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.
By unanimous consent, it was agreed to reverse the Committee's previous decision to adopt the following amendment:
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.”
“(3) 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.”
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast — 2.
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 22 on page 38 the following:
“59.1 (1) The Minister must cause an independent review of sections 31 to 59 and 92 to 95, and of their operation to be undertaken.
(2) The Minister must cause a report of the review to be laid before each House of Parliament within two years after the day on which this section comes into force and within every two-year period after the tabling of a report under this subsection.
(3) However, if an Act of Parliament amends this Act based on a review, the next report must be tabled within two years after the day on which the amending Act is assented to.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 7.
“59.1 The following definition apply in this section and in sections 60 to 71.
adaptative management means a structured and iterative process for the implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment of mitigation measures in an attempt to achieve specified objectives, reduce uncertainty, and increase knowledge. (gestion adaptative)”
Debate arose thereon.
At 11:30 a.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 11:35 a.m., the sitting resumed.
By unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.
(a) by replacing line 31 on page 38 with the following:
“the factors set out in section 22, in the public inter-”
(b) by replacing lines 34 and 35 on page 38 with the following:
“whether these effects are, in light of the factors set out in section 22, in the public interest.”
(c) by replacing lines 8 and 9 on page 39 with the following:
“are indicated in the report are, in light of the factors set out in section 22, in the public interest.”
(d) by replacing lines 17 and 18 on page 39 with the following:
“are indicated in the report are, in light of the factors set out in section 22, in the public interest.”
(e) by replacing lines 23 to 42 on page 39 with the following:
“referred to in that subsection, must take into account the factors set out in section 22.”
(f) by replacing lines 14 and 15 on page 41 with the following:
“may be, considered all of the factors set out in section 22.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 34 and 35 on page 38 with the following:
“whether these effects are justified, in light of the factors referred to in section 63, because the project is in the public interest.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“ral and the reasons for it are posted on the Internet site.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 8 and 9 on page 39 with the following:
“are indicated in the report are justified, in light of the factors referred to in section 63, because the project is in the public interest.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 17 and 18 on page 39 with the following:
“are indicated in the report are justified, in light of the factors referred to in section 63, because the project is in the public interest.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 23 and 24 on page 39 with the following:
“referred to in that subsection are to be based on:”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 23 and 24 on page 39 with the following:
“referred to in that subsection, must be based on 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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“referred to in that subsection, must be based on the report with respect to the impact assessment and a considera-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast — 4.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 14 on page 41 with the following:“may be, based the determination on the report with respect to the impact assessment of the designated project and considered each of the factors referred to in section”
(a) by deleting lines 25 and 26 on page 39.
(b) by deleting lines 39 to 42 on page 39.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 by replacing lines 41 and 42 on page 39 with the following:
“Canada’s ability to meet its national and international obligations and commitments in respect of the environment, climate change and biodiversity.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Monique Pauzé for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 42 on page 39 the following:
“(f) the extent to which the laws regarding land use and development and environmental protection in force in the province in which the project is being carried out are respected.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Monique Pauzé and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: — 0;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 9.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also negatived:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 42 on page 39 the following:“63.1 The Minister or Governor in Council must not make a decision with respect to a designated project under paragraph 60(1)(a) or section 62, respectively, unless he or she is satisfied that the laws regarding land use and development and environmental protection in force in the province in which the project is being carried out are respected.”
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 42 on page 39 the following:
“(f) any relevant assessment referred to in section 92, 93 or 95.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 5 on page 40 with the following:
“may be, takes into account are justified because the project is in the public interest, the”
(b) by replacing line 14 on page 40 with the following:
“takes into account are justified because the project is in the public interest, 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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(b) the implementation of a follow-up program and, if the Minister considers it appropriate, an adaptive management plan.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast — 4.
(a) by replacing line 5 on page 41 with the following:
“that project and the reasons for the determination and conclusions as well as for the conclusions reached with respect to the factors considered under section 63;
(a.1) provides detailed written reasons if the Minister disagrees with any of the conclusions or recommendations contained in the report submitted by the Agency or the review panel;”
(b) by adding after line 11 on page 41 the following:
“(e) for any approved designated project, clearly assigns responsibility to an appropriate federal authority to amend the terms and conditions of any approval as appropriate in the event that predictions about the impacts and benefits of the approved designated project either underestimate its negative impacts or overestimate its benefits.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
(a) by adding after line 21 on page 41 the following:
“(3.1) Despite subsection 65(3), the Minister must not issue the decision statement before the conclusion of consultations with the Indigenous peoples who may be affected by the designated project.”
(b) by adding after line 27 on page 41 the following:
“(4.1) Despite subsection 65(4), the Minister must not issue the decision statement before the conclusion of consultations with the Indigenous peoples who may be affected by the 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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(7) The Minister must inform the proponent in writing of any extension granted under this section and the reasons for granting it and ensure that a notice of the extension and the reasons for granting it are posted on the Internet site.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast — 2.
“Act, except with respect to activities at a uranium mine or mill, designate any condition that is included in the deci-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
“Act, except for those in relation to a uranium or thorium mine or mill, designate any condition that is included in the deci-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
“(4) Sections 120 to 152 do not apply to the administration or enforcement of this Act as it relates to any condition that is considered to be a part of a licence and any decision statement that is considered to be a part of a licence, certificate, order, permit, authorization, leave, exemption, direction or approval.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
(a) replacing line 23 on page 43 with the following:
“70 (1) The Minister must, after considering any views provided by the proponent on the matter, establish the period within”
(b) replacing line 26 on page 43 with the following:
“(2) The Minister may, after considering any views provided by the proponent on the matter, extend the period by any period”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“72.1 A determination made by the Minister under paragraph 60(1)(a) or by the Governor in Council under section 61 or 62 may, on a question of law or of mixed law and fact, be appealed to the Federal Court.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
At 12:37 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 12:49 p.m., the sitting resumed.
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 20 on page 45 the following:
“(d) a federal authority’s preparations for the determinations referred to in sections 82, 82.1 and 83 and for the designation referred to in section 87.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 7.
“(3) The awarding of costs under the participant funding program will be prescribed in accordance with the regulations made under paragraph 109(b.1).
(4) The Agency must establish procedures and guidelines for filing applications for costs and determining any costs awarded to the public, including costs advances.
(5) Any application for costs for public participation in the planning phase of a proposed designated project must be submitted to the Agency.
(6) Any application for costs related to the referral of an impact assessment to a review panel under section 36 must be submitted to the Minister.
(7) Any application for costs when a designated project is referred to a review panel for review must be submitted to the review panel.
(8) Any application for costs for public participation in a regional or strategic assessment must be submitted to the Minister.
(9) Any person may make a request for a costs advance, including during the planning process, panel reviews, or regional or strategic reviews.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
(a) by replacing line 24 on page 45 to line 10 on page 46 with the following:
“76 (1) If the Agency or a review panel incurs costs in relation to the exercise of its powers or the performance of its duties and functions in respect of a designated project, the proponent of the designated project must pay
(a) to the Agency
(i) any costs that the Agency incurs in respect of that project in relation to the exercise of its powers or the performance of its duties and functions for prescribed services provided by a third party, and
(ii) any prescribed amount that is related to the Agency's exercise of that power or the performance of that duty or function; and
(b) to a review panel
(i) any costs that the review panel incurs in respect of that project in relation to the exercise of its powers or the performance of its duties and functions for prescribed services provided by a third party, and
(ii) any prescribed amount that is related to the review panel's exercise of that power or the performance of that duty or function.”
(b) by replacing lines 11 to 13 on page 46 with the following:
“(2) The Service Fees Act does not apply to the prescribed amount referred to in paragraph (1)(b).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The Chair ruled that the following three (3) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also negatived:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 46 with the following:“the costs and amounts referred to in”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 26 and 27 on page 46 with the following:
“79 The costs and amounts that the proponent must pay under”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 31 on page 46 with the following:
“80 If a proponent does not pay a cost or”
“designated under that section; and
(c) a physical activity that is carried out on lands other than federal lands, but that is regulated by a federal authority or wholly or partially financed by a federal authority.” (projet)
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 25 on page 47 with the following:
“designated under that section; and
(c) a physical activity that is carried out in Canada, but not on federal lands, and that is not a designated project, but for which an authority is a proponent or is providing funding. (projet)”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“82.1 An authority must not carry out a project on non federal lands, exercise any power or perform any duty or function conferred on it under any Act of Parliament other than this Act that couId permit a project to be carried out, in whole or in part, or provide financial assistance to any person for the purpose of enabling that project to be carried out, in whole or in part, unless
(a) the authority determines that the carrying out of the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects; or
(b) the authority determines that the carrying out of the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects and the Governor in Council decides, under subsection 90(3), that those effects are justified in the circumstances.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 18 on page 48 with the following:
“adverse environmental effects must be based on a considera-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Jacques Gourde — 3.
“tion of the factors listed in Section 22.”
