Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 1543
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. May, for your bill, which I had the opportunity to speak about and support in the House.
I also appreciated Mr. Jowhari's questions about the environmental issue. It will be good to continue the discussion on this topic.
First, in terms of planned obsolescence, please explain the impact of the current legislation on the lifespan of objects and how this legislation is currently being used by companies to their advantage.
View Bryan May Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Bryan May Profile
2021-06-22 11:24
I apologize that I will have to respond in English. I'm working on my French, but it is not nearly good enough to present here today.
The environmental side of this was a huge motivator for me to want to move on this private member's bill. Clearly we will see less waste, less e-waste, as we allow for more items to be repaired. We see a huge growing desire for the DIY culture.
You can go on YouTube and learn how to fix almost anything. I think that is something we want to instill in our culture. I have two children. I teach them as much as I possibly can how to fix things and repair things on their own. It's not just the right thing to do from an environmental perspective, but it's a skill that we are potentially losing in our generation. The question about planned obsolescence is one that we see all the time. My mother-in-law has a washer-dryer from the sixties and it's still running perfectly fine. She had to replace a fan belt on one of them a couple of years ago and it's running perfectly fine.
We don't see that anymore. We see devices that are designed to ultimately fail and that's a choice from a manufacturing perspective, but it's also been driven by consumers. I think we have to recognize this is something, again, that won't be solved by this private member's bill, but potentially provincial legislation and regulation around requiring manufacturers to provide parts or manuals, or things like that, in order to repair some of these devices. I think we need to look at that a little bit deeper in terms of how we move forward.
I agree with you, sir, the idea of planned obsolescence is a challenge, but it won't be solved by this bill.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
Clearly this issue inspires you. We know that the environmental cost of not doing things is always there. Have you been able to measure how much it costs us in terms of waste?
With this bill, how much public money could be saved if we were able to repair our washers and dryers, our electronics and so on? This would keep these items out of landfills or recycling facilities in the United States, for example, as we discussed earlier in our work.
View Bryan May Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Bryan May Profile
2021-06-22 11:27
Again, as with the other question we had about the costs associated with this, I would have to defer to industry experts, who I hope you will call to witness on this bill, but common sense would suggest that it would be significant. We know that waste and waste management, if not the biggest challenge for our municipalities and regions, is up there, and we know that the cost is significant.
We're looking at this from an environmental perspective and we're looking at this from a consumer rights perspective, but we also need to look at this in terms of an affordability perspective and in terms of what consumers, what Canadians, are spending their money on. If they're not spending it on a new appliance, what then could they do? Could they pay down their debt? Could they save for retirement? Could they help their kids through school? There are a whole bunch of other aspects to this, a ripple effect that could result.
I'm excited by what is to come. Hopefully this bill does have enough runway to see royal assent, but maybe not. Again, given that it was unanimously supported in the House, maybe the minister may choose to pick it up as well.
View Sébastien Lemire Profile
BQ (QC)
Regarding the elections, the ball is in the government's court.
You described Bill C‑272 as a precursor. What other legislation could be reviewed in the same way to promote a longer lifespan for our devices?
At the same time, you said that many bills in the past weren't finalized.
What inspired you, both in the bills that were passed and the bills that weren't finalized?
View Bryan May Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Bryan May Profile
2021-06-22 11:29
If I understand your question, there are a number of things that have been attempted in the past, but this issue of copyright would still have been a barrier. It would still have been illegal for those pieces of legislation to pass.
In terms of what was the motivation, quite frankly, it was seeing my children growing up in a more digitized world and seeing the need for this growing every single year.
View Bernard Généreux Profile
CPC (QC)
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. May, for being here today.
We're talking mainly about obsolescence. We spoke a little bit about the environment and various things. This inevitably affects the environment. The items become obsolete because of rules that make us no longer want to repair them. Instead of keeping them for a long time and repairing them, we throw them away, which inevitably harms the environment.
Will your bill somehow ensure that we can have material goods with a longer lifespan, which would contribute to the protection of the environment?
View Bryan May Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Bryan May Profile
2021-06-22 11:37
Thank you very much for the question.
As I said in response to a previous question, no, my bill does not in fact do that. It is the first step that could lead to that type of legislation, that could allow the provinces to move forward with different regulations around manufacturing, parts availability and access to manuals. That isn't affected by this bill; that would be an overreach.
