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.
37th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION
Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development
EVIDENCE
CONTENTS
Monday, February 16, 2004
| ¹ | 1530 |
 |
The Clerk of the Committee |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.) |
|
The Clerk |
|
The Clerk |
|
Mr. Roy Bailey (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC) |
|
The Clerk |
|
The Clerk |
|
Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, CPC) |
|
The Clerk |
|
The Clerk |
|
The Chair (Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport, Lib.)) |
|
The Chair |
| ¹ | 1535 |
|
Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.) |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
The Chair |
| ¹ | 1540 |
|
Mr. Bob Mills |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, BQ) |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Julian Reed |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair, NDP) |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Joe Comartin |
|
The Chair |
| ¹ | 1545 |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau (Sudbury, Lib.) |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Diane Marleau |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Julian Reed |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bob Mills |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi, Lib.) |
| ¹ | 1550 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Charles Hubbard |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Charles Hubbard |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Julian Reed |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Julian Reed |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bob Mills |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Paul Szabo |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Serge Marcil (Beauharnois—Salaberry, Lib.) |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Serge Marcil |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Serge Marcil |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Serge Marcil |
|
The Chair |
| ¹ | 1555 |
|
Mr. Bob Mills |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras |
|
The Clerk |
|
Mr. Bernard Bigras |
|
The Chair |
|
Hon. Serge Marcil |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Roy Bailey |
| º | 1600 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Roy Bailey |
|
The Chair |
CANADA
Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development |
|
l |
|
l |
|
EVIDENCE
Monday, February 16, 2004
[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
¹ 
(1530)
[English]
The Clerk of the Committee: Honourable members, I see we have a quorum.
[Translation]
Our first item of business is the election of the Chair. I am ready to receive motions to that effect.
[English]
Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.): I would like to nominate Mr. Charles Caccia as chair.
The Clerk: Madam Marleau seconds the motion.
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: Under the new Standing Orders I can now preside over the election of the vice-chairs, if you wish.
Are there any nominations?
Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Roy Bailey (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC): I nominate Bob Mills as vice-chair.
The Clerk: Are there any other nominations? Is it agreed?
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: I declare Mr. Bob Mills duly elected as vice-chair of the committee from the opposition side.
Mr. Mills.
Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, CPC): I nominate Paul Szabo as vice-chair for the government side.
The Clerk: The nomination is in.
[Translation]
Mr. Marcil seconds the motion.
[English]
Is it agreed?
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: I declare Mr. Szabo elected as vice-chair of the committee.
I invite Mr. Caccia to take the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair (Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport, Lib.)): Good day, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for your trust and support in me. While the environment and sustainable development committee focuses on long-term economic issues, decisions respecting the environment also have a major economic impact. Consequently, this committee works for the welfare of future generations.
[English]
The Chair: We have in the past carried out some reasonably good work and produced some reasonably good reports. I'm saying this for the benefit of the new members of this committee, whom I welcome wholeheartedly and whom I wish well as participants in the work we carry out here.
We may or may not have a short life at this committee. Everything is possible. So we should perhaps cast our thinking into the summer and prepare our working plan with several months in mind, rather than the reverse and then regret.... I have seen us make decisions for a very short term and then realize that actually the very short term became something longer. I hope you will agree with this type of analysis.
We have a list of witnesses with regard to the hearings on Kyoto, which is incomplete. You will recall that we started in September by inviting cabinet ministers who are Kyoto oriented, so to speak, and we had some very good sessions. But we did not succeed in bringing the Minister of Finance to this committee and I believe another minister. We brought the Minister of Agriculture, and it was a very good session. But now we have a new Minister of Agriculture. Oh, he never came. That's right. Actually, there are two cabinet ministers who potentially have a very important role to play in the Kyoto implementation. Therefore, that part of this committee's work has remained incomplete.
You may recall that we wrote a letter about groundwater and water in general. We received replies, which the clerk, I'm sure, has circulated. A subcommittee has been formed at the officials level, which consists also of ADMs of two or three departments. That subcommittee started its work in November, I believe, and it should by now have completed its activity. If it has completed that work, then of course this committee would be well-advised to hear the findings of that subcommittee on water because it has carried out work in a horizontal fashion across a number of departments.
There was a request from the head of the Green Party to appear before this committee. Of course, I couldn't make that decision alone. I could only make it with your consent. If you wish to hear from the head of the Green Party, we can certainly devote a session to hear from a party that doesn't yet exist but whose representative has expressed the wish to be heard.