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: John Aldag, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, Wayne Long, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(b) Indigenous knowledge provided with respect to the project;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, Wayne Long, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“(2) However, if the project is to be carried out outside Canada, the authority’s determination need not include a consideration of the factors set out in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, Wayne Long, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
(a) replacing lines 2 and 3 on page 49 with the following:
“tion and that invites the public to pro-”
(b) replacing line 5 on page 49 with the following:
“(2) No sooner than 30 days after the day on which it”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, Wayne Long, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
(a) replacing line 10 on page 49 with the following:
“87 The Minister may, by order, designate a physical activity, or a”
(b) replacing lines 13 and 14 on page 49 with the following:
“and is not a designated project, but that, in the Minister’s opinion, may cause significant adverse environmen-”
(c) replacing lines 16 and 17 on page 49 with the following:
“88 (1) The Minister may, by order, designate a class of projects if, in the Minister’s opinion, the carrying out of a project that is a part”
(d) replacing line 23 on page 49 with the following:
“89 (1) If the Minister intends to designate a physical”
(e) replacing line 25 on page 49 with the following:
“or a class of projects under subsection 88(1), the Agency must post on”
(f) replacing line 29 on page 49 with the following:
“(2) The Minister must consider any comments received”
(g) replacing line 32 on page 49 with the following:
“(3) If the Minister designates a physical activity, or a”
(h) replacing line 34 on page 49 with the following:
“projects under subsection 88(1), the Agency must post on the Internet”
(i) replacing line 37 on page 49 with the following:
“projects, as the case may be, and the Minister’s reasons for making”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Wayne Long, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Jacques Gourde — 3.
“91.1 Federal authorities must exercise their powers or perform their duties and functions with respect to an approved designated project in a manner that ensures the effective implementation of the follow-up program and the complete transparency of its results by means of a central electronic federal registry.”
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: John Aldag, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, Wayne Long, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 1 on page 51 with the following:
“93 (1) If, according to the conditions and circumstances established by regulations made under section 112.1, it is appro-”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The Chair ruled that the following two (2) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also negatived:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 51 with the following:“95 If, because the conditions and circumstances established by regulations made under section 112.1 exist, it is appropriate to conduct a strategic assessment, the Minister may establish a committee — or autho-”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 24 on page 59 the following:
“112.1 Within one year after the day on which this Act comes into force, the Minister must make regulations establishing
(a) rules of practice and procedure for review panel hearings that are based on procedural fairness and natural justice, that emphasize flexibility and informality in the conduct of the hearings in order to facilitate public participation and that include processes to ensure that any intervenors have access to information and have the right to cross examine witnesses and present expert witnesses, as well as any other rights to ensure their meaningful participation;
(b) detailed criteria and the process to be followed for determining the extent to which a designated project contributes to sustainability;
(c) the conditions and circumstances in which regional assessments or strategic assessments must be conducted, as well as the considerations that must be included and the processes to be followed in conducting those assessments;
(d) classes of projects on federal lands or outside Canada in respect of which the Agency would conduct a streamlined assessment based on the purposes of this Act; and
(e) the process to apply in streamlined assessments referred to in paragraph (d).”
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 26 on page 51 the following:
“93.1 The assessment referred to in section 92 or 93 must include an assessment of the effects of past physical activities, of alternative means of carrying out the physical activities and of options for the protection of the environment, human life or health or public safety.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 to 37 on page 51 with the following:
“(a) any proposed or existing Government of Canada policy, plan or program; or”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: — 0;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 9.
“95.1 (1) The Minister must establish and maintain a list of priority regional and strategic assessments, and updates it at least annually.
(2) The Minister must, in each calendar year, conduct at least one regional assessment and one strategic assessment included in the list established under 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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 adding after line 3 on page 52 the following:
“(2) The assessment referred to in subsection (1) must include an assessment of the environmental, economic and social effects, and of alternative means of carrying out the physical activities.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 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 adding after line 11 on page 52 the following:
“(3) The terms of reference established under subsections (1) and (2) must include terms respecting the consideration of the traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Jacques Gourde, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
At 1:52 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 3:34 p.m., the sitting resumed.
(a) replacing line 12 on page 52 with the following:
“97 (1) The Minister must respond, with reasons and within”
(b) adding after line 16 on page 52 the following:
“(2) When conducting an assessment referred to in section 92, 93 or 95, the Agency or committee, as the case may be, must take into account any scientific information and Indigenous knowledge provided with respect to the assessment.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: — 0.
“98 Subject to section 119, the Agency, or the committee, must ensure that the”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast — 2.
“public is provided with an opportunity to participate meaningfully, within the time period specified by the Agency or committee, as the case may be, in”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: — 0.
(a) replacing line 4 on page 53 with the following:
“102 (1) On completion of the assessment that it conducts,”
(b) adding after line 9 on page 53 the following:
“(2) Subject to section 119, the report must set out how the Agency or committee, as the case may be, took into account and used any Indigenous knowledge provided with respect to the assessment.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: — 0.
“Canadian Assessment Appeal Tribunal
103.1 (1) The Canadian Assessment Appeal Tribunal (referred to as the “Tribunal” in this section and in sections 103.2 to 103.6) is established, consisting of a Chairperson and not more than two other members, one of whom may be a Vice-Chairperson.
(2) The members of the Tribunal are to be appointed by the Governor in Council to hold office during good behaviour for a term not exceeding five years, subject to removal by the Governor in Council at any time for cause.
(3) The Governor in Council must appoint as members persons who
(a) have knowledge of or experience in issues of sustainability that may arise in relation to impact, regional and strategic assessments; and
(b) have demonstrated that they are committed to respecting the rights and interests of the Indigenous peoples of Canada and to achieving reconciliation with them.
(4) A person is not eligible to be appointed or to continue as a member of the Tribunal if they are an employee of any federal department, agency, board or commission.
(5) The Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson are to be designated from among the members by the Governor in Council.
(6) The employees who are required for the purposes of the Tribunal are to be appointed under the Public Service Employment Act.
103.2 An appeal may be filed by a proponent, a person residing in Canada or a jurisdiction referred to in paragraphs (a) to (g) of the definition jurisdiction in section 2;
103.3 An appeal lies to the Tribunal from any of the following decisions:
(a) a decision by the Minister not to make a designation under subsection 9(1);
(b) a decision by the Agency under section 16 that an impact assessment is not required for a designated project;
(c) a decision by the Agency during the planning phase provided for in sections 10 to 15;
(d) an order made by the Minister under subsection 17(1) directing the Agency to not conduct an impact assessment of a designated project;
(e) a determination by the Agency or the Minister under subsection 22(2) of the scope of the factors to be taken into account;
(f) a decision by the Agency under section 29 to delegate the carrying out of any part of an impact assessment;
(g) the approval by the Minister under section 31 of the substitution of a jurisdiction’s process for an impact assessment;
(h) a determination by the Minister under section 36 to not refer an impact assessment to a review panel;
(i) the establishment or approval by the Minister under section 41, 44 or 47 of a review panel's terms of reference;
(j) the termination by the Minister under section 58 of the impact assessment of a designated project by a review panel;
(k) a determination by the Minister or the Governor in Council under section 60 or 62, respectively, as to whether a designated project is in the public interest;
(l) the establishment by the Minister under section 64 of conditions that are to be complied with by a proponent of a designated project;
(m) a decision statement issued by the Minister under section 65;
(n) the amendment by the Minister under section 68 of a decision statement;
(o) a determination by an authority under section 82 or 83 that the carrying out of a project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects; and
(p) a decision by the Minister under section 97 to not conduct the requested assessment.
103.4 No civil proceedings lie against any member of the Tribunal for anything done or said in good faith in the exercise or purported exercise of a power or in the performance or purported performance of a duty or function of the Tribunal.
103.5 The Tribunal may make rules governing the practice and procedure in relation to applications for appeals, including rules respecting
(a) the periods for appeal, the priority to be given to proceedings, the notice that is required and the period in which notice must be given;
(b) the information that may be required and the manner in which, and the time within which, it must be provided with respect to a proceeding before the Tribunal;
(c) the production and disclosure of documents;
(d) the circumstances in which a hearing is to be held in the absence of the public;
(e) the referral of a matter to a process of dispute resolution; and
(f) any other matter considered by the Chairperson to require rules.
103.6 The Governor in Council may make regulations respecting the Tribunal, including regulations respecting
(a) for the purposes of subsection 103.1(3), the criteria for determining whether a person is qualified to be a member of the Tribunal;
(b) the sittings of the Tribunal;
(c) the inspection by the Tribunal or its employees of any land or premises;
(d) the recommendations and orders that the Tribunal may make in respect of an appeal; and
(e) the time within which the Tribunal must make a decision on an appeal.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
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 11 on page 53 the following:
“Assessment Appeal Tribunal
103.1 (1) A tribunal called the Assessment Appeal Tribunal (referred to as “Tribunal” in this section and in sections 103.2 to 103.4), is to be established, consisting of full and part-time permanent members appointed in accordance with subsection (3), from which a Chairperson is to be appointed.
(2) The Governor in Council must appoint no more than five members of the Tribunal to hold office during good behaviour for a term not exceeding five years, subject to removal by the Governor in Council at any time for cause.
(3) The members appointed to the Tribunal must represent a range of regions across Canada and, on the basis of their education, training, and local or traditional knowledge, as well as experience in environmental issues and Indigenous rights and interests, must appear, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, to have the relevant knowledge and expertise to serve as members.
103.2 An appeal may be filed by a proponent, an intervenor or a participant in the process.
103.3 An appeal lies to the Tribunal from any decision of the Minister, Agency or Governor in Council in relation to whether a designated project is to be subjected to an impact assessment, including any decision of whether or not to refer a project to a review panel, any decision to determine the scope of a project by omitting or including works associated with the project and any decision to set or extend a time limit.
103.4 No member of the Tribunal is to receive remuneration for the performance of their duties.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 3:47 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 3:50 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The Committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Elizabeth May, — That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 11 on page 53 the following:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 11 on page 53 the following:
“Assessment Appeal Tribunal
103.1 (1) A tribunal called the Assessment Appeal Tribunal (referred to as “Tribunal” in this section and in sections 103.2 to 103.4), is to be established, consisting of full and part-time permanent members appointed in accordance with subsection (3), from which a Chairperson is to be appointed.
