By Paul Withers
CBC NEWS

Trudeau government legislation that enshrines the independence of Atlantic Canada's inshore fishing fleets and enhances protections for fish stocks and fish habitat has cleared the Senate.

The news is a relief to Martin Mallet.

"This is great news. We've been waiting for this for a long while," said Mallet, executive director of the Maritime Fishermen's Union.

Inshore fishery associations like his lobbied hard for Bill C-68, which overhauls the Fisheries Act.

It will give the teeth of law to two key policies designed to prevent inshore fisheries — including lobster — from ending up in the hands of a few large companies.

The owner-operator and fleet separation policies keep commercial fishing licences in the hands of small enterprises and prevent companies from both fishing and processing the catch.

"This will protect smaller operators from corporate takeover," Mallet said in an interview from his office in Shediac, N.B. "It will protect our small coastal communities."

Conservatives won't delay C-68 in CommonsBill C-68 passed the Senate Thursday with Conservative support after Liberals agreed to remove the so called "water flow" amendment from Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, added in the House of Commons.

Conservatives warned it could give Fisheries and Oceans the ability to treat industrial, agricultural and municipal water flow locations as fish habitat.

A spokesperson for Conservative fishery critic MP Todd Doherty said Conservatives will not delay C-68 when it reaches the Commons.

The party still believes the bill is flawed — it restores habitat protections removed by the Harper government — but Conservatives support owner-operator and fleet separation policies in Atlantic Canada.

Fisheries groups warned Conservatives during the lobby campaign that Conservative candidates in Atlantic Canada would pay a price at the polls in the upcoming federal election if they vote against Bill C-68.

On Thursday, just three Conservative senators voted against it in the Senate.

Fish protectionsEnvironmentalists were also heartened to see the bill move to the House of Commons, where it is very likely to pass before Parliament rises.

In addition to protecting habitat, the new Fisheries Act also imposes new requirements on the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to more carefully manage fisheries.

"This is one of our oldest pieces of legislation: 1868. And this is the first time we are going to see something that says sustainably manage our fish stocks and rebuild stocks that are depleted — first time," says Robert Rangeley, science director of Oceana Canada, a marine conservation group.

"So this is a really important piece of legislation."

Minister expects new Fisheries Act to passIn North Vancouver, federal Fisheries Minister Jonathan Wilkinson also welcomed the Senate vote.

He is on the verge of delivering a signature piece of legislation that fulfils a 2015 election commitment to restore lost protections for fish and fish habitat.
​
"It's a very important promise from an environmental perspective. It is one of the most important promises that we made with respect to fisheries and oceans and so from my perspective this is a very important milestone," Wilkinson said.

By Marco Vigliotti
iPOLITICS

​The Senate has passed legislation instituting new safeguards for fish and their habitat that includes government sponsored amendments banning shark fin imports.

Bill C-68 passed third reading in the Upper Chamber Thursday afternoon and will now be returned to the House, which must sign off on the amendments before it becomes law.

The bill aims to restore protections removed from the Fisheries Act by the previous Conservative government in 2012 while incorporating new safeguards. It also directs the minister of fisheries and oceans to manage fish stocks sustainably and put rebuilding plans in place for depleted stocks.

Prior to 2012, the Fisheries Act protected all fish and fish habitat in Canada, though this was changed by the Harper government in a bid to make life easier for farmers who would have to navigate regulatory red tape to win approval to alter small water bodies or clear out drainage ditches.

BACKGROUNDER: Fisheries Act overhaul clears House of Commons

Sen. Peter Harder, the government’s representative in the Senate, moved 28 amendments to Bill C-68 last month during clause-by-clause consideration by the Senate fisheries and oceans committee.

Among other changes, the amendments incorporated provisions in Bill S-238 banning the practice of shark finning and the import and export of shark fins, with the government worried that bill will not pass into law before Parliament rises for the next election. They also touched upon Bill S-203 which would ban the taking of whales, dolphins and porpoises into captivity. Specifically, the changes would make it mandatory to have a permit for the importation and exportation of the class of marine mammals, known as cetaceans.

