Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Ninety-nine point nine per cent of EAs are screening levels.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Absolutely.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Yes. Just so we're clear—

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  You'd have to ask the agency.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  That's a question probably for Environment. Similar to the answer to the honourable member, I would say there's currently already $7.7 billion in environmental liabilities that will be paid for, not for decades but for centuries to come, from some sites that preceded strong regul

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Again, I would say this would be something on which the committee may seek clarification. What does “directly affected” mean, particularly since the bill has a very strong statement on assessing cumulative effects. Previously it was “consider”; it's now “must”, which is a clarifi

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Yes. That's why in the opening statement...in the development of the regulations to figure out exactly where the scope is going to be.... Right now, how I understand it is there are currently three different categories. There's screenings, comprehensive studies, and panel revie

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  We noted in the chapter on environmental evaluation that there were delays, but that they were due to poor coordination among the various federal departments. For instance, some delays were due to the fact that they do not agree on the type of assessments to be done and their out

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  In the current system, more than 100 agencies and federal departments are involved. Under the new system, there are going to be four. So the cause of that problem will probably be eliminated.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  In the report I submitted last May 8, I noted that there was now an important environmental deficit of more than C$7 billion. This is due to projects that antedated environmental assessment, for instance abandoned mines, and industrial sites from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. That

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  With your permission, I am going to answer in English. One thing I can say is that without environmental assessments, Canadians are facing billions of dollars in environmental liabilities. The changes will be up to Parliament, and how those changes are made. What is clear is tha

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  No. As you said, we noted in 2009 that there were a lot of gaps, in particular with regard to environmental assessment reviews and mitigation. There are some shortcomings with regard to follow-up. Finally, we don't know what problems were identified by the assessments and whether

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I think that would be for the government to answer.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Again, I think that would be for the government to clarify. My understanding of the bill is that the NEB will provide public consultations for the public that is directly affected by a project. There are transboundary effects that are also in the bill. The question then is what “

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  You would have to ask the provinces. What I would say in answer to your previous question to Mr. Amos is that I know that our provincial counterparts in British Columbia, Ontario, and New Brunswick have looked at the provincial environmental assessments and have said there have