(2) The Governor in Council must appoint no more than five members of the Tribunal to hold office during good behaviour for a term not exceeding five years, subject to removal by the Governor in Council at any time for cause.
(3) The members appointed to the Tribunal must represent a range of regions across Canada and, on the basis of their education, training, and local or traditional knowledge, as well as experience in environmental issues and Indigenous rights and interests, must appear, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, to have the relevant knowledge and expertise to serve as members.
103.2 An appeal may be filed by a proponent, an intervenor or a participant in the process.
103.3 An appeal lies to the Tribunal from any decision of the Minister, Agency or Governor in Council in relation to whether a designated project is to be subjected to an impact assessment, including any decision of whether or not to refer a project to a review panel, any decision to determine the scope of a project by omitting or including works associated with the project and any decision to set or extend a time limit.
103.4 No member of the Tribunal is to receive remuneration for the performance of their duties.”
The debate continued.
Linda Duncan moved, — That the amendment be amended by deleting the words “103.4 No member of the Tribunal is to receive remuneration for the performance of their duties.”.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 7.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: — 0;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 8.
(a) replacing line 27 on page 53 with the following:
“designated project that it conducts are posted and, subject to paragraph (4)(c), maintained on the In-”
(b) replacing lines 6 and 7 on page 54 with the following:
“those factors;”
(c) replacing line 25 on page 54 with the following:
“them may be obtained;
(g.1) any public comments received during the impact assessment; and”
(d) replacing line 31 on page 54 with the following:
“records or information are posted and, subject to paragraph (4)(c), maintained on the Internet site:”
(e) replacing line 14 on page 55 with the following:
“of them may be obtained;
(h.1) any public comments received in the course of the impact assessment; and”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast — 2.
(a) by replacing lines 29 to 31 on page 55 with the following:
“posted on the Internet site and maintained permanently.”
(b) by replacing line 21 on page 56 with the following:
“(a) all data collected and all records posted on the Internet site;”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 7.
“Indigenous knowledge under this Act or for any consequences that flow”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: — 0.
“(b.1) prescribing the process for applications for costs and the awarding of costs for public participation in the participant funding program established under section 75, and the issuance of guidelines for funding following consultation with the public;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5.
“in paragraph 114(1)(c), (d), (e) or (f);”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 7.
“112 The Minister must make regulations”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5.
(a) adding after line 8 on page 59 the following:
“(a.1) respecting the form and format of a description referred to in subsection 10(1), of a notice referred to in subsection 15(1) and of any information or study provided under this Act and the manner of providing the description, notice, information or study;”
(b) replacing lines 12 to 14 on page 59 with the following:
“(c) prescribing, for the purposes of any of subsections 9(5), 18(6), 28(9), 36(3) and 37(6), any activity in respect of which a time limit may be suspended and respecting circumstances, in relation to an activity, in which a time limit may be suspended;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast — 2.
“112.1 (1) Within one year after the day on which this Act comes into force, the Minister must make regulations to establish principles and criteria and provide guidance respecting subsection 9(1), paragraph 18(1)(a), subsections 22(2) and 26(2), section 27, subsection 28(3), section 29, paragraph 33(1)(i), and sections 38, 63, 64, 97 and 99.
(2) The Minister must also make regulations respecting
(a) public participation procedures;
(b) panel procedures;
(c) criteria under section 9 for designating a category of physical activities;
(d) direction on how to carry out an effective cumulative effects assessment at the project level, particularly with respect to potential future developments and when there is no current regional assessment available as a reference for future developments;
(e) the interests to be represented on assessment-specific, multi-interest planning committees and how appropriate representatives are to be selected;
(f) processes for regional and strategic assessments;
(g) processes for impact assessments of projects carried out under sections 82 and 83; and
(h) criteria for amending conditions of authorizations with respect to approvals in response to the results of monitoring and follow-up programs.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 7.
(a) by deleting lines 5 and 6 on page 60;
(b) by deleting lines 17 to 20 on page 61.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 7.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 38 on page 61 the following:“114.1 For the purposes of this Act, the Minister must
(a) issue guidelines and codes of practice respecting the application of this Act;
(b) establish criteria for the appointment of members of review panels; and
(c) establish criteria for the appointment of members of committees established under section 92 or 93.”
“(3) Members of the advisory council are entitled to be paid reasonable travel and other expenses while performing their duties and functions under this Act.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 4:20 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:23 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
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 25 on page 62 the following:
“(3) The membership of the advisory council must include at least one person who is a member of a First Nation, one Métis person and one Inuit person.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 7.
“(3) The membership of the council must include at least
(a) one person recommended by an Indigenous governing body or other entity that represents the interests of First Nations;
(b) one person recommended by an Indigenous governing body or other entity that represents the interests of the Inuit; and
(c) one person recommended by an Indigenous governing body or other entity that represents the interests of the Métis.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast — 2.
(a) replacing line 2 on page 63 with the following:
“cal year ends, including the advice with respect to regional and strategic assessments to be given priority.”
(b) replacing line 7 on page 63 with the following:
“two fiscal years, including the advice with respect to regional and strategic assessments to be given priority.”
(c) replacing line 15 on page 63 with the following:
“comments on the report to the advisory council, including with respect to the advice the council provided about regional and strategic assessments, and then”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Ed Fast — 2.
“Indigenous Knowledge
119 (1) Any Indigenous knowledge that is provided to the Minister, the”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: James Bezan, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Scott Reid — 4.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 63 with the following:“(2) Despite subsection (1), the Indigenous knowledge re-”
“Agency, a committee referred to in section 92, 93 or 95 or a review panel under this Act in confidence is”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: James Bezan, Sylvie Boucher, Scott Reid — 3.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 63 with the following:“(3) The Minister, the Agency, the committee or the review panel, as the”
“(2.1) Before disclosing Indigenous knowledge under paragraph 2(b) for the purposes of procedural fairness and natural justice, the Minister, the Agency, the committee or the review panel, as the case may be, must consult the person or entity who provided the Indigenous knowledge and the person or entity to whom it is proposed to be disclosed about the scope of the proposed disclosure and potential conditions under subsection (3).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: James Bezan, Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Scott Reid — 4.
The Chair ruled that the following two (2) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 31 on page 63 and line 1 on page 64 with the following:“case may be, may, having regard to the consultation referred to in subsection (2.1), impose conditions with respect to the disclosure of Indigenous knowledge by any person or entity to”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 4 on page 64 with the following:
“(4) The person or entity referred to in subsection (3) must comply”
“condition established under section 64, amended under subsection 68(1) or added to a decision statement under that subsection, that is alleged”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: James Bezan, Sylvie Boucher, Scott Reid — 3.
“Alternative Dispute Resolution
139.1 (1) If all the parties to a dispute that is directly related to a matter under this Act consent, the review panel must provide or cause to be provided an alternative dispute resolution process for the dispute.
(2) The results of the alternative dispute resolution process are not binding.
(3) The review panel may take the results of the alternative dispute resolution process into account when making a recommendation and may refer to them in the recommendation.
(4) The review panel must make the results of the alternative dispute resolution process public, subject to the consent of the parties.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers — 7.
“(d) track compliance with monitoring and reporting obligations with respect to the follow-up programs of approved designated projects and report annually on the matter, including on aspects of follow-up programs that are under the control of other jurisdictions; and
(e) ensure that lessons learned about the accuracy of the predictions made during past impact assessments are shared with the public and brought to the attention of those involved in relevant future impact assessments under this Act.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers — 8.
At 5:05 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:21 p.m., the sitting resumed.
“relating to impact assessment, or consult the Indigenous peoples that may be affected by the carrying out of the 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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers — 8.
“related to impact assessment and monitoring committees for matters related to the implementation of follow-up programs and adaptive management plans, including with respect”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
“to advise it on issues related to impact assessments and regional and strategic assessments, in-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 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 line 31 on page 78 with the following:
“at least one person who is a member of a First Nation, one Métis person and one Inuit person.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers — 8.
(a) replacing lines 3 and 4 on page 79 with the following:
“committee.”
(b) adding after line 4 on page 79 the following:
“(2.1) The membership of the committee must include at least
(a) one person recommended by an Indigenous governing body or other entity that represents the interests of First Nations;
(b) one person recommended by an Indigenous governing body or other entity that represents the interests of the Inuit; and
(c) one person recommended by an Indigenous governing body or other entity that represents the interests of the Métis.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
“Act before the day on which this Act comes into force is continued as an environmental assessment under the 2012 Act as if that Act had not been repealed.
(2) Despite subsection (1), at the request of the proponent of a designated project referred to in that subsection, the Agency may terminate the environmental assessment in order to enable the proponent to commence the process established under this Act by the proponent providing
(a) an initial description of the project under subsection 10(1) of this Act in the case of a designated project in respect of which the Agency considers that the proponent has, before the day on which this Act comes into force, collected the information or undertaken the studies required by the former Agency under subsection 23(2) of the 2012 Act; or
(b) the notice of commencement of the impact assessment under subsection 18(1) of this Act in the case of a designated project in respect of which the Agency considers that the proponent has not, before the day on which this Act comes into force, collected the information or undertaken the studies required by the former Agency under subsection 23(2) of the 2012 Act, in which case the Agency is deemed to have provided the proponent with the notice of the commencement on the day on which this Act comes into force.
(3) Any request made by a proponent under subsection (2) must be made to the Agency within 60 days after the day on which this Act comes into force.
(4) If the 60-day period during which the Minister was authorized to refer an environmental assessment described in subsection (2) to a review panel under subsection 38(1) of the 2012 Act expired before the day on which this Act comes into force, the Minister is not authorized to refer the impact assessment to a review panel under subsection 36(1) of this Act.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Reid and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 4;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5.