Harder’s amendments to Bill C-68 also include a provision that would exclude human-made agricultural waterways from being designated as a “fish habitat.”

The senator called the definition as it stands in the bill “overly broad.” He said such waterways currently follow environmental codes of practice.

READ MORE: Shark finning, cetacean captivity amendments could be folded into C-68

SOURCE: https://ipolitics.ca/2019/06/06/amended-bill-c-68-passes-third-reading-in-senate/

By Peter Mazereeuw
THE HILL TIMES

Several high-profile government bills are entering the final stretch of scrutiny by Senators this week, with a decision on whether or not to kill the controversial tanker ban bill, C-48, on the docket, and third reading debate on the government’s sweeping environmental impact assessment bill, C-69, expected to begin early this week.

The government has also continued to introduce new bills in the House of Commons as recently as last week, with just 15 sitting days now left in the House and a handful more than that in the Senate. It’s possible not all of them will pass through both Chambers and into law before Parliament rises for the summer for the election campaign without negotiations and cooperation among groups both in the House and Senate.

The House is scheduled to sit until June 21 and the Senate until June 28. The next election is expected to happen on Oct. 21 and the House will not be back before then, so there’s a legislative push on for the government over the next three weeks.

The government tabled legislation to implement the CUSMCA trade agreement with the United States and Mexico just last week. Bill C-100 is still at second reading in the House, and would have to pass through a committee study and multiple rounds of debate before it arrived in the Senate to begin that process anew.

The New Democrats in the House signalled last week that they won’t make it easy for the government to move the bill along quickly without using time allocation, when they voted against a motion preceding C-100 that authorized government spending to implement that trade deal. The Conservatives and Liberals voted in favour of the motion.

However, should Bill C-100 make it to the Senate, members of the Red Chamber should already be familiar with it, said Independent Senator Raymonde Saint-Germain (De la Vallière, Que.), the deputy facilitator of the Independent Senators Group.

“We’ve been expecting it for a long time, we know what’s in it. We can find [the Foreign Affairs and International Trade Committee] enough time to study it,” she said.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) and U.S. Vice-President Mike Pence discussed the implementation of the trade deal during the latter’s visit to Ottawa last week. Mr. Pence said his administration was pushing for U.S. legislators to implement the bill this summer.

Government House Leader Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Ont.) didn’t include C-100 in her response to the Thursday Question last week, meaning it may not come up for debate this week.

Government House leaders often strike deals with their opposition counterparts to get unanimous consent to advance certain bills through several stages simultaneously late in a legislative session, but the NDP’s vote on the spending motion for C-100 means that is unlikely in this case. The government could also recall the House of Commons in the summer to deal with C-100, if it wants to wait for the U.S. to ratify the trade deal before Canada does the same.

Sen. Saint-Germain said she didn’t know whether the Senate would have enough time to study and vote on other recently-introduced bills before it rises. Bill C-99, to change the citizenship oath to recognize the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and C-98, to create an oversight body for the Canada Border Services Agency, are both still at second reading in the House.

Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen (York South-Weston, Ont.) told reporters last week that “we are very hopeful for a multi-party approach in support” of the citizenship oath bill.

“We are proceeding forward by presenting a bill, but also hoping that with the other parties supporting this, we can move quickly towards passage,” he said.

When asked whether the Senate would have enough time to deal with bills recently introduced into the House once they progressed to the Upper Chamber, Senator Peter Harder (Ottawa, Ont.) the government’s representative in the Senate, said “the Senate will do what the Senate needs to do.”

A spokesperson for Conservative Senate Leader Larry Smith (Saurel, Que.), Karine Leroux, said in an emailed statement that “these last-minute bills show a lack of planning by the Trudeau government. The Official Opposition in the Senate will act responsibly and do its due diligence by reviewing the latest bills proposed by the Trudeau government.”