Finally, we also wanted to go into sustainable development strategies, but we never precisely fleshed out that particular plan. You will recall that in September the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Madam Gélinas, urged us to back her up in her work with regard to various departments. As a result of that, as a committee we wrote to virtually every department, and we received replies, which were also circulated by the clerk. That is the nub of the sustainable development strategy. It may be that perhaps in February or early March the committee would find it suitable and desirable to get an assessment on the part of the commissioner as to how that work is progressing for the sustainable development report the commissioner is preparing for next November.
¹ (1535)
We have also received a request to appear from another source, the Canadian Urban Transit Association, CUTA, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. I don't know exactly what is the purpose of their request, but I imagine they would want to make this committee aware of the link between their work and Kyoto, in the case of CUTA, and for the Great Lakes Fishery Commission their work in habitat protection and protection of the resource.
The clerk has corrected me. The issue of invasive species was the reason for that request.
As you can see, there is a wide menu. I would welcome your comments, suggestions, and guidance as to what we could do.
But before going into that discussion, we have to clean up the balance of the requests that the clerk has to....
Mr. Reed.
Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, it pertains to the workload. Perhaps you would like to get that other business out of the way, and then I would like to make a comment.
The Chair: We will do this first, and then we'll open it up to the members.
The clerk informs me that you have a copy of this sheet.
[Translation]
Anything else?
[English]
Have you had enough time to digest it?
I will call them item by item, unless you want me to call them all at once. I don't think that would be wise because there may be objections. So we had better do it systematically.
On the first item concerning the research officers, is there agreement on that?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: On the second item regarding the presence to form a quorum, is there agreement on that?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: On the third item about 10 minutes for witnesses, is that agreed?
Mr. Szabo has a question.
Mr. Paul Szabo: Mr. Chairman, from time to time we will have, for instance, a minister before us, and at other times we may have a panel of two, three, or four people. It seems that we should have some flexibility here. I wonder if the members would want to increase this to 15 minutes and just say that it would be up to 15 minutes, and the chair would determine the allocation based on who the witnesses were.
The Chair: The suggestion is up to 15 minutes. Is that your suggestion, Mr. Szabo?
¹ (1540)
Mr. Bob Mills: The problem with that, Paul, is if we had three or four people appearing before us, we wouldn't want to give the three or four people 15 minutes each.
Mr. Paul Szabo: That's why it is up to 15 minutes. The chair would determine the time. He has up to 15 minutes to play with, but they could have only five minutes each if it was a large panel. This way everybody gets 10 minutes.
The Chair: Mr. Bigras.
[Translation]
Mr. Bernard Bigras (Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, BQ): Mr. Chairman, the formula that we've agreed to strikes a healthy balance between witness presentations and questioning, because most of the time, we receive the documents in advance and have time to familiarize ourselves with their contents. What's important is for members to be able to ask as many questions as possible. Therefore, the 10-minute rule strikes this balance between presentations and questions.
[English]
The Chair: Why don't we insert the word “preferably”, so that it reads “That witnesses be preferably given 10 minutes for their opening statement”?
Mr. Julian Reed: That's okay by me. The chair of the committee should have some discretion as to who is appearing.
The Chair: Then we'll leave it the way it is and hope for the best.
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
On number 4, questioning, five minutes per member, etc., we have a long body of experience.
Mr. Comartin.
Mr. Joe Comartin (Windsor—St. Clair, NDP): Mr. Chair, this is not the pattern you have followed at this committee. Since I've been here, you've taken all opposition parties first and then gone to the questions from the government side.
This would effectively eliminate me in the first round.
The Chair: Yes, you are quite right. In this committee we have followed a different pattern.
Mr. Joe Comartin: You always have, Mr. Chair, so I'm just wondering why we would be doing this.
The Chair: Then we will say in this connection that we will adopt the pattern adopted up until now. Agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
¹ (1545)
The Chair: We now come to the Board of Internal Economy...with a limit of two representatives for each organization. Is that acceptable as it is?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Then we come to the paragraph that says from time to time, at the request of a member or staff, the clerk be authorized to order books and publications, etc. Is that acceptable?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Then we come to the 24-hour notice. Is that acceptable?
Hon. Diane Marleau (Sudbury, Lib.): I just thought it would be better if we could have 48 hours instead of 24.
The Chair: We have worked with 24 and we have survived.