(a) by replacing line 35 on page 83 to line 8 on page 84 with the following:
“Act before the day on which this Act comes into force is continued under the 2012 Act as if that Act had not been repealed.”
(b) by replacing lines 16 to 31 on page 84 with the following:
“(3) Despite subsection (1), at the request of the proponent, the Agency must continue an environmental assessment of a designated project by the former Agency commenced under the 2012 Act before the day on which this Act comes into force as an impact assessment in respect of that designated project under this Act. The Agency is deemed to have provided the proponent, on the day on which the request is received, with a notice of the commencement of the impact assessment of the designated project under subsection 18(1) of this Act.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Reid and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6.
“respect of which the former Agency has posted the notice of commencement under section 17 of the 2012 Act before that day, is continued under the 2012 Act as if that Act had not been repealed.
(2) The proponent of a designated project referred to in subsection (1) must provide the Agency with any information or studies required by the Agency or the former Agency under subsection 23(2) of the 2012 Act within three years after the day on which this Act comes into force.
(2.1) At the proponent’s request, the Agency may, before the time limit referred to in subsection (2) has expired, extend the time limit by any period that is necessary for the proponent to provide the Agency with the information or studies.
(3) If the proponent fails to provide the information or studies within the time limit referred to in subsection (2) or within any extension of that time limit, the environmental assessment is terminated. The Agency must post a notice of the termination on the Internet site.
(4) Despite subsection (1), at the request of the proponent of a designated project referred to in that subsection that is made within 60 days after the day on which this Act comes into force, the Agency may offer to continue the environmental assessment as an impact assessment under this Act by providing, within 90 days after the day on which the request is made, the proponent with
(a) a written direction that sets out any information and studies that the Agency considers necessary for it to conduct the impact assessment, other than any information and studies already provided by the proponent with respect to the environmental assessment; and
(b) the documents referred to in paragraph 18(1)(b).
The Agency must post a copy of the written direction on the Internet site.
(4.1) Before continuing an environmental assessment as an impact assessment under subsection (4), the Agency must ensure that the public and any Indigenous group that may be affected by the carrying out of the designated project are provided with an opportunity to participate meaningfully in the preparation of the offer by inviting them to provide comments, within the period that the Agency specifies, on any information and studies that are necessary to conduct the impact assessment and on the contents of the documents referred to in paragraph 18(1)(b) that are to be provided to the proponent.
(4.2) If, within 60 days after the day on which the Agency provides the proponent with the written direction and documents referred to in subsection (4), the proponent provides the Agency with written notice that they accept the offer made under that subsection,
(a) the environmental assessment is continued as an impact assessment under this Act; and
(b) the direction is deemed to be a notice of commencement provided under paragraph 18(1)(a) and is deemed to have been posted on the Internet site on the day on which the proponent provided the Agency with the notice of acceptance.
(4.3) Despite subsection 36(1), the Minister is not permitted to refer an impact assessment referred to in paragraph (4.2)(a) to a review panel.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
(a) replacing lines 11 to 19 on page 85 with the following:
“force is continued under the 2012 Act as if that Act had not been repealed.
(2) Despite subsection (1), on request made to the Minister by the proponent of a designated project referred to in that subsection, the environmental assessment is continued as an impact assessment under this Act as if the impact assessment had been referred by the Minister to a review panel under subsection 36(1) of this Act.
(3) The following rules apply in respect of an impact assessment referred to in subsection (2):”
(b) deleting lines 1 to 19 on page 86.
The question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
“185.1 (1) This Act does not apply to a designated project, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the 2012 Act, that is a designated project, as defined in section 2 of this Act, if the former Agency determined that no environmental assessment was required under the 2012 Act or that section 128 of that Act applied to the project.
(2) This Act does not apply to a designated project, as defined in section 2 of this Act, that is not a designated project, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the 2012 Act, if one of the following conditions applies:
(a) the proponent began the carrying out the project before the day on which this Act comes into force;
(b) a federal authority, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the 2012 Act, exercised a power or performed a duty or function conferred on it under any Act of Parliament, other than this Act, that could permit the project to be carried out, in whole or in part;
(c) an environmental assessment of the project was commenced or completed before the day on which this Act comes into force by a jurisdiction other than a federal authority, as those terms are defined in subsection 2(1) of the 2012 Act.”
The question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
“59.1 The following definition apply in this section and in sections 60 to 71.
adaptative management means a structured and iterative process for the implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment of mitigation measures in an attempt to achieve specified objectives, reduce uncertainty, and increase knowledge. (gestion adaptative)”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Sylvie Boucher, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Jacques Gourde, Churence Rogers — 7.
Clause 1, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 4.
Clause 2 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 4.
On Clause 3,
Darren Fisher moved, — That Bill C-69, in Clause 3, be amended by(a) replacing line 1 on page 88 with the following:
“(a.1) the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum”
(b) replacing line 5 on page 88 with the following:
“(c) the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador At-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 4.
Clause 3, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 4.
Clause 4 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
Clause 5 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 3.
On Clause 6,
Churence Rogers moved, — That Bill C-69, in Clause 6, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 88 with the following:“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 reference”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Peter Fragiskatos, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Sylvie Boucher, Linda Duncan, Jacques Gourde, Scott Reid — 4.
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 6, be amended by deleting lines 3 to 8 on page 89.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Arnold Viersen — 8.
“(4) 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 John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 6, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 3.
On Clause 7,
Churence Rogers moved, — That Bill C-69, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 15 on page 89 with the following:“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 reference”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Churence Rogers and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 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 7, be amended by deleting lines 25 to 30 on page 89.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Arnold Viersen — 8.
“tion (1) must be appointed, in a non-voting capacity, from a roster established un-”
After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.
“Minister of Natural Resources, and will serve ex officio.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 6:16 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 6:19 p.m., the sitting resumed.
By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.
“tion (1) must be appointed, in an advisory capacity, from a roster established un-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Reid and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 4;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 5.
“(4) 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 John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 7, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 8 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Arnold Viersen — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
Clause 9 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Scott Reid, Arnold Viersen — 3.
On Clause 10,
William Amos moved, — That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 91 the following:“Whereas the Government of Canada is committed to implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Arnold Viersen — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“data as well as Indigenous knowledge are taken into account in decision-”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Arnold Viersen — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 92 the following:
“Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples means the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations as Resolution 61/295 on September 13, 2007. (Déclaration sur les droits des peuples autochtones)”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Arnold Viersen — 8.
“ligne interprovinciale désignée par un arrêté au titre de”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Ed Fast, Scott Reid — 2;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 6.
The Chair ruled that the following eleven (11) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also negatived:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 17 on page 127 with the following:“des lignes interprovinciales désignées par un arrêté”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing line 7 on page 199 with the following:
“261 (1) The Minister may, by order,”
(b) by replacing, in the French version, lines 15 and 16 on page 199 with the following:
“tion ou partie d’une ligne interprovinciale visée par l'arrêté sauf en conformité avec un certificat délivré en vertu”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 24 on page 199 with the following:
“terprovinciale visée par un arrêté pris au titre de l'article”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 15 on page 202 with the following:
“lignes interprovinciales visées par un arrêté pris au titre”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 2 on page 204 with the following:
“interprovinciale visée par un arrêté pris au titre de l’ar-”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 11 on page 204 with the following:
“arrêté pris au titre de l’article 261 ou d’une ligne interna-”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 19 on page 204 with the following:
“terprovinciale visée par un arrêté pris au titre de l’article”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 26 on page 204 with the following:
“sées par un arrêté pris au titre de l’article 261 ou de”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 9 on page 205 with the following:
“d) aux lignes interprovinciales visées par un arrêté”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 30 on page 209 with the following:
“ligne interprovinciale désignée par un arrêté pris au titre”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 24 on page 212 with the following:
“nales et aux lignes interprovinciales visées par un arrêté”
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 10, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 93 with the following:
“stitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. (corps dirigeant autochtone)”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“Indigenous knowledge means the Indigenous knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada. (connaissances autochtones)”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Scott Reid, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 96 the following:
“traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada includes information acquired from Indigenous knowledge systems. (connaissances traditionnelles des peuples autochtones du Canada)”
Debate arose thereon.
Linda Duncan moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the word “traditional” with the word “indigenous”.
The question was put on the subamendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS : John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 7.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 7.
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 10, be amended by replacing line 21 on page 96 with the following:
“in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 7.
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 10, be amended
(a) by replacing lines 21 and 22 on page 97 with the following:
“ficient and that protects people and property while maintaining the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change;”
(b) by replacing lines 26 and 27 on page 97 with the following:
“that is safe and secure and that protects people and property while maintaining the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change;”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 7.
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 10, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 97 the following:
“(b.1) to ensure, in relation to the matters described in (a) and (b), respect for the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada as recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 7.
“(e) to ensure that a healthy and stable climate is maintained for future generations.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 7.
