Environment committee  I'll start with what we do. As was mentioned a couple of times already, it's an assessment of impact. It's not just of the environment. It's social, health and economic impacts as well. In terms of the environment focus, we essentially look at anything related to the project th

Environment committee  I might just add to that around the guidelines. The criteria by which the minister decides on what path that project would go are actually laid out in the legislation in section 36. That's something that is clear, and then we support that through the guidelines.

Environment committee  Sure. As I said, the EA review process, which began in 2016, was something that included the review of the project list. The basis for that review included starting with the existing project list in CEAA, 2012, and looking internally at what projects had typically come through th

Environment committee  That's a very specific case that relates to the life-cycle regulator for that sector, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. When we looked at projects with the offshore boards and those that would be regulated by the Canada Energy Regulator now, all of those life-cycle regulat

Environment committee  It's aligned with the two streams that I mentioned earlier. If an impact assessment is done by the agency, then the decision-making at the end of that process is done by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. If the review process is done by a review panel, which is a c

Environment committee  Building off the last answer, there is certainly an obligation on governments to consider the climate impacts of projects that are on the list. For projects that are on the list, there was analysis done to look at whether the projects on the list were those that would typically i

Environment committee  There are a number of different regulatory considerations for projects. When you look at essentially any major project, there is typically provincial as well as federal regulation of some sort that comes into play. In terms of its rationale, the Impact Assessment Act really is

Environment committee  The basic tenet is that we're looking at projects that have the potential for the greatest environmental affects in federal jurisdiction. The way that we identified that was through thresholds, and typically there are production thresholds. For example, with regard to mining, the

Environment committee  That's generally correct. There are some specific infrastructure projects that are included on the list. In terms of going through the impact assessment process, you would need to be on the list. The one exception in your comment is that, if it's on federal lands, there's a separ

Environment committee  Those processes have been simplified into two different streams. The assessment can either be run by the agency itself, or the minister can choose to refer that project for review to an independent review panel. In both cases, there is actually a new provision, which I mentioned

Environment committee  Through the course of our consultations, we certainly heard a lot of support for having proponents engage with us early and have that early planning process where there is open and transparent access to the conversation around how projects are being developed. I think the thing t

Environment committee  The project list is a regulation that existed under CEAA 2012. It was reviewed as part of the EA review process, so there was a fairly extensive public engagement process on that. However, the project list is a GIC regulation that was established. In its establishment, there was

Environment committee  That's correct. It's specific types of projects.

Environment committee  Thanks for the question. I think I'll ask Ian to take that, who's responsible for our Crown consultation division.

Environment committee  Thank you very much. My name is Brent Parker. I am the acting vice-president of external relations and strategic policy at the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. I appreciate the opportunity to come to speak with you today about the agency and the Impact Assessment Act itself