ENVI Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Minutes of Proceedings
The Committee resumed clause-by-clause consideration on Clause 1 of the Bill.
The witnesses answered questions.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended
(a) by replacing line 8 on page 22 with the following:
“with an opportunity to participate meaningfully in the impact assess-”
(b) by replacing line 15 on page 34 with the following:
“opportunity to participate meaningfully in the impact assessment, including by providing the public with an opportunity to be heard and to ask questions;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“with an opportunity to participate meaningfully, within the time period specified by the Agency, in the impact assess-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 22 to 24 on page 22 with the following:
“ister no later than the day set under subsection 16(3).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“ister no later than 280 days after the day on which the no-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3;
NAYS: William Amos, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 5.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 22 with the following:
“(3) The report must provide a summary of the comments received from the public in relation to the designated project, the Agency’s response to those comments, and a summary of reasonable alternatives to the project as well as set out the effects that, in the Agen-”
Linda Duncan moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding after the word “public” the following:
“and Indigenous groups ”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(3.1) The report must also set out how traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples was taken into account and utilized in the impact assessment of a designated project.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(3.1) Subject to section 119, the report must set out how the Agency, in determining the effects that are likely to be caused by the carrying out of the designated project, took into account and used any Indigenous knowledge provided with respect to the designated project.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: Joël Godin — 1.
“(3.2) The report must also set out a summary of any comments received from the public, as well as the Agency’s recommendations with respect to any mitigation measures and follow-up program and the Agency’s rationale and conclusions.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: — 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended
(a) by replacing line 21 on page 24 with the following:
“31 (1) If the Minister is of”
(b) by replacing line 27 on page 24 with the following:
“project meets the conditions set out in section 33, the Minister”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 34 on page 24 with the following:
“site as well as a description of the substitution and a notice that invites the public to provide”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 25 with the following:
“(4) The Agency must post on the Internet site a notice of the Minister’s proposed decision with respect to the request for the substitution and, if applicable, any conditions the Minister intends to establish with respect to the substitution, as well as a notice that invites the public to provide comments on the proposed decision and intended conditions within 30 days after the day on which the notice is posted.
(5) The Agency must post on the Internet site a notice of the Minister’s final decision with respect to the request for a substitution that includes the reasons for it as well as any conditions established by the Minister in relation to the substitution.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 5 to 13 on page 25 with the following:
“process in relation to a designated project requested by a jurisdiction referred to in paragraph (c) or (d) of the definition jurisdiction in section 2 without the written consent of any Indigenous group that may be affected by the carrying out of the designated project.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Joël Godin and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6.
(a) by replacing line 16 on page 25 with the following:
“(a) subject to paragraph (a.1), the process to be substituted will include a consid-”
(b) by adding after line 17 on page 25 the following:
“(a.1) if the process followed by a jurisdiction includes a consideration of some but not all of the factors set out in subsection 22(1), substitution is approved in part, provided that the Minister takes into consideration any factors that are not included in that jurisdiction’s process through a single and coordinated assessment process with that jurisdiction;”
(c) by replacing line 20 on page 25 with the following:
“be given an opportunity to and will participate in the assess-;
(b.1) federal representatives or administrators, other than the federal authorities described in paragraph (b), that are in possession of information relevant to an assessment will be given an opportunity to participate in the assessment;”
(d) by replacing line 33 on page 25 with the following:
“draft report, and the jurisdiction will consider the public's comments;
(e.1) the public will have access to the participant funding program established under section 75 to facilitate meaningful public participation in the assessment, including the Agency’s preparations for a possible impact assessment or the impact assessment of, and the design or implementation of, follow-up programs in relation to the assessment;”
(e) by replacing lines 1 and 2 on page 26 with the following:
“(2) The report submitted to the Minister must set out the effects”
(f) by replacing lines 5 and 6 on page 26 with the following:
“the carrying out of the designated project. The report must also indicate, from”
(g) by adding after line 10 on page 26 the following:
“(2.1) If the report submitted is not in compliance with subsection (2), the Minister must carry out such further inquiries and studies to enable him or her to modify to the report as is necessary to ensure its compliance.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(a.1) the substituted process carried out by an authority will have no significant adverse effects within federal jurisdiction;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“pate meaningfully in the assessment and to provide comments on a”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“(2.1) The Minister must be satisfied that the report that will be submitted to him or her will set out how the jurisdiction that is following the process to be substituted, in determining the effects that are likely to be caused by the carrying out of the designated project, took into account and used any Indigenous knowledge provided with respect to the designated project.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: — 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 26 the following:
“(5) The Minister must post the report submitted to him or her on the Internet site within 10 days after the day on which it is submitted.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
“under section 31, and the Minister's approval of the substitution as well as the substitution process and report comply with sections 31 to 33, the assessment that results from the”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“Minister requires additional information from the proponent or the jurisdiction of the substituted process, for the purposes of subsection 60(1), the Minister must request the addi-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
“35.1 Any information provided to the Minister by that jurisdiction or the proponent must be disclosed to the public.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended
(a) by replacing line 32 on page 26 to line 2 on page 27 with the following:
“36 (1) At any time during the period after the designated project is posted on the Internet site and up to 45 days after the proponent’s impact statement has been placed in the Registry in accordance with section 104, the Minister must refer the impact assessment of that designated project to a review panel when the Minister determines it is in the public interest to do so and may refer the impact assessment to a review panel at the request of any person or jurisdiction.