“facilities;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 6 on page 99 the following:
“(d.1) ensuring that decisions, orders, and recommendations referred to in paragraphs (a), (c) and (d) respect the Government of Canada’s environmental obligations, its commitments in respect of climate change, and the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada as recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“(e) advising and reporting on energy matters, including renewable energy, energy efficiency, the impacts of the production, distribution and use of energy on climate, the impacts of a changing climate on the production, distribution and use of energy, as well as Canada’s transition to a low carbon economy;”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by replacing line 7 on page 99 with the following:
“(e) advising and reporting on energy matters, including renewable energy, energy efficiencies, carbon reduction, climate impacts related to the production, distribution, and use of energy, and the impacts of a changing climate on the production, distribution, and use of energy;”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“(h) exercising its powers and performing its duties and functions in a manner that respects the Government of Canada’s commitments with respect to the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
“(1.1) The directors appointed must reflect, to a reasonable extent, the diversity of Canadian society and must ensure that, collectively, they maintain a range of competencies, including with respect to Indigenous traditional knowledge and worldview, community development and public engagement, renewable and non-renewable energy, and environmental and climate science.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 100 with the following:
“(2) At last one director must be appointed from each of the following groups:
(a) the First Nations;
(b) the Inuit; and
(c) the Métis.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended
(a) by replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 100 with the following:
“(2) At least one of the directors must be a member of a First Nation, Métis or Inuit.”
(b) by replacing line 10 on page 104 with the following:
“a member of a First Nation, Métis or Inuit.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 9 on page 100 the following:
“(1.1) The Governor in Council must ensure that persons appointed to the board of directors have relevant experience and expertise in climate science, renewable energy and community development, as well as an understanding of the traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 11 on page 100 the following:
“(2.1) No director is to serve in any capacity if they have served a combination of terms totalling ten years.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“est include”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by replacing line 12 on page 101 with the following:
“Commission or a commissioner, or interfere with the Commission or attempt to compromise the independence of the Commission in any way.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 15 on page 101 the following:
“(2.1) Despite subsection (2), meetings of the board of directors are to be held in the National Capital Region as described in the schedule to the National Capital Act.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“conflict of interest include”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“(1.1) The commissioners appointed must reflect, to a reasonable extent, the diversity of Canadian society and must ensure that, collectively, they maintain a range of competencies, including with respect to Indigenous knowledge and worldview, community development and public engagement, renewable and non-renewable energy, and environmental and climate science.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 104 with the following:
“(2) At least one commissioner must be appointed from each of the following groups:
(a) the First Nations;
(b) the Inuit; and
(c) the Métis.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 104 with the following:
“a member of a First Nation, or Métis or Inuit.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 104 the following:
“(1.1) The Governor in Council must ensure that persons appointed as commissioners have relevant experience and expertise in climate science, renewable energy and community development, as well as an understanding of the traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“interest include”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 39 on page 106 the following:
“(2.1) The Commission must make public
(a) findings made under paragraph 32(2)(a);
(b) recommendations made under paragraph 32(2)(b); and
(c) decisions and orders made under paragraph 32(2)(c).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Martin Shields — 4;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gary Anandasangaree, Darren Fisher, Churence Rogers — 5.
At 7:33 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 7:45 p.m., the sitting resumed.
“must give instructions to the commissioners authorized to”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Martin Shields — 4;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 5.
“appropriate to do so and shall make public its reasons for holding the hearing.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 112 the following:
“(1.1) The written reasons must demonstrate a consideration by the Commission of
(a) the impact of the recommendations on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;
(b) the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change as a consequence of the recommendations; and
(c) any public input received with respect to the recommendations.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 8.
“Environmental and Climate Change
55.1 When making a decision, an order or a recommendation under this Act, including in relation to the Regulator's exercise of its powers and the performance of its duties and functions under sections 80 to 84, the Commission must consider the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its domestic and international obligations and commitments in respect of environmental and climate change.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers, Martin Shields — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 112 the following:
“55.1 (1) When making a decision, an order or a recommendation under this Act, the Commission must consider the public interest and, in particular,
(a) the extent to which the decision, order, or recommendation contributes to sustainability;
(b) the implementation of mitigation measures, where appropriate; and
(c) the extent to which the effects of the designated project hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change.
(2) When making a decision or an order under this Act, a designated officer must consider the public interest and, in particular,
(a) the extent to which the decision or order contributes to sustainability;
(b) the implementation of mitigation measures, where appropriate; and
(c) the extent to which the effects of the designated project hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
(a) by replacing line 6 on page 113 with the following:
“the Constitution Act, 1982 and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on September 13, 2007.”
(b) by replacing line 11 on page 113 with the following:
“section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on September 13, 2007.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by replacing line 6 on page 113 with the following:
“the Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also negatived:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 113 with the following:“section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
(a) replacing line 12 on page 113 with the following:
“57 (1) The Regulator must establish an advisory committee”
(b) adding after line 17 on page 113 the following:
“(2) The membership of the advisory committee must include at least
(a) one person recommended by an Indigenous organization that represents the interests of First Nations;
(b) one person recommended by an Indigenous organization that represents the interests of the Inuit; and
(c) one person recommended by an Indigenous organization that represents the interests of the Métis.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“58 (1) Any Indigenous knowledge that is provided in confidence to the Reg-”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
The Chair ruled that the following three (3) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 113 with the following:“(2) Despite subsection (1), the Indigenous knowledge re-”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 13 and 14 on page 114 with the following:
“good faith of any Indigenous knowledge under this Act or any other Act of Par-”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 19 and 20 on page 114 with the following:
“scribing the circumstances in which Indigenous knowledge that is”
“ferred to in that subsection must be disclosed if”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Peter Kent — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended
(a) by deleting lines 30 and 31 on page 113.
(b) by deleting lines 18 to 22 on page 114.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(2.1) Before disclosing Indigenous knowledge under paragraph 2(b) for the purposes of procedural fairness and natural justice, the Regulator must consult the person or entity who provided the Indigenous knowledge and the person or entity to whom it is proposed to be disclosed about the scope of the proposed disclosure and potential conditions under subsection (3).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
The Chair ruled that the following two (2) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 1 and 2 on page 114 with the following:“(3) The Regulator may, having regard to the consultation referred to in subsection (2.1), impose conditions with respect to the disclosure of Indigenous knowledge by any person or entity to”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 5 on page 114 with the following:
“(4) The person or entity referred to in subsection (3) must comply”
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 10, be amended by replacing line 18 on page 114 with the following:
“59 The Governor in Council may, after consultation with Indigenous governing bodies, make regulations pre-”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
“65 A decision or order made by the Commission, a designated officer or an inspection officer under this Act may include any conditions that the Commission, designated officer or inspection officer consid-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
(a) by deleting lines 8 to 12 on page 120;
(b) by adding after line 18 on page 120 the following:
“75.1 (1) The Regulator must establish, within the corporation, a Public Intervenor Office to manage any participant funding program established under section 75, advise the Regulator on the appropriate mechanisms and timing of engagement activities and, on a voluntary basis, represent the interests and views of parties, the public – and, if appropriate, the Indigenous peoples of Canada and Indigenous organizations – on matters within the Regulator’s mandate.
(2) The Regulator or the Public Intervenor Office must establish processes to engage with the public – and, in particular, the Indigenous peoples of Canada and Indigenous organizations – on matters within the Regulator’s mandate.
(3) The Public Intervenor Office may coordinate scientific and technical studies to the extent possible and may develop pools of independent experts that are available to the public to provide third-party independent advice during project reviews.
(4) The Regulator must ensure that information provided by proponents, the Regulator and the Public Intervenor Office is searchable, transparent, well-organized and not subject to change during the course of a project review, so as to facilitate public access.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
“74 The Regulator must establish processes that the Regulator considers appropriate to engage meaningfully with the public — and, in particular, the Indigenous peoples of Canada and Indigenous organizations — when public hearings are held under section 52 or subsection 241(3).
75 For the purposes of this Act, the Regulator must es-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 12 on page 120 the following:
“(2) The Regulator must, at the end of each fiscal year, prepare and make public a report that includes an evaluation of the processes established under subsection (1) during the previous fiscal year and that sets out its plan for public engagement in the upcoming fiscal year.
(3) In developing the plan mentioned in subsection (2), the Regulator must invite the public to provide comments respecting the processes established under subsection (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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
“241(3). The participant funding program may also be used to facilitate the participation of the Indigenous peoples of Canada and Indigenous organizations in any steps leading up to those hearings.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Peter Kent — 4;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, 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 10, be amended by adding after line 18 on page 120 the following:
“75.1 The participant funding program must include funding for the participation of intervenors, which funding is available through contributions from the proponents 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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by replacing line 20 on page 120 with the following:
“Indigenous governing body to establish col-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Peter Kent — 4;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 5.
“(78.1) Despite section 78, the Minister must not enter into any arrangement under section 77 devolving any powers, duties or functions given to the Minister or the Governor in Council in respect of any final decision or order.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ed Fast and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Peter Kent — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 6.
“(c) the impacts of the production, distribution and use of energy on climate and the impacts of a changing climate on the production, distribution and use of energy; and
(d) Canada’s transition to a low carbon economy.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 23 on page 121 the following:
“(c) the climate impacts related to the production, distribution and use of energy as well as the impacts of a changing climate on the production, distribution and use of energy.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by adding after line 33 on page 121 the following:
“(c) the Government of Canada to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change.”
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by deleting lines 14 to 16 on page 122.
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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
“ument purporting to be certified by an employee of the”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“(e) a person, company or other entity that has been granted leave under Part 4 to abandon an international power line or interprovincial power line; or
(f) the holder of an authorization issued under Part 5”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“lation to an abandoned facility or to the abandonment of a pipeline, an offshore pow-”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
“made under section 96 or 312, in order to, among other things, ensure the safety and security of persons, the safety and security of regulated facilities or abandoned facilities or the protection of property or the environment.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
(a) replacing line 2 on page 133 with the following:
“to believe that a person has contravened this Part, any of”
(b) replacing line 4 on page 133 with the following:
“non-compliance to the person.”
(c) replacing line 6 on page 133 with the following:
“(a) the name of the person to whom the notice is di-”
(d) replacing line 17 on page 133 with the following:
“(d) the period within which the person may provide”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 9;
NAYS: — 0.
