Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 22
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Environment committee  Is this around Cold Lake you're talking about? I'm not familiar with the—

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  If we're interested in having no net loss as a principle—and it is a principle, not a law—as part of the vision that Bill articulated, you have to have some sort of vision of where you're going or else you're not going to get there. I think it's clear that globally we can't go on

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I doubt that very much.

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I think we have the same rules for them as we have for everybody else, whatever those rules are. I was suggesting that if it's a principle, it's not necessarily a law.

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  In Alberta, the Alberta government has the primary responsibility for managing woodland caribou. For the provinces, that's their thing. It's complicated by the Species at Risk Act and the fact that the woodland caribou, such as the caribou in northeastern Alberta, is a listed spe

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  As I understand it, that's the fundamental concern, because woodland caribou is very sensitive to these linear developments for all sorts of reasons. They're corridors for predators, etc., I think primarily, but also, woodland caribou don't like to cross roads.

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I hadn't heard that. I can't comment on that.

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I think the best tool the federal government has is to provide a little bit of money. A little bit of money goes an awfully long way when you're talking about the naturalists' communities or the angler and hunter communities. They don't need much money to do an incredible amount

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  Perhaps I could take this. So far, in terms of how the Department of Fisheries and Oceans applies the no net loss policy—

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I'm not sure we can immediately jump to the conclusion that there is going to be a net loss. I think what has to happen is that whatever government agency is involved.... And there is a problem constitutionally here, in that the federal government has responsibility for fish and

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  Yes, I know. I appreciate that. The idea is how you actually achieve it. I think we have to recognize that when you start into a negotiation and into discussions, if you had that principle of no net loss, you go into the discussions with the developer knowing this is basically wh

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I don't see why it would. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans was able to fairly successfully implement its policy for over 20 years—

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I wouldn't say we need a regulation on compensation. I'd say the committee might want to think about it.

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  In my view, it just needs to be implemented.

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell

Environment committee  I could, but, Bill, do you want to take it?

April 16th, 2013Committee meeting

Stephen Hazell