Senate to vote on killing tanker ban bill

The Senate is expected to vote early this week on a report from its Transport Committee on Bill C-48, a bill that would fulfill a Liberal election promise to ban oil tanker traffic from the northern B.C. coast, making permanent a voluntary moratorium that is already in place there.

The Senate Transport Committee recommended that the Senate kill the bill in its report, finalized late last week. Senators on the committee came to a tie vote on whether to proceed with the bill. Tie votes count as a loss, meaning the vote determined that the committee would recommend that Senators do not allow the bill to go ahead.

If the Senate accepts the committee’s report, Bill C-48 will die, in what would be an exceptionally rare move by the Upper Chamber to defeat a government bill. If the Senate does not accept the committee’s report, the bill would go on to be debated at third reading, where Senators could move amendments to the controversial bill, which Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and others have said would harm the oil and gas industry. 

If Senators do amend the bill at third reading, it could set the stage for a ping-pong battle between the two Chambers. Transport Minister Marc Garneau (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce-Westmount, Que.) has rejected the idea of amending the bill to create exemptions to the moratorium zone, suggesting in front of Senate Transport Committee in May that opening up corridors for shipping oil on the coast would undermine the purpose of the bill, since spilled oil could spread far and wide through the water.

Sen. Saint-Germain, a member of the Transport Committee, said she couldn’t predict how Independent Senators would vote on the committee’s report when it comes before the Chamber at report stage. The report was agreed to on division, meaning that not all committee members agreed with it, but those who opposed did not force a formal vote.

“I anticipate very interesting discussions,” she said.

Independents collectively form a majority in the Chamber, but are not whipped or formally tied to any political party.   

The Senate Conservatives will try to convince Senators to accept the committee’s report and kill Bill C-48, said Conservative Senator David Tkachuk (Saskatchewan), the chair of the Transport Committee. The Conservatives may bring forward amendments to the bill if it makes it to third reading, he said.

Independent Senator Elaine McCoy (Alberta) penned an op-ed in The Globe and Mail late last week, urging her colleagues to kill C-48, and Independent Senator Doug Black (Alberta) said he agreed with her via Twitter. Independent Senator Paula Simons (Alberta) voted against proceeding with the bill at the Transport Committee.

Senators green-light overhaul of C-69

Senators agreed late last week to pass Bill C-69, on reforming the environmental impact assessment process, through report stage, meaning they effectively endorsed the 187 amendments to the bill made by the Senate Environment Committee.

That bill has also been widely criticized by conservative politicians and resource industry groups, among others, for everything from technical errors to potentially causing harm to the resource industry. The Environment Committee’s amendments ranged from minor changes to those that would take discretionary power over assessments away from the federal environment minister, and changes that environmental groups say would make environmental reviews too industry-friendly, for example, putting industry regulators back in charge of review panels conducting assessments, and ensuring the economic impact of a project is taken into account in an assessment.

The Senate agreed to pass the committee’s report on division, meaning some Senators disagreed with the report, but weren’t willing to force a recorded vote on it. Third reading debate on Bill C-69 will likely begin early this week, and the Senate Conservatives are considering putting forward one or more new technical amendments at that stage.

The government fisheries and fish habitat bill, C-68, is also at third reading in the Senate, as is Bill C-77, to reform the the military justice system. Senate leaders agreed hold a third reading vote on C-77 by June 6.

Baylis’ urges PROC to get Members’-rights motion back to House

Liberal MP Frank Baylis (Pierrefonds-Dollard, Que.) is urging MPs on the Procedure and House Affairs Committee to do a short study of his private member’s motion to change the standing orders, M-231, and get it back to the House in time for a vote, before it dies on the order paper with the summer break and dissolution of Parliament for this fall’s election.

