new power; all we're getting at is

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  It's nice to know somebody relies on my—Maybe you could have a word with my wife! I don't think the addition of these references to these provisions substantially changes the thrust of the overall amendment.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  No, except that as you say, this turns on BQ-6. I will explain it to members. BQ-6 would provide a mechanism for identifying a province that has legislation in place designed to attain the 2008-2012 Kyoto targets, and it would then enable the Governor in Council to make an orde

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  This amendment would have very broad implications for the management of substances under CEPA. We have a number of concerns about the wording of the provision. First of all, the provision starts with “the Minister shall require”, so it's not clear who would be required to do the

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  There are approximately 80 substances on schedule 1 so far, and growing.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Mr. Chairman.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Could I make a friendly suggestion? If the objective is to include “provincial, territorial, and aboriginal governments”, then you could just limit it to the term “governments”, which is a defined term in CEPA to include provincial, territorial, and aboriginal governments. So you

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes, that's a fair point, and we don't have a clear policy as to the inclusion of Métis, so maybe I'll retract my friendly suggestion.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  You hit on the exact issue in the last clause. This amendment wasn't made as a result of specific incidents that have arisen during the course of enforcing CEPA. However, since CEPA was developed, of course, charter litigation has evolved and Justice Canada's understanding of pe

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think the answer is that we don't know. We can try to get back to you.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  We don't know the answer to this question. I apologize, and we'll try to find the answer for you tomorrow.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think we could provide a slightly clearer response to Mr. Godfrey's question. I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Cullen. The Justice Canada policy is that when a bill is opened up to make specific amendments, Justice Canada seeks to use that opportunity to bring the bill up to the c

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I appreciate that the question's been called. I wonder if there's any scope to ask a question to clarify the NDP amendment regarding the air pollution, an amendment about which we have some concerns.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Sure. The environmental damages fund is a discrete fund within the national accounts. The fund was established to allow for the collection of money and the disbursement of money to support environmental projects, a wide range of projects that could include reparation, that could