Hon. Diane Marleau: It's just a suggestion.
The Chair: Do we want to change it to 48? Is 24 okay?
Mr. Paul Szabo: Mr. Chairman, if the committee has unanimous consent, they can even waive it entirely.
The Chair: The clerk is alerting us that we will be facing that situation very soon.
Hon. Diane Marleau: Isn't 48 hours the standard in the House of Commons?
The Chair: Each committee has its own rules.
Let's take a quick poll here. Whoever is in favour of 48 hours, please so indicate. Who is in favour of 24? It seems to me that 24 carries.
Mr. Julian Reed: Mr. Chairman, I understand there is a discretionary power here, and I think we should all acknowledge that.
The Chair: Twenty-four hours has a slight edge on 48, so we'll stick to that.
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: The next one is authorization to purchase gifts on behalf of the committee.
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Next is the question of holding working sessions during meal hours. Is that all right?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Order in Council appointments are to be circulated. Is that fine?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: The final one is that the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute documents received from the public only after they have been translated in both official languages.
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Before we open up the discussion for future work, the floor is open to Mr. Mills to propose his notice of motion. He is seeking....
Well, you will indicate what you are seeking. Go ahead.
Mr. Bob Mills: I would seek unanimous consent to present these today. They are not critical, but I think they can be dealt with very quickly. I will just go through the two of them together.
The first one is pretty standard, that whenever we have the main estimates or supplementary estimates we call the minister. This makes it official that we do that. That's pretty much standard procedure. Secondly, if we get a chapter of the Auditor General's report, that we call the Auditor General and the senior officials of that department to the committee for that meeting and that it be televised. Again that's pretty standard procedure.
Secondly, Gib Parent has been doing a lot of very interesting work, particularly in the area of alternate energy and windmills. He has been looking at them all over the world and some of the alternate technology that could be used in energy supply and so on for the future. I'm interested enough in that work that I think the committee should deal with that directly and have him as a witness. To my knowledge, he hasn't been called, or maybe once some time ago, but he hasn't been called to the committee to report on exactly what he has been doing for the last year or year and a half, particularly in the area of alternate energy.
So that's the purpose of that motion.
The Chair: We have three motions in essence, and I will seek unanimous consent one by one rather than as a package.
Mr. Hubbard.
Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I think we just made a point here in terms of 24 hours' notice. I will not give unanimous consent.
¹ (1550)
The Chair: You will not?
Mr. Charles Hubbard: No.
The Chair: On all three?
Mr. Charles Hubbard: Yes.
The Chair: That takes care of that until the next meeting. So it will be on the agenda at the next meeting.
Thank you.
Mr. Reed, you have the floor.
Mr. Julian Reed: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Considering the intensity of the proposed workload here, we're going to have to be somewhat prudent as to what we select and what we don't select, and I'm wondering if it would be useful to have a steering committee that would sort that out. A steering committee would consist of the chair, the two vice-chairs, and one more from each of the opposition. My experience with steering committees is that they don't overrule a standing committee, but they come back with suggestions as to why we should tackle these particular subjects, and it might save us some time.
The Chair: Fine. We could do that, if the committee is in favour.
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Mr. Julian Reed: Great.
The Chair: The steering committee could meet tomorrow in my office, and we could go over the various alternatives and come back on Wednesday with a plan. We could meet tomorrow morning at 11 o'clock, let's say.
Mr. Bob Mills: Mr. Chair, I'm not sure how many others are going to the Kyoto climate change meeting that the U.S. embassy has set up for Wednesday from 2:30 to 4 p.m.
The Chair: Nevertheless, we have been allocated a slot on Monday and Wednesday, and those members can go to the U.S. embassy from 2 to 3 p.m. and then come back and still have the flavour of the meeting.
If tomorrow at 11 o'clock is not convenient, would you like to suggest a different time?
Mr. Paul Szabo: Tomorrow is Tuesday.
The Chair: We're talking about the steering committee tomorrow.
Mr. Paul Szabo: We could have a preliminary discussion tomorrow.
The Chair: What time would you suggest, Mr. Bigras?
[Translation]
Mr. Bernard Bigras: If I understand correctly, Mr. Chairman, this meeting would take place in your office.
The Chair: That is correct.
Mr. Bernard Bigras: Therefore, without the benefit of simultaneous translation.
The Chair: No, the conversation would alternate between French and English.