Mr. Baylis testified before PROC late last week, as the committee held its first hearing on the motion, which would establish a second debating Chamber for the House to deal with private member’s business, and would change the standing orders in several ways to take power out of the hands of party officers like the whips, and put it into the hands of backbench MPs—including doing away with speaking lists, through which the whips decide who gets to speak in the House and when.

Mr. Baylis’ motion had also been before the House of Commons as a whole for consideration, but he missed the first hour of debate on the motion in the House last week after making a mistake with his scheduling, he said. Because he missed the debate, the motion died, making PROC Mr. Baylis’ last chance to revive it.

Mr. Baylis told the committee members that many of the ideas proposed in the motion have been examined by MPs before, and noted that PROC had already done a separate study on establishing a second Chamber for the House. He told The Hill Times that he had received positive feedback from the Conservatives, NDP, and Liberal whip Mark Holland (Ajax, Ont.) about the motion. He said there was nonetheless some “timidity” about making big changes to the way the House does its business, and that he wanted PROC to complete a study on the motion so that all MPs would have a chance to vote on it in the Chamber before the summer.

peter@hilltimes.com

Status of government bills

​House of Commons

Second reading:

• C-5, An Act to Repeal Division 20 of Part 3 of the Economic Action Plan 2015 Act, No. 1
• C-12, An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act
• C-27, An Act to amend the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985
• C-28, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (victim surcharge)
• C-32, An Act related to the repeal of Section 159 of the Criminal Code
• C-33, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act
• C-34, An Act to amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act
• C-38, An Act to amend an Act to amend the Criminal Code (exploitation and trafficking in persons)
• C-39, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (unconstitutional provisions)
• C-42, Veterans Well-being Act
• C-43, An Act respecting a payment to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to support a pan-Canadian artificial intelligence strategy
• C-52, Supporting Vested Rights Under Access to Information Act
• C-56, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Abolition of Early Parole Act
• C-87, Poverty Reduction Act
• C-94, An Act respecting certain payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund
• C-98, An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act
• C-99, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act
• C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America, and the United Mexican States

Report stage:

• C-88, An Act to amend the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act
• C-92, An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children, youth, and families
• C-93, An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis
• C-97, Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1

Consideration of amendments made by the Senate:

• C-58, An Act to amend the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
• C-59, An Act respecting national security matters

Senate

Senate pre-study:

• C-92, An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children, youth, and families
• C-97, Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1

Committee:

• C-48, Oil Tanker Moratorium Act
• C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act, and other Acts
• C-78, An Act to amend the Divorce Act, the Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance Act, and the Garnishment, Attachment, and Pension Diversion Act
• C-82, Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions Act
• C-84, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (bestiality and animal fighting)
• C-91, Indigenous Languages Act

Report stage:

• C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act

Third reading

• C-68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act
• C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act
• C-77, An Act to amend the National Defence Act to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts

Awaiting Royal Assent

• C-71, An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms
• C-81, Accessible Canada Act

READ MORE: https://www.hilltimes.com/2019/06/03/senate-to-decide-on-fate-of-tanker-ban-liberals-leaving-u-s-mexico-trade-bill-until-last-minute/202345

By David Moscrop
MACLEAN'S

With Parliament set to rise on June 21, MPs are preparing for a summer filled with pre-election groundwork. But the government will be making the dash to sunny days with its briefcase full of legislation that has yet to be passed. Prime Minister Trudeau and his team will be under pressure to deliver on these commitments. That task will be made difficult by emboldened Independent senators and obstructionist Tory senators, as well as opposition members of Parliament who have concerns with the substance of pending legislation, wish to see the government embarrassed ahead of the election in October, or both.