(a) by replacing line 1 on page 139 with the following:
“(1.1) The Commission may designate persons or classes of persons to conduct”
(b) by replacing line 6 on page 141 with the following:
“within any longer period that the Commission allows, make”
(c) by replacing lines 15 and 16 on page 141 with the following:
“view to be conducted by a person designated under subsection 116(1.1).”
(d) by replacing line 19 on page 141 with the following:
“subsection 116(1.1).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 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 10, be amended by replacing lines 13 to 15 on page 143 with the following:
“135 The Regulator must make public the orders made under subsections 95(1) or (2), the notices of non-compliance issued under subsection 108(1) and the notices of violation issued under subsection 120(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: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Peter Kent, Robert J. Morrissey, Churence Rogers — 8.
At 8:56 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 9:05 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Pursuant to the motion adopted on Tuesday, March 20, 2018, all the amendments submitted to the Committee as well as every question necessary to dispose of clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill and to report the Bill to the House were deemed proposed and disposed of as follows:
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 25 on page 166 the following:
“(3) If the application is incomplete, the Commission must notify the company in writing within 10 days after receiving the application and identify the information that is missing.”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 166 with the following:
“recommendation, which must demonstrate that the Commission took into consideration the factors described in subsection (2); and”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 7.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 5 and 6 on page 167 with the following:
“Indigenous knowledge that has been provided to the Commission and”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 167 with the following:
“Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 22 on page 167 the following:
“(e.1) the effect of the pipeline on sustainability;
(e.2) the effect of the pipeline on the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change;”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by adding after line 25 on page 167 the following:
“(g.1) the existence of reasonable alternatives and whether any alternative better promotes sustainability;
(g.2) any input received from the public with respect to the issuance of the certificate or the dismissal of the application;”
(b) by replacing line 33 on page 167 with the following:
“Government of Canada and its commitments in respect of climate change;”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 7.
“(j) the extent to which the effects of the pipeline hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its domestic and international commitments and obligations in respect of environmental and climate change;”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(j) the extent to which the effects of the pipeline hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change;”
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
“an application for a certificate and may request that a public hearing be held on the matter.
(3.1) If the Commission decides not to hold a public hearing requested under subsection (3), it must make public its reasons for doing so.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Linda Duncan — 2;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 7.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 10 and 11 on page 168 with the following:
“under section 216, the Lead Commissioner may specify, only once in respect of the application to which the report relates, that a period of no longer than 30 days is to be excluded from the calculation of the”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 15 and 16 on page 168 with the following:
“(6) The Minister may, by order, grant one extension of the time limit specified under subsection (4).”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing line 4 on page 169 with the following:
“under section 183, the Minister may, by or-”
(b) by replacing, in the French version, line 8 on page 169 with the following:
“(2) L’arrêté peut préciser tout facteur dont la Commis-”
(c) by replacing line 10 on page 169 with the following:
“in the order and it must specify a time limit, which must not be longer than 60 days, within which”
(d) by replacing, in the French version, line 11 on page 169 with the following:
“(3) L’arrêté lie la Commission.”
(e) by replacing, in the French version, line 12 on page 169 with the following:
“(4) L’arrêté est publié dans la Gazette du Canada dans”
(f) by replacing, in the French version, lines 15 and 16 on page 169 with the following:
“dans l’arrêté, réexamine la recommandation ou toute condition visée par l’arrêté, établit et présente au mi-”
(g) by replacing, in the French version, line 19 on page 169 with the following:
“a) si l’arrêté vise la recommandation, confirme celle-”
(h) by replacing, in the French version, line 21 on page 169 with the following:
“b) si l’arrêté vise une condition, confirme cette”
(i) by replacing line 33 on page 169 with the following:
“subject if the Minister were to direct that the”
(j) by replacing line 4 on page 170 with the following:
“subsection (5), the Minister may, by order,”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing line 27 on page 170 with the following:
“183 or 184, the Minister must,”
(b) by replacing, in the French version, line 32 on page 170 with the following:
“(ii) soit donne à la Commission, par arrêté, instruc-”
(c) by replacing, in the French version, line 36 on page 170 with the following:
“(iii) soit lui donne, par arrêté, instruction de rejeter”
(d) by replacing, in the French version, line 6 on page 171 with the following:
“(ii) soit donne à la Commission, par arrêté, instruc-”
(e) by replacing, in the French version, line 8 on page 171 with the following:
“(2) Le ministre énonce, dans tout arrêté”
(f) by replacing lines 12 to 16 on page 171 with the following:
“within 45 days after the day on which the report under section 183 is submitted. The Minister may, by order, grant one extension of the time limit. If the Minister makes an order under subsection 184(1) or (9),”
(g) by replacing, in the French version, line 19 on page 171 with the following:
“(4) Les arrêtés pris en vertu des paragraphes (1) ou (3)”
(h) by replacing, in the French version, line 21 on page 171 with the following:
“(5) La Commission est tenue de se conformer à l’arrêté”
(i) by replacing, in the French version, line 24 on page 171 with the following:
“(6) L’arrêté pris en vertu du paragraphe (1) est publié”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
“(2) An order made under subsection (1) must include
(a) the reasons for making the order;
(b) the manner in which the impacts that the pipeline may have on any Indigenous group or on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada were considered and weighed;
(c) the extent to which the effects of the pipeline's hinderance or contribution to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its domestic and international obligations and commitments in respect of environmental and climate change were considered and weighed; and
(d) the manner in which public input on and the effects of the pipeline were considered and weighed.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 171 with the following:
“reasons for making the order, which must demonstrate that the factors set out in paragraphs 183(2)(a) to (l) were taken into consideration by the Governor in Council”.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“reasons for making the order. The reasons must demonstrate that the Governor in Council took into account all the considerations referred to in subsection 183(2) that appeared to the Governor in Council to be relevant and directly related to the pipeline.”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
“197 (1) The Commission must, by order, revoke a certificate is-”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“199 (1) The company must submit the plan, profile and book of reference referred to in paragraph 198(c) to the Regulator.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 175 with the following:
“which the lands are situated, as well as on the Regulator’s website.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(2.1) The Regulator must publish on its website any notice that is published under paragraph (1)(b).”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast — 2.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 4 to 6 on page 176 with the following:
“(4) Any interested person, other than an owner of lands referred to in sub-”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing lines 13 to 21 on page 176 with the following:
“202 (1) The Commission must hold a public hearing in relation to a notice mentioned in subsection 201(1) in a region that it considers convenient for persons potentially affected by the notice and must provide reasons for its selection, including the factors that it took into account.”
(b) by replacing lines 32 to 35 on page 176 with the following:
“201(3) to make representations and must allow each person who filed a written statement under subsection 201(4) to make representations if the Commission considers that the written statement is relevant to its decision.
(4.1) The Commission may, if it considers it appropriate to do so, allow any other interested person to make representations at the place and time fixed for the hearing.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(b.1) to protect lands or structures of cultural, historical, scientific or religious significance;”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 15 on page 181 with the following:
“214 (1) The Commission may, by order, after considering the factors set out in paragraphs 183(2)(a) to (l), exempt from”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: — 0;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by adding after line 24 on page 181 the following:
“(d) any improvements, upgrades or clean technology enhancements to any thing or system referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c) that improve safety or expand protections for the environment, including by reducing carbon emissions.”
(b) by adding after line 4 on page 182 the following:
“(4.1) Despite subsection (4), the time limit specified by the Lead Commissioner in respect of an application under paragraph (1)(d) must be no longer than 150 days after the day on which the applicant has, in the Commission’s opinion, provided a complete application.”
(c) by replacing lines 10 and 11 on page 182 with the following:
“(6) The Minister may, by order, grant one extension of the time limit specified under subsection (3).”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast — 2;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6 .
The following amendment, submitted by Robert Sopuck for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing line 2 on page 182 with the following:
“must be no longer than 280 days after the day on which”
(b) by replacing line 33 on page 200 with the following:
“(5) The specified time limit must be no longer than 280”
(c) by replacing line 1 on page 218 with the following:
“(5) The specified time limit must be no longer than 280”
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 1 to 3 on page 185.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(3.1) On April 1 of every year there is to be credited to the Orphan Pipelines Account an amount representing interest, at the rate fixed for the purposes of subsection 21(2) of the Financial Administration Act, on the balance to the credit of the Account.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
At 9:47 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 9:52 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing line 1 on page 198 with the following:
“258 (1) The Minister may, by order,”
(b) by replacing, in the French version, line 7 on page 198 with the following:
“(2) La prise de l’arrêté ne peut survenir plus de quarante-”
(c) by replacing, in the French version, line 10 on page 198 with the following:
“(3) L’arrêté emporte l’impossibilité de délivrer tout per-”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mel Arnold, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by replacing lines 23 and 24 on page 199 with the following:
“subject to section 52 and to the approval of the Minister, issue a certificate in respect of”
(b) by replacing lines 29 and 30 on page 200 with the following:
“recommend to the Minister that the issuance of the certificate be approved; or”
(c) by replacing line 37 on page 200 with the following:
“Lead Commissioner may specify, only once in respect of the application to which the certificate relates, that a period of no longer than 15 days is to be”
(d) by replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 201 with the following:
“(7) The Minister may, by order, grant one extension of the time limit specified under subsection (4).”
(e) by replacing lines 11 to 15 on page 201 with the following:
“is made, the Minister may, within 90 days after the making of that recommendation, either approve the issuance of the certificate or refuse to approve its issuance. The Minister must provide reasons for the decision and make the reasons public within 15 days after the day on which the decision is made.”
