Publication Search

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:44

Expand

I call the meeting to order.

Good afternoon. I'd like to welcome Mr. Zimmer, who's joining our committee today for clause-by-clause of Bill S-5.

We have with us again Mr. Carreau, Ms. Farquharson and Madam Gonçalves.

(On clause 16.1)

I'm just going to take a minute to situate myself. I believe, G-12 had been tabled, so it's on the floor. We're opening the discussion on it. Would anyone like to speak to G-12?

Do you have your hand up, Ms. Collins?

Collapse

S-5, An Act to amend the Canadian Enviro ...

NDP (BC)

Laurel Collins (Victoria)

2023-02-02 15:46

Expand

I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In our last meeting I had proposed a subamendment. After speaking to members of the committee, I don't have support for the subamendment. In the interest of time, I'm not going to move it.

I can speak more maybe after other members of the committee speak.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:46

Expand

Okay.

Would anyone like to speak to this amendment?

Mr. Weiler.

Collapse

Lib. (BC)

Patrick Weiler (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country)

2023-02-02 15:46

Expand

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to propose a subamendment to this amendment.

Currently, the amendment says:

The Ministers shall, to the extent practicable, use scientifically justified alternative methods and strategies to replace, reduce or refine the use of vertebrate animals in the generation of data and the conduct of investigations under paragraph 68(a).

Then proposed subsection (2) would say, “For the purposes of subsection (1), methods and strategies to refine the use of vertebrate animals”. Here I want to strike “shall” and add “include minimizing”, and then from there it continues “pain and distress caused to vertebrate animals in the generation of data and the conduct of investigations under paragraph 68(a).”

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:47

Expand

Can you send it in writing to the clerk? It can't be distributed to everyone, because it's not bilingual, as far as I know. The clerks would like to see a written version.

Mr. Patrick Weiler: Gladly.

The Chair: In the meantime, after you've done that, of course, we can open discussion on the subamendment.

We have Ms. Collins, please.

Collapse

NDP (BC)

Laurel Collins (Victoria)

2023-02-02 15:48

Expand

I appreciate the intent of this motion in general. I think the addition is valuable, and I think the addition of the subamendment is also valuable.

I will be voting in favour of the subamendment but, in the end, voting against the amendment, just because it is deleting an important section about what the minister shall not do and really taking out some of the checkpoints and the requirements to answer this question each time.

I really appreciate the additions that are being added here, and I appreciate the work of both Ms. Taylor Roy and Mr. Weiler.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:49

Expand

Yes, we have Ms. Taylor Roy.

Collapse

Lib. (ON)

Leah Taylor Roy (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill)

2023-02-02 15:49

Expand

I just want to comment on that.

I did meet with some of the animal rights groups—Animal Justice and Dr. Chandrasekera—after the last meeting to discuss this. They're satisfied with this. It has the positive intent of advocating for increased use of non-animal testing to support that kind of research and development in that area.

On the subamendment that Mr. Weiler just made, it also addressed the issue of “refine”, which some people want to remove and some want to include, but it just tried to tailor that to specify that it was only talking about basically reducing pain when it came to the refinements.

I do think this amendment is very much supported by the animal rights activists. I would hope that people will support this as well.

Thank you.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:50

Expand

Is there anyone else?

Mr. Kurek.

Collapse

CPC (AB)

Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot)

2023-02-02 15:50

Expand

Thank you, Chair.

I know that the subamendment was read into the record and there was talk about it being sent. I am just wondering if we can have the exact wording read again. Thank you.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:50

Expand

Don't you have it yet? Has it been sent directly?

Okay, we'll get it to you in a second.

Collapse

CPC (AB)

Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot)

2023-02-02 15:50

Expand

I'd just like to know.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:50

Expand

Absolutely.

As we wait for the written text to arrive, does anyone else want to speak to it?

Ms. Pauzé, go ahead.

Collapse

BQ (QC)

Monique Pauzé (Repentigny)

2023-02-02 15:51

Expand

Since the text that was sent is not in French, could Mr. Weiler reread it?

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:51

Expand

I am being told that it's bilingual. So you will be able to read the French version.

Collapse

BQ (QC)

Monique Pauzé (Repentigny)

2023-02-02 15:51

Expand

Oh, okay.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:51

Expand

The text will be sent in both official languages to all the committee members by email.

Collapse

BQ (QC)

Monique Pauzé (Repentigny)

2023-02-02 15:52

Expand

Mr. Chair, I would like to put a question to the person who made this proposal.

There are restrictions, but I am wondering why it is also proposed to remove all the restrictions. I am trying to read the exceptions and the amendment side by side, and it seems to me that it could work.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:52

Expand

Isn't it an addition?

Collapse

BQ (QC)

Monique Pauzé (Repentigny)

2023-02-02 15:52

Expand

No, it is an amendment by replacement, so all the exceptions would also end up being removed.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:53

Expand

Are you talking about the amendment or the subamendment?

Collapse

BQ (QC)

Monique Pauzé (Repentigny)

2023-02-02 15:53

Expand

About the amendment. I have not received the subamendment yet.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:53

Expand

We are now debating the subamendment. You should receive the text of the subamendment by email.

Ms. Taylor Roy, do you want to elaborate on the amendment?

Collapse

Lib. (ON)

Leah Taylor Roy (Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill)

2023-02-02 15:53

Expand

The original amendment that I put forward was to replace what was there with a positive obligation on the minister to look for alternatives to animal testing.

Madam Collins had suggested going back to the other one, but she withdrew that subamendment.

The other subamendment I put forward was from animal rights groups I had spoken to that had asked for further clarification on the word “refine”. I was going back to my original amendment, which now is not being amended by Ms. Collins. I am trying to add a small section that just talks about the concept of “refine” to ensure that we're talking about reducing distress for the animals.

That's where it is right now.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:54

Expand

Before, we didn't really know what “refine” meant. It was too large a term and it could have meant anything. Now we're narrowing the meaning of “refine”.

Is there anyone else before we vote on the subamendment?

Collapse

CPC (AB)

Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot)

2023-02-02 15:54

Expand

Is it just removing “shall”?

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:54

Expand

It adds a section to define what “refining” means because previously it was a bit too broad.

Go ahead, Ms. Collins.

Your screen is frozen, unfortunately.

Collapse

NDP (BC)

Laurel Collins (Victoria)

2023-02-02 15:55

Expand

Okay. It looks like maybe my connection is unstable. Hopefully you can hear me.

I just want to reiterate my appreciation for this amendment. I do think it's valuable to clarify what the word “refine” means, especially, limiting it to “minimizing pain”. I commend Ms. Taylor Roy for her work on this. I'm just wondering, if we have a general consensus around the table to move forward with the subamendment, whether we could do it by unanimous consent.

Collapse

Lib. (QC)

Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis)

2023-02-02 15:56

Expand

Is there unanimous consent for the subamendment?

(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

The Chair: Now we continue to debate, if necessary, the amendment.

Ms. Pauzé, did you want to speak to amendment G-12?

Collapse

BQ (QC)

Monique Pauzé (Repentigny)

2023-02-02 15:56

Expand

Yes, I did.

I am wondering why the amendment is proposing that the text up to line 21 be replaced, when it seems to me that the “Exceptions” part could very well apply, even if the amendment was adopted.

Collapse

Francis Scarpaleggia - 15:57