After being elected in 2015, Trudeau publicly shared the mandate letters he delivered to each of his members of cabinet, outlining what was expected of them and anchored by the “12 top priorities” of the government. As a means of accountability, the Privy Council Office (PCO) created a mandate-letter tracker and published it online. When last updated on March 22, the website indicated that only four of 432 commitments were “Not met” and were “Not being pursued”—electoral reform; a balanced budget; an employment insurance break for firms that hire young folks permanently; and the removal of GST on capital investments in new, affordable rental housing. The PCO states that there has been “Progress made” on 267 promises and that 161 have been “Completed/Met.”

But there is some serious unfinished business in that “Progress made” section. Filed under it is Canada’s response to the opioid crisis, which has been slow and insufficient. Ditto fixing ensuring public servant pay—as the Phoenix pay system debacle remains unresolved. Ditto once more Indigenous housing and the implementation of recommendations from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

As the dissolution of Parliament and the federal election approach, the fate of a few key pieces of legislation hang in the balance—and that’s important. The remaining bills cover efforts to tackle the climate emergency and to address the ongoing colonial relationship between the state and Indigenous peoples. Their fates will reflect the priorities and capacities of the government, what it cares about and what it cares enough about to get something real done. The same is true of the Senate. So, the next few weeks will be decisive—both a test of the Trudeau government and the (semi-) independent Senate. At the time of this writing, there were eight bills under consideration in the House of Commons and 11 in the Senate. And the latter is where things get interesting.

While the government has control of the agenda in the House, and the capacity to control the calendar, with Trudeau’s changes to the Senate after his election 2015, he has had less ability to direct affairs in the Red Chamber—which is now experiencing some growing pains. Today, the Independent Senators Group (ISG), a caucus of non-partisan senators, has an absolute majority in the upper house. The Senate Conservatives (who did not respond to a request for an interview), however, remain partisan and obstructionist, their apparent interest in stalling the government’s agenda increasing as the election draws nearer.

Candice Bergen, the Conservative House leader in the Commons, blames the government. “I think they have realized that they haven’t accomplished a lot and are trying to get some things done. For sure they have really failed on their promises to Indigenous people.” But some government legislation, including the contentious environmental assessment review legislation, Bill C-69, has been in front of the Senate since the summer of 2018—and has been stalled by partisan temporizing. Sen. Yuen Pao Woo, facilitator of the ISG, sees such political games as an old problem, indicative of the reality that, while the Senate is changing, it’s not fully reformed. “It’s the old way, which is that partisan caucuses use the rules to extend and to obstruct and to delay,” he says. “It is the status quo that is holding back the Senate rather than the new approach.”

Of the dozen bills currently before the Senate, a few stand out as particularly important to the government—and the country. Bill C-92, a bill designed to address serious flaws in the Indigenous child welfare system, is one. So is Bill C-91, an Indigenous languages bill to fund and protect Indigenous languages. The budget implementation act, Bill C-97, is also in front of the Senate, but given that it’s a money bill, the chamber is unlikely to tie it up for too long. There’s also Bill C-59, a national security bill. Bill C-71, a firearms regulation bill, was just passed.

The most contentious bills, however, seem to be concerned with the environment. Bill C-48, which would institute an oil tanker moratorium along the northern coast of B.C., has been scrutinized by the Senate for ages, and was recently defeated at committee—though not killed. Its fate will be decided on the floor of the upper chamber. Bill C-68, which is concerned with the sustainability of fish stocks, has been making its way through Parliament for years. Coastal First Nations are demanding the Senate assent to the bill.

And then there’s Bill C-69, the granddaddy-showdown of them all. The environmental assessment bill has been controversial from the get-go. While supporters see it as an essential update to the review process for major resource projects, opponents regard it as a threat to, among other things, the green-lighting of pipelines. Alberta premier Jason Kenney has been stumping against it for months, making the bill a feature of his recent, successful election campaign. Unsurprisingly, the oil and gas lobby has been aggressively opposed to it, too. The Senate (and not just Conservative senators) has offered 187 amendments to the bill, which doesn’t surprise Bergen. “The outcry against C-69 has been massive,” she says. “It is a terrible bill that will do massive damage to our economy.”