(f) by replacing line 16 on page 201 with the following:
“(10) If the Minister approves the issuance of”
(g) by deleting lines 26 to 29 on page 201.
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 33 and 34 on page 199 with the following:
“er things, any Indigenous knowledge that has been provided to the”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Linda Duncan — 1.
“la ligne de transport d’électricité, notamment :”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by adding after line 5 on page 200 the following:
“(a.1) the existence of reasonable alternatives and whether any alternative better promotes sustainability;
(a.2) any input received from the public with respect to the issuance of the certificate or the dismissal of the application;”
(b) by replacing line 18 on page 200 with the following:
“Government of Canada and its commitments in respect of climate change; and”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 200 with the following:
“Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(f) the extent to which the effects of the power line hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its domestic and international obligations and commitments in respect of environmental and climate change;”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(f) the extent to which the effects of the power line hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change; and”
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
“paragraphe 47(1);”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
“(c) hydrocarbons or any other commodity were a reference to electricity.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 18 to 22 on page 204.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 16 to 20 on page 210 with the following:
“der this Part.”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 21 to 24 on page 210.
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting line 31 on page 210 to line 1 on page 211.
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 4 to 6 on page 211.
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 7 to 15 on page 211.
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 16 to 18 on page 211.
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 31 on page 211 with the following:
“proval of the Minister, revoke a certificate is-”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
“(c) hydrocarbons or any other commodity were a reference to electricity.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 13 and 14 on page 217 with the following:
“other things, any Indigenous knowledge that has been provided to the Com-”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by adding after line 20 on page 217 the following:
“(a.1) the existence of reasonable alternatives and whether any alternative better promotes sustainability;
(a.2) any input received from the public with respect to the issuance of the authorization or the dismissal of the application;”
(b) by replacing line 32 on page 217 with the following:
“Government of Canada and its commitments in respect of climate change; and”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 31 on page 217 with the following:
“Constitution Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(f) the extent to which the effects of the offshore renewable energy project or offshore power line hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its domestic and international obligations and commitments in respect of environmental and climate change; and”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 8.
“(f) the extent to which the effects of the project or power line hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change; and”
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 218 with the following:
“Lead Commissioner may specify, only once in respect of the application to which the authorization relates, that a period of no longer than 15 days is to be ex-”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 218 with the following:
“(7) The Minister may, by order, grant one extension of the time limit specified under subsection (4).”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5.
“(c) hydrocarbons or any other commodity were a reference to electricity.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Garnett Genuis — 3.
“(h) transmit hydrocarbons or any other commodity by pipeline and regulate the time and manner in which hydrocarbons or any other commodity are to be”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
“time before July 3, 2013, as that section read from”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
(a) by replacing lines 30 and 31 on page 229 with the following:
“(a) Category IA-N land, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Naskapi and the Cree-Naskapi Commission Act;”
(b) by adding after line 33 on page 229 the following:
“(3.1) A company must not take possession of, use or occupy Category IA land, as defined in section 1.1 of the Agreement on Cree Nation Governance between the Crees of Eeyou Istchee and the Government of Canada, entered into on July 18, 2017, without the consent of the concerned Cree Nation.
(3.2) A company must not take possession of, use or occupy Cree lands, as defined in Part, I Chapter 1, of the Agreement between the Crees of Eeyou Istchee and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada concerning the Eeyou Marine Region, signed on July 7, 2010, without the consent of the Cree Nation Government.”
(c) by replacing line 1 on page 230 with the following:
“(4) If the lands referred to in subsection (1), (3) or (3.2) are”
(d) by adding after line 4 on page 230 the following:
“(5) If the lands referred to in subsection (3.1) are taken possession of, used or occupied by a company, or if they are injuriously affected by the construction of a pipeline, compensation must be made by that company in accordance with the mechanisms set out in the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, signed on November 11, 1975.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Linda Duncan — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Ed Fast, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 7.
“makes a decision on an application, ensure that a copy of the decision is forwarded by mail”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended
(a) by adding after line 5 on page 245 the following:
“(1.1) If the application is incomplete, the Commission must notify the applicant in writing within 10 days after the day on which it receives the application and identify the information that is missing.”
(b) by replacing lines 20 to 23 on page 245 with the following:
“a maximum of 90 days.”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
The following amendment, submitted by Shannon Stubbs for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 245 with the following:
“tation of oil or gas within 60 days after the day on which”
The question was put on the amendment of Shannon Stubbs and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6.
“the alleged contravention and gives the holder an opportunity to”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 10, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
Clause 11 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 2.
Clause 12 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 13 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
Clause 14 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
Clause 15 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 16 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 17 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 18 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
Clause 19 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 20 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 21 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
Clause 22 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 23 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 24 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 25 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 26 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 27 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 4.
Clause 28 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 29 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 30 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 31 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 32 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Gérard Deltell, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 33 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Linda Duncan, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 6;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 2.
Clause 34 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Linda Duncan, Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 3.
Clause 35 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 2.
Clause 36 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, James Maloney, Churence Rogers — 5;
NAYS: Ed Fast, Garnett Genuis — 2.
At 11:05 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 11:15 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Clause 37 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Arnold Viersen — 2.
Clause 38 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Arnold Viersen — 2.
Clause 39 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 40 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 41 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 42 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
On New Clause 42.1 and New Clause 42.2
“42.1 Every reference to the National Energy Board in any deed, contract, agreement or other document executed, or in Quebec, signed, by the National Energy Board in its own name is, unless the context otherwise requires, to be read as a reference to the Regulator.
42.2 Any amount that is appropriated by an Act of Parliament for the fiscal year in which the commencement day falls to defray the expenditures of the National Energy Board and that is unexpended on that day is considered to be an amount appropriated to defray the expenditures of the Regulator.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 43 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 44 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 45 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
Clause 46 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
On Clause 47,
(a) by replacing lines 10 to 14 on page 277 with the following:
“navigable water means a body of water of sufficient quantity and quality that it is capable of being navigated by any type of floating vessel, in full or in part, for any part of the year as a”
(b) by replacing lines 19 to 24 on page 277 with the following:
“1982, and that
(a) is of cultural, environmental or historical value to Canada’s natural heritage; or
(b) is defined by any of Canada’s Indigenous communities as important to their historical, current and possible use.
For greater certainty, navigable water does not include minor waters such as artificial irrigation and drainage ditches unless they are three metres or more in width or constitute a natural water body that has been converted for this purpose. (eaux navigables)”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 47, be amended by replacing lines 10 to 24 on page 277 with the following:
“navigable water means a body of water of sufficient quantity and quality that it is capable of being navigated by vessels, in full or in part, for any part of the year or as a means of transport or travel for Indigenous peoples of Canada exercising rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and that
(a) is of cultural, environmental or historical value to Canada’s natural heritage; or
(b) is considered by any of Canada’s Indigenous communities to be important to their historical, current or future use.
It does not include minor waters that are less than three metres wide, including artificial irrigation channels and drainage ditches, as well as natural bodies of water that are used as such.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Arnold Viersen — 2;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 7.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 47, be amended by replacing line 19 on page 277 with the following:
“1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
“(c) any activity that may lower or modify the water level or flow of any navigable water or any part of a navigable water.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 47, be amended by adding after line 15 on page 278 the following:
“Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples means the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations as Resolution 61/295 on September 13, 2007. (Déclaration sur les droits des peuples autochtones)”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 47, be amended by adding after line 15 on page 278 the following:
“Indigenous knowledge means the Indigenous knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada. (connaissances autochtones)”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 47, be amended by adding after line 19 on page 278 the following:
“traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada includes information acquired from Indigenous knowledge systems. (connaissances traditionnelles des peuples autochtones du Canada)”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: — 0;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
Clause 47, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Arnold Viersen — 3.
On Clause 48,
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 48, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 279 with the following:
“in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
(a) by replacing line 2 on page 279 with the following:
“in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on September 13, 2007.”
(b) by replacing line 7 on page 279 with the following:
“Act, 1982, and by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on September 13, 2007.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Matt DeCourcey, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
“must consult on and compensate for any adverse effects that the decision may have on the interests of the Indigenous peoples of Canada and on their rights as they are”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Arnold Viersen — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 48, be amended by replacing line 7 on page 279 with the following:
“Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 48 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 49,
(a) by replacing lines 23 to 25 on page 279 with the following:
“Works Other Than a Minor Work in any Navigable Water”
(b) by replacing line 30 on page 279 to line 5 on page 280 with the following:
“move or decommission a work – other than a minor work – in, on, over, under, through or across any navigable water.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
(a) by replacing lines 23 to 25 on page 279 with the following:
“Works Other Than a Minor Work in any Navigable Water”
(b) by deleting lines 1 and 2 on page 280;
(c) by replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 280 with the following:
“under, through or across any navigable water.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
“6 If the Minister is of the opinion, on the basis of an impact assessment, that a work that is the”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 49, be amended
(a) by replacing line 15 on page 280 with the following:
“6 If, on the basis of an impact assessment, the Minister is of the opinion that a work that is the”
(b) by replacing line 23 on page 280 with the following:
“7 (1) If, on the basis of an impact assessment, the Minister is of the opinion that a work that is”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
“igation, including by changing the water level or water flow of a navigable water, he or she must inform the owner, in writing, of”
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 2.
