Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Subsection103.07(6) was the other addition from Mr. McGuinty, and that refers to air emissions standards. That makes sense to me.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I would make the same comment again. I don't see the connection to the carbon budget. I see a direct connection to the authority under proposed paragraph 103.07(2)(b), which refers to establishing air emission standards, but here we're talking about researching causes and remedia

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  The authority to conduct research under CEPA into environmental emergencies is extremely broad and already applies to all the LFEs or large industrial emitters. What this does is act as a notwithstanding clause. It's saying that despite what you've done under these other provisio

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  My understanding of the two additional clauses that have been added are that proposed subsection 103.05(2), which is the authority regarding the setting of sectoral carbon budgets for LIEs, and proposed paragraph 103.07(2)(b), which is about the air emissions standards.... Both o

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  The last one to which I referred was proposed subsection 103.02(5), which is the authority to regulate the way in which individual carbon deficits would be set.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Mr. Chair, for the sake of clarity, if you go back to the Bill C-30 provision, clause 34 starts out by saying, “A regulation made under”. The authorities that were introduced in some of the Liberal and NDP amendments, to which we just referred, some of them refer to regulations

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Well, 103.02(4) and 103.05(2), the setting of national sectoral and individual carbon budgets, neither of those actually uses the word “regulation”. They require the minister to set those. Again, the status of that, in terms of whether that's a regulatory authority, an order, wha

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I don't think we've taken a position on exactly how that should work. I'm just, at the moment, trying to point out a consistency issue. I don't want to get put into the position of looking as though I support a basic model, which is a fundamental political choice, as opposed to s

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Sure. There are two parts to this, new proposed subsection 330(3.1) and new proposed subsection 330(3.2). The first part, (3.1), reverts word for word to what's in CEPA now in terms of the authority to establish regulations that set different standards within different geograph

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  The emitter in the province would not be subject to any federal regulation that is the subject of an equivalency agreement. Just to be clear, an equivalency agreement doesn't necessarily encompass all federal regulations; it has to specify the regulations. The Alberta equivalenc

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  This amendment uses the same language that the government used in Bill C-30 to refer to “persons, works, undertakings or activities”. “Person” is a legal term of art, the addition of which, of course, refers to a human person or a corporate entity. The reference to “works, undert

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  That's the legal term that refers to the power that's being created here--administrative discrimination. Ordinarily, one would regulate like things in a like manner. You need authority to administratively discriminate among like things and you need to stipulate the basis of that

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I can't tell you what will happen or would happen. We've never used this authority. Whether we ever will, I have no idea. That will be determined by the government of the day. This provides the authority to make that discrimination, provided we meet the test of ensuring consiste

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. This definition defines greenhouse gas emissions very specifically to include total annual national emissions, whereas the bill uses the term greenhouse gas emissions in numerous ways: in ways that could be applied to individual facilities, to sectors, etc

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Mr. Chair, I'd like to explain the rationale for the clauses that this amendment would remove or the lines that this amendment would remove. With the way part 5 of CEPA is currently constructed, the government can regulate products that contain a toxic substance and that then em