Mr. Bernard Bigras: I understand that the meeting will take place in your office and that both languages will be spoken, but it seems to me...I've attended steering committee meetings in the past. As a rule, such meetings were held in a room with the benefit of simultaneous interpretation. If we're going to do this, let's do it right, rather than resort to half measures.
The Chair: Fine then. The clerk will look for a room where we can conduct a meeting in both official languages. He'll let us know, most likely around 11 a.m., if a room is available. Agreed?
Mr. Marcil.
Hon. Serge Marcil (Beauharnois—Salaberry, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, mention was made earlier of the steering committee which would be composed of the two vice-chairs, the Chair and two other members. Who might these members be?
The Chair: Mr. Bigras will represent the Bloc Québécois, and Mr. Comartin, the NDP.
Hon. Serge Marcil: What about the Government representative?
The Chair: There should be an equal number of Government representatives. You're the Parliamentary Secretary, are you not?
Hon. Serge Marcil: That's right.
The Chair: Mr. Reed and Mr. Szabo would round out the representation for the Government side.
Hon. Serge Marcil But the steering committee shouldn't have the same number of members as the main committee.
The Chair: That's the steering committee's problem, Mr. Marcil. It's always been like this. However, if we want to go with the formula... We rejected it regularly last year because...However, we can always try it this one time to see if it's workable.
¹ (1555)
[English]
Mr. Bob Mills: The other option is just to have the chairman and the two vice-chairs. Then you have balance. You can make decisions a lot easier with three people than with six people.
The Chair: Yes, that would be....
[Translation]
Mr. Comartin isn't here.
Mr. Bernard Bigras: Perhaps the clerk can enlighten us as to what happens elsewhere with the steering committee. Since this is new to us, who sits on the steering committee as a rule?
The Chair: It's a microcosm of the main committee.
Mr. Bernard Bigras: Therefore, as I understand it, three members of the government party sit on a steering committee. Correct?
The Clerk: Not necessarily. As a rule, the steering committee is composed of the Chair, the two vice-chairs, a representative of each party and the parliamentary secretary.
Mr. Bernard Bigras: That's standard procedure.
The Chair: Will you be here tomorrow?
Hon. Serge Marcil: I will, but I would like to make a suggestion. Generally speaking, when a steering committee meets and makes a motion to the main committee, it's rather hard for members to oppose that motion. If the representative of each of the parties... However, on occasion, the committee may refuse to take directions from the steering committee.
Since there are three opposition parties, I would suggest that there be three members: yourself, as Chair, the Government Vice-Chair, and the Opposition Vice-Chair, for a total of three persons. It's not a question of voting either, because the steering committee merely debates issues. It does not vote. There could be three members from this side, three from the other side and yourself, as Chair, including the Vice-Chair. It's not necessary to have one representative from the Conservative Party, one representative from the Bloc and one from the NDP.
The Chair: I'd like to suggest the following:
[English]
one president, two vice-presidents, one parliamentary secretary, and one for each of the other parties, for a total of six.
Correct?
An hon. member: Whatever works.
The Chair: Fine. That's done.
I hope you will agree that on Wednesday we will hold a meeting with HRDC, which already has been kindly agreed upon and arranged with the help of our clerk. We will hear about the green employment chapter of the commissioner's report. It has been in the works for some time, so it is concluding old business. It will be an informative session on green employment. That will be in addition to the motions Mr. Mills will present on Wednesday, having given the necessary notice. Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
So we'll meet tomorrow morning, and we hope for the best. A notice will follow.
Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Roy Bailey: Mr. Chair, this is a personal thing, but maybe the rest of the committee is interested as well. There recently was an announcement that a lot of money will be going into my riding in the form of an ethanol plant. Because the U.S. has built ten to our one, or maybe more, they certainly have a lot more research going on. I would like to know about all of the research and the debates that have taken place stateside to see what they're saying about it. I've been reading about it and I have gotten some information from the States, but I'm sure the committee and you, sir, could get a lot more information and would know the right people so that the information would come to the attention of this committee.
º (1600)
The Chair: So you would like to....
Mr. Roy Bailey: Through you and the clerk I'd like to go to the sources in Washington to see what research has been conducted on that subject.
The Chair: That brings me, then, to the pleasant task of reintroducing to all of you Tim Williams, who is our researcher. His first task will be to launch this kind of research.
Are there any other requests? If not, we thank you, and we'll see you very soon.
The meeting is adjourned.