The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 49, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 280 with the following:“tion, including by changing the water level or water flow of a navigable water, he or she must inform the owner, in writing, of that”
“7 (1) If the Minister is of the opinion, on the basis of an impact assessment, that a work that is”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
(a) by replacing lines 25 to 28 on page 281 with the following:
“(e) the cumulative impact of the work, in combination with other works, on navigation and on related social, cultural, economic and environmental uses associated with that navigable water;”
(b) by replacing line 30 on page 281 with the following:
“ples of Canada;”
(c) by adding after line 35 on page 281 the following:
“(h.1) scientific information, including an assessment of magnitude, geographic extent, duration and reversibility, that may be derived from or in addition to an impact assessment; and
(h.2) the impact of the work on cultural, social, environmental and economic uses and values associated with navigable waters, including as a result of its construction, placement, alteration, rebuilding, removal, decommissioning, repair, maintenance, operation or use.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 49, be amended
(a) by replacing lines 25 to 28 on page 281 with the following:
“(e) the cumulative impact of the work, in combination with other works, on navigation and related social, cultural, economic and environmental uses in that navigable water;”
(b) by adding after line 30 on page 281 the following:
“(f.1) any scientific information that has been provided to the Minister in respect of any aspect of the work;”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
(a) by replacing lines 25 to 28 on page 281 with the following:
“(e) the cumulative and environmental impact of the work, in combination with other works, on navigation and on affected navigable waters;”
(b) by adding after line 35 on page 281 the following:
“(h.1) the best available science related to a work's individual and cumulative impacts on navigation and navigable waters, that may be derived from or in addition to an impact assessment; and
(h.2) the impact of the work on cultural, social, environmental and economic uses and values associated with navigable waters, including as a result of its construction, placement, alteration, rebuilding, removal, decommissioning, repair, maintenance, operation or use; and”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 49, be amended by replacing lines 29 and 30 on page 281 with the following:
“(f) any Indigenous knowledge that has been provided to the Minister;”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 2.
“one that requires the owner to
(a) maintain the water level or water flow necessary for navigation purposes in a navigable water; or
(b) give security in the form of”
The question was put on the amendment of William Amos and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 49, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 286 with the following:
“the Minister and the Indigenous governing body, as defined in section 2 of the Impact Assessment Act, of any Indigenous group, community or people that could be affected if the work, or its construction, placement,”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 49, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 50 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 51 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 52 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 53,
“13.2 The Minister may, by order, designate areas where certain categories of works, or all works, are deemed to be major works and where any impact on navigation will require an approval.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 53 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 5;
NAYS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 4.
On Clause 54,
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 54, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 289 with the following:
“of the obstruction to the Minister and the Indigenous governing body, as defined in section 2 of the Impact Assessment Act, of any Indigenous group, community or people that could be affected by the obstruction, in the form and man-”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
(a) replacing lines 36 to 38 on page 290 with the following:
“17 (1) If a person in charge of an obstruction or potential obstruction in a navigable water fails to comply with paragraph 15(2)(a) or (b) or is not known or cannot be located, or if a person to whom an order is given under subsection 15(3), 15.1(1) or 16(1) fails to comply with the order, the Minister may sell by auction or otherwise, as he or she considers appropriate, the obstruction or potential obstruction or the thing referred”
(b) replacing line 4 on page 291 with the following:
“section 15.2 or subsection 16(2), as the case may be.”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 54, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 55 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 56 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 57,
(a) by replacing lines 25 to 27 on page 292 with the following:
“23 (1) No person shall take any action that lowers or modifies the water level or flow of a navigable water or any part of a navigable water to a level that impedes navigation for vessels of”
(b) by replacing lines 1 to 8 on page 293 with the following:
“(3) The Minister may approve the work whose construction, placement, alteration, re-building, removal, decommissioning, repair, maintenance, operation or use may lower or modify the water level or flow of a navigable water or part of a navigable water, if the Minister is of the opinion, after having considered the rights to navigation of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, that there are sufficient measures in place to mitigate the impact of the changes to water levels on navigation.”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 57, be amended
(a) by replacing line 27 on page 292 with the following:
“water to a level that extinguishes or substantially interferes with navigation for vessels of”
(b) by deleting lines 1 to 8 on page 293.
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
“rivers, streams or waters, in whole or in part, that are not used for the exercise of the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, if the Min-”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 57, be amended by replacing line 14 on page 293 with the following:
“public interest and is consistent with the obligation to protect the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 57 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 58,
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing lines 1 and 2 on page 295 with the following:
“Indigenous Knowledge”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The Chair ruled that the following three (3) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing lines 3 and 4 on page 295 with the following:“26.2 (1) Any Indigenous knowledge that is provided to the Minister under”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 295 with the following:
“(2) Despite subsection (1), the Indigenous knowledge re-”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing lines 28 and 29 on page 295 with the following:
“disclosure in good faith of any Indigenous knowledge under this Act or for”
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 295 the following:
“(2.1) Before disclosing Indigenous knowledge under paragraph 2(b) for the purposes of procedural fairness and natural justice, the Minister must consult the person or entity who provided the Indigenous knowledge and the person or entity to whom it is proposed to be disclosed about the scope of the proposed disclosure and potential conditions under subsection (3).”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The Chair ruled that the following two (2) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also adopted:
That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing lines 17 to 20 on page 295 with the following:“(3) The Minister may, having regard to the consultation referred to in subsection (2.1), impose conditions with respect to the disclosure of Indigenous knowledge by any person or entity to whom it is disclosed under paragraph (2)(b) for the purposes of procedural fairness and natural justice.”
That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 21 on page 295 with the following:
“(4) The person or entity referred to in subsection (3) must comply”
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 295 with the following:
“(5) Despite any other Act of Parliament, no crimi-”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 58, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 59 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 60,
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 60, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 296 with the following:
“registry in which information on the location and type of all new major works, works and minor works is deposited as well as any other information that he or she specifies.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 60, be amended by replacing lines 12 and 13 on page 296 with the following:
“registry in which information is deposited, including detailed information with respect to all works — including minor works — undertakings and activities that could interfere with navigable waters, and any other information that the Minister specifies.”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
(a) by replacing line 13 on page 296 with the following:
“deposited, which includes details of all works, undertakings and activities with the potential to interfere with navigable waters, including minor works.”
(b) by replacing line 19 on page 296 with the following:
“(a) that are publicly available;
(a.1) that document a description of the work, its geographic location, its anticipated impacts and its proponent;
(a.2) that document any approvals required, decision outcomes and rationales for any assessment factors considered;
(a.3) that document any amendments to the schedule regarding a reference to navigable waters; or”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 60 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 5;
NAYS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 4.
On Clause 61,
“(g.1) excluding any body of water that the Governor in Council considers to be small from the definition”
The question was put on the amendment of John Aldag and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 5;
NAYS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 4.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 61, be amended by replacing lines 23 to 25 on page 297 with the following:
“(g.2) prescribing the circumstances in which the Indigenous knowledge that is provided to the Minister under this Act”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 61, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 62,
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in Clause 62, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 298 with the following:
“Act, 1982 and by the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
Clause 62 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 63 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 64 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 65 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 66 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 67 carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
By unanimous consent, Clauses 68 to 127 inclusive carried severally on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Clause 128,
“128 Section 5.002 of the Act is replaced by the following:
5.002 The Canadian Energy Regulator may establish a participant funding program to facilitate the participation of the public in the impact assessment, as defined in section 2 of the Impact Assessment Act, of any designated project, as defined in that section, if
(a) the Canadian Energy Regulator has responsibilities for the project under that Act;
(b) the project includes physical activities that are designated by regulations made under paragraph 112(e) of that Act or that are part of a class of activities designated by those regulations; and
(c) the project is the subject of an application for an authorization under subsection 5(1) of this Act.”
The question was put on the amendment of Darren Fisher and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
Clause 128, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
By unanimous consent, Clauses 129 to 196 inclusive carried severally on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The Schedule carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
On Preamble,
The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in the preamble, be amended by adding before line 13 on page 1 the following:
“Whereas the Government of Canada has adopted without qualification the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on September 13, 2007, and is committed to implementing Article 25 of that declaration to ensure that Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned and otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters, costal seas and other resources so that they may uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard;”
The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
(a) by replacing line 13 on page 1 with the following:
“Whereas the Government of Canada is committed, under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted on September 13, 2007, to”
(b) by replacing lines 27 to 32 on page 1 with the following:
“ted to assessing how vulnerable populations and gender-diverse people may be affected by policies, programs and projects and to taking actions that contribute to environmental justice and an inclusive and democratic society by promoting wider participation in decision-making;”
The question was put on the amendment of Linda Duncan and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault — 1;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 8.
The following amendment, submitted by Mike Bossio for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in the preamble, be amended by replacing line 23 on page 1 with the following:
“data and the Indigenous knowledge of the Indigenous”
The question was put on the amendment of Mike Bossio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The following amendment, submitted by Robert Sopuck for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved: That Bill C-69, in the preamble, be amended by replacing lines 26 to 32 on page 1 with the following:
“Whereas the Government of Canada recognizes that proposed projects in respect of which an impact assessment is being conducted are often in the national interest and that applications for the projects should be approved in a timely manner on the basis of scientific information and the need for economic growth;
And whereas the Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that projects that are approved under the Impact Assessment Act move forward without delay and that the rule of law in Canada is respected by not allowing provinces to encroach on federal jurisdiction or special-interest groups to intervene unlawfully to prevent those projects from moving forward;”
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Sopuck and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder — 2;
NAYS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney, Cathay Wagantall — 7.
The Preamble, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The Title carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 6;
NAYS: Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 3.
The Bill, as amended, carried on the following recorded division:
YEAS: John Aldag, William Amos, Darren Fisher, Kamal Khera, James Maloney — 5;
NAYS: Pierre-Luc Dusseault, Garnett Genuis, Rachael Harder, Cathay Wagantall — 4.
ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.
ORDERED, — That Bill C-69, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House at report stage.
At 12:23 a.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.