What this bill does is simply allow for a circumvention of the TPMs around diagnosis, maintenance and repair. With that, it opens up.... I agree with you. The outcome that we would like to see as a result of this private member's bill could in fact be those things that you discussed. However, this bill specifically does not snap its fingers and make that all happen. It would all be up to the different provincial jurisdictions to determine for themselves what that right to repair landscape is going to look like.
View Earl Dreeshen Profile
CPC (AB)
One of the questions was around if you happened to have a particular brand of combine and you wanted to put a different header on it. I think that's where some of these other companies are saying, “You know what? We have a great product as well, but we're going to have a little bit of difficulty being able to link up there, or potentially have a problem linking up with this product that we would like to be able to sell.” I think that really becomes one of the issues that people in the ag arena speak about.
One of the other things you spoke about was the environmental aspects of it and the fact that when things become obsolete, or there's planned obsolescence, these have to be dealt with. If you can keep them out of landfills that's important. I have a little different idea as far as landfill is concerned. I look at all of the solar panel waste that we're going to have and everything else as we work in certain directions. I think it's important that we do a full life-cycle analysis of all of the products that we're going to be producing no matter what the scenario, and the fact that you are addressing that is important, so I appreciate that.
I don't know if I have enough time to have you quickly comment on that, but I'd appreciate that.
View Bryan May Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Bryan May Profile
2021-06-22 11:57
I'm not sure that I have the time. Madam Chair has the red tag up there.
However, I will say that's, again, beyond this bill. That will be future legislation. This is simply removing that barrier.
View Taylor Bachrach Profile
NDP (BC)
Ms. Gue, as you know, the NDP has long fought for environmental rights to be recognized in legislation, and we're very pleased to see a reference to the right to a healthy environment embedded in Bill C-28. Unfortunately, that bill has been stalled. It hasn't been debated in the House yet and we're disappointed that it hasn't moved along any further.
How does this bill that we're talking about today, Bill C-230, relate to the concept of environmental rights?
Lisa Gue
View Lisa Gue Profile
Lisa Gue
2021-06-16 17:05
Mr. Bachrach, thanks for your long history of advocacy on environmental rights at the municipal level, as well as in Parliament.
We too are encouraged that the government has introduced Bill C-28, and at the same time, we are discouraged that it has yet to be debated. I hope to have the opportunity in the not-too-distant future to return to your committee to discuss those important measures related to environmental rights and other really critical updates to CEPA that are an important complement to Bill C-230.
In terms of your specific question about how the two relate, as Elaine already said, they are complementary. I would note that, of course, Bill C-28 is primarily amending the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the provisions related to environmental rights and environmental justice that are specific to the authorities of CEPA, whereas Bill C-230 takes a broader view of federal actions.
There are other legislative authorities relating, for example, to the management of nuclear power, nuclear waste, federal environmental assessment and pesticide regulation, just to name a few that could have implications. I think it's a strength of Bill C-230 and, again, an important complement to what's being proposed in Bill C-28, that the proposed national strategy would take a holistic, whole-of-government view to redressing environmental racism.
View Monique Pauzé Profile
BQ (QC)
My question is for Mr. Gaudreault.
You talked a lot about addressing inequalities, so could you define environmental justice for us?
Sylvain Gaudreault
View Sylvain Gaudreault Profile
Sylvain Gaudreault
2021-06-16 17:39
Against the backdrop of climate change, which is irreparable, the biggest challenge facing populations is definitely environmental justice. All impacts on all populations must be avoided. We have to work to avoid the impacts.
The impacts are experienced on three levels. First are the past impacts on indigenous and working-class populations, which we absolutely have to remedy. Second are the current impacts tied to climate change, ranging from heat islands to public health issues. Third are the future impacts, those associated with the green transition; for example, workers and families will end up having to leave behind the types of jobs they currently hold and adopt new types of employment.
That, too, is a facet of environmental justice for all. It is imperative that the provinces and federal government invest massively in a just transition. The transition must be just for workers and vulnerable populations, whether they are racialized or indigenous, whether they live in historically poor neighbourhoods or whether they have to leave well-paying jobs to do other types of work in the future. That is a just transition.
View Fayçal El-Khoury Profile
Lib. (QC)
Could you tell us what measures you are taking every year concerning environmental protection, potential noise or odours that may bother those who live close to railways?
Are there any measures you analyze from year to year and, if so, that you modify?
Results: 1 - 15 of 1543 | Page: 1 of 103

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data