Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Yes, I'm aware of some in B.C. where I have identified some systematic problems in terms of consultation and the thresholds. We have a project list approach in B.C., much like the one the federal government is proposing. It can either anticipate different types of projects or lea

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  No, it doesn't, because the proposed additional amendment to section 35 is much worse than the one that's first proposed in the budget bill.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  It minimizes even more the protection to fish habitat that we rely on the Fisheries Act and the federal government for.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I'm sorry? I'm looking forward to it?

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  No, I'm not looking forward to any of it. I think it's all a several-decades step backwards in environmental protection. It's messing with what I think has been referred to as a piece of environmental legislation that most people really resonate with. In industry, I have friend

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  It's probably because they're just that: they are new concepts. I think my colleague referred to the fact, and concerning the regulation point too, that the thing that's unique about this process is that so much of the substance is being left to regulation. While it's okay to d

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I'd agree with that. I don't know that I can speak with any more specificity about it; I'm not from a first nation. I think there is danger in using particular examples of first nations as success stories, because I am even less able to make generalizations about them than I am

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I feel that the whole provincial-federal question needs to be looked at further, as I think many things in this bill do. In terms of looking at the gaps and substituting things, there was reference made before wondering who will fill the gaps. There's actually no legal responsi

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I do appreciate being here and I think this committee is doing a good job hearing from a diverse variety of witnesses. The breadth of the budget bill in its entirety, even just part 3, is so enormous and such a policy change for Canada—and, admittedly, the government has said tha

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Being a lawyer, I'm thinking of levels of a court. For example, at one level you have a judge, and as the matter becomes more serious you have three judges. Then you have five to nine judges reviewing it, because more people can provide you with additional analysis and perspectiv

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Sorry, that the current strategy is misguided?

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  Yes, and I do think it's a very short-term strategy. I think that part 3 ignores long-term costs, which is part of the problem with it.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  It's a problem because it's not applied fairly. I still think that's an area of uncertainty. It doesn't allow the public, first nations, or, potentially the civil servants involved in the process, the same certainty as it allows proponents.

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I think it discredits the entire review process for pipelines and tanker projects. You could spend your 24 months reviewing it, and have economists, scientists, and first nations—everybody involved—have the NEB make a recommendation and then the government completely overturns it

Subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C-38 committee  I'd agree with that. For example, the current review process for the notorious Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project doesn't look at long-term costs. You have to consider seepage as well as spills. It doesn't look at downstream effects. We're not looking at the full economic