(1.1) If the Minister is requested to refer the impact assessment to a review panel, the Minister must make a decision within the prescribed period and provide reasons to the requesting person or jurisdiction.”
(b) by replacing lines 7 to 15 on page 27 with the following:
“(a) the extent to which the project may cause, or contribute to, direct, indirect or cumulative effects that are adverse;
(b) concerns of the public or Indigenous groups about such effects;
(c) opportunities for cooperation with other jurisdictions in the assessment of such effects;
(d) the purposes of the Act;
(e) the federal government’s duty to foster sustainability and apply the precautionary principle;
(f) the extent to which referral to a review panel may facilitate informed decision making by the Minister or the Cabinet under this Act; and
(g) any other relevant factor.
(2.1) Despite subsection (1), the Minister may refuse a referral request if he or she determines that it is frivolous, vexatious or made in bad faith and provides written reasons for the determination.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 5 and 6 on page 27 with the following:
“project to a review panel is in the public interest must be based on a consideration of the following factors:”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
(a) replacing line 11 on page 27 with the following:
“(b) public concerns related to those effects;”
(b) replacing line 15 on page 27 with the following:
“nated project or any part of it; and”
(c) adding after line 15 on page 27 the following:
“(d) any adverse impact that the designated project may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.”
Debate arose thereon.
Linda Duncan moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding, after the word “1982”, the words “, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 34 to 36 on page 27 with the following:
“spect to that impact assessment to the Minister within the time period fixed by the review panel in accordance with subsection (1.1).
(1.1) The review panel must fix the time periods — appropriate to each designated project — within which the review panel’s duties referred to in section 51 are to be carried out.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 35 and 36 on page 27 with the following:
“than the day established by the Agency under subsection (1.1).
(1.1) No later than 10 days after the day on which the Minister has appointed to a review panel the minimum number of members required, the Agency must establish a date by which the panel must submit its report with respect to the impact assessment to the Minister. ”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“than 560 days after the day on which he or she appoints”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6.
“37.1 (1) Despite section 37, if the review panel is to conduct an impact assessment of a designated project that includes physical activities that are regulated under any of the Acts referred to in section 43, it must, subject to subsection (2), submit a report with respect to that impact assessment to the Minister no later than 300 days after the day on which he or she appoints to the panel the minimum number of members required.
(2) The Minister may, at any time before the Agency posts a copy of the notice of commencement of the impact assessment on the Internet site, by order, establish a time limit that is longer than the time limit referred to in subsection (1) but is no more than 600 days. The order must include the Minister’s reasons for making it.
(3) The Minister must take into consideration the factors set out in subsection 36(2) in establishing a time limit under subsection (2).
(4) Subsections 37(3) to (7) apply, with any modifications that the circumstances require, with respect to a time limit established under this section.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
At 12:02 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 12:08 p.m., the sitting resumed.
“designated project to a review panel, the Agency or the review panel may,”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
“nent of the designated project to collect or disclose any information”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
“cy or the review panel, are necessary for the impact assessment by the review”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
“38.1 (1) If the Agency or the review panel has required the proponent of a designated project to collect or disclose information or to undertake a study, the time period for the completion of the review must be suspended for the length of time the Agency or the review panel believes necessary for the proponent to comply with the requirements.
(2) The Agency must post on the Internet site any information concerning the suspension referred to in subsection (1).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended
(a) by replacing line 10 on page 29 with the following:
“diction referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d) of the defini-”
(b) by replacing line 16 on page 29 with the following:
“to be conducted by that panel. In the case of a jurisdiction referred to in paragraphs (e) to (g) of that definition, the Minister must, subject to this Act and any applicable land claim agreement, enter into such an agreement or arrangement.”
(c) by adding after line 32 on page 29 the following:
“(3.1) When the Minister refers the impact assessment of a designated project to a review panel, the Minister and the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development may enter into an agreement or arrangement — with any jurisdiction referred to in paragraphs (e) to (g) of the definition jurisdiction in section 2 that has powers, duties or functions in relation to an assessment of the impact on Aboriginal and treaty rights of the designated project — respecting the joint establishment of a review panel and the manner in which the impact assessment of the designated project is to be conducted by that panel.”
(d) by replacing line 34 on page 29 with the following:
“tion (1), (3) or (3.1) must be posted on the Internet site before”
Debate arose thereon.
Linda Duncan moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the words “Indian Affairs and Northern Development” with the words “Indigenous and Northern Affairs”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Linda Duncan and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: Bob Bratina — 1.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May, as amended, and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 17 to 22 on page 29.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Joël Godin — 2;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 7.
“(1) with
(a) the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act; or
(b) the Canadian Energy Regulator if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Canadian Energy Regulator Act.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: Joël Godin — 1.
(a) replacing line 37 on page 30 with the following:
“is referred to a review panel, the Minister must — within 45 days after the day on which the notice referred to in subsection 19(4) with respect to the designated project is posted on the Internet site — establish”
(b) replacing line 18 on page 31 with the following:
“(a) the Minister must — within 45 days after the day on which the notice referred to in subsection 19(4) with respect to the designated project is posted on the Internet site — establish or approve the re-”
(c) replacing line 25 on page 31 with the following:
“(c) the Minister must — within 45 days after the day on which the notice referred to in subsection 19(4) with respect to the designated project is posted on the Internet site — appoint the chairperson, or a”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 7 and 8 on page 31.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
(b) by replacing line 10 on page 31 with the following:
“ly establish a review panel under subsection 39(1), (3) or (3.1),”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(a) the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, except in relation to a uranium or thorium mine or mill;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended
(a) by replacing line 1 on page 32 with the following:
“44 (1) Subject to subsection (4), when the Minister refers an impact assessment”
(b) by adding after line 22 on page 32 the following:
“(4) No more than one person from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is to be appointed to the review panel under subsection (1) and any such person must not be appointed as the chairperson of the panel.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“panel, the Minister must — within 45 days after the day on which the notice referred to in subsection 19(4) with respect to the designated project is posted on the Internet site — establish the panel’s terms of”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 14 to 22 on page 32.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(3) A maximum of one of the persons appointed under para-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(4) The persons appointed from the roster must not constitute a majority of the members of the panel.”
Debate arose thereon.
Mike Bossio moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding, before the words “The persons”, the words “The chairperson must not be appointed from the roster and”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Gagan Sikand — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 4.
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3.
“(4) The persons appointed from the roster must not constitute a majority of the members of the panel.”
Debate arose thereon.
Mike Bossio moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding, before the words “The persons”, the words “The chairperson must not be appointed from the roster and”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Gagan Sikand — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Robert Sopuck — 4.
By unanimous consent, the amendment, as amended, was allowed to stand.
“(4) The persons appointed from the roster must not constitute a majority of the members of the panel.”
Mike Bossio moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding, before the words “The persons”, the words “The chairperson must not be appointed from the roster and”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Gagan Sikand — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3.
By unanimous consent, the amendment, as amended, was allowed to stand.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 28 to 33 on page 32.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: — 0;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended
(a) by replacing line 34 on page 32 with the following:
“47 (1) Subject to subsection (4), when the Minister refers an impact assessment”
(b) by adding after line 15 on page 33 the following:
“(4) No more than one person from the Canadian Energy Regulator is to be appointed to the review panel under subsection (1) and any such person must not be appointed as the chairperson of the panel.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“panel, the Minister must — within 45 days after the day on which the notice referred to in subsection 19(4) with respect to the designated project is posted on the Internet site — establish the panel’s terms of”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 8 to 15 on page 33.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Bob Bratina, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(3) The majority of persons appointed under para-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6.
“(3) A maximum of one of the persons appointed under para-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to the consideration of the amendment, as amended, of William Amos previously stood which read as follows: That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 15 on page 33 the following:
“(4) The chairperson must not be appointed from the roster and the persons appointed from the roster must not constitute a majority of the members of the panel.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3.
By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to the consideration of the amendment, as amended, of William Amos previously stood which read as follows: That Bill C-69, in Clause 6, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 89 the following:
“(4) The chairperson must not be appointed from the roster and the persons appointed from the roster must not constitute a majority of the members of the panel.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 3.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 16 to 22 on page 33.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“tion 26(1) of that Act.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting line 27 on page 33 to line 6 on page 34.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(c) a roster of persons who are commissioners under”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 6 on page 34 the following:
“(d) a roster of persons who are members of First Nations, Métis or Inuit and who may be appointed as members of a review panel established under subsection 47(1).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“opportunity to participate meaningfully, within the time period specified by the review panel, in the impact assessment;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“(ii.1) subject to section 119, sets out how the review panel, in determining the effects that are likely to be caused by the carrying out of the designated project, took into account and used any Indigenous knowledge provided with respect to the designated project,”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 34 with the following:
“sions and recommendations in relation to the factors referred to in sections 22 and 63, including conclusions”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“54 Except as otherwise provided for under this Act, a review panel may determine its own procedure but must, to the extent that is consistent”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Joël Godin, Robert Sopuck — 4;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 9 on page 38 the following:
“(4) The Minister may, at any time during an assessment, make an order directing the review panel to suspend the assessment until an assessment under sections 92, 93 or 95 is concluded.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Joël Godin, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand, Robert Sopuck — 8.
“(2.1) The report must also set out how traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples was taken into account and utilized in the impact assessment of a designated project.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Robert Sopuck — 3;
NAYS: William Amos, Mike Bossio, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Gagan Sikand — 5.
At 1:31 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.