For a government keen to tout its achievements, especially on the environment, this situation is far from optimal. In October, voters will be asking “What have you done for me lately?” as well as “What are you going to do for me next?” Currently, the Liberals trail the Conservatives in the aggregate polls by six points. They’re likely to remind Canadians of their success lifting children out of poverty with the Canada Child Benefit--which is increasing. They’ll also be sure to trumpet their renegotiation of NAFTA, though the new deal has yet to be ratified by Parliament or the U.S Congress and may not receive approval from the latter.

The legalisation of marijuana will be another feather in their cap. And Trudeau has himself said that he would happily make the election about the carbon tax. Yet his team will also have to answer to shortcomings on big files, including letting down Indigenous peoples, failing to balance the budget, breaking their promise on electoral reform and—to the dismay of progressives—purchasing the Trans Mountain pipeline.

The government is confident it will get its legislation passed, and members are prepared to use the parliamentary tools at their disposal to make that happen, such as longer sitting hours for the House of Commons. “We’ll most likely be entertaining extended hours,” says government House Leader Bardish Chagger. “I believe it’s important for us to be able to not only having meaningful debate but to call legislation to a vote—and also to have time to consider amendments that might come back from the Senate.”

Another tool: asking the House to sit past its scheduled adjournment on June 21. “I would hope that if we continue working in a productive manner, we shouldn’t have to do that,” says Chagger. “But if there are important pieces of legislation that are not completed, of course. We are here to serve Canadians and their best interests.”

With an election coming, Parliamentarians will amplify the high-notes of the legislative process—getting the remaining bills passed will be political, partisan and acrimonious. The fate of each piece of government business in the next few weeks will then offer voters a way to assess their government of the last four years; to decide whether the country is walking on sunshine or down a boulevard of broken Liberal dreams.

READ MORE: ​https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-final-mad-scramble-to-deliver-on-team-trudeaus-big-promises/

Rachel Aiello
CTV NEWS

OTTAWA – MPs return to Parliament Hill Monday, giving them four weeks until the House of Commons likely adjourns for the final time before the election campaign begins.

After members of Parliament decamp to their ridings for the summer BBQ circuit and pre-election campaigning, senators are scheduled to stay in town an extra week to wrap up whatever legislation they can. All of this timing of course, is pending any unforeseen need to reconvene Parliament, -- say, over needing to ratify CUSMA.

All told, this leaves just 24 sitting days to pass whatever legislation remains. Any bills not passed will die when Parliament adjourns and would have to be re-tabled if a future government wanted to still pursue them.

Here's where all active outstanding pieces of government legislation stand. Given the flow of bills, those in the Senate are closest to passage, as are the bills that have been sent back to the House with Senate amendments.

​In the House:

Bills at second reading

• Bill C-87, the Poverty Reduction Act. This was tabled by Minister of Families, Children and Social Development Jean-Yves Duclos in November 2018.
• Bill C-98, which amends the RCMP Act and CBSA Act to set up a new oversight body for the two agencies. It was tabled by Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale in May.

Bills being studied at committee

• Bill C-88, which makes changes related to regional resource protections in the Mackenzie Valley in the Northwest Territories. It was tabled by Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc in November 2018 and is currently before the House Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee.
• Bill C-92, which seeks to assert that Indigenous people have jurisdiction over child and family services in their communities. It was tabled by Indigenous Services Minister Seamus O'Regan in May and has been fast-tracked and is currently also before the House Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee. It is being pre-studied in the Senate as well, so expect this bill to keep moving quickly.
• Bill C-93, the pot pardons legislation. Tabled by Goodale in May, it is currently before the House Public Safety and National Security Committee. Its first meeting on the legislation is scheduled for next week.
• Bill C-97, the Budget Implementation Act, 2019. This omnibus bill makes all sorts of changes tied into the federal budget, and also makes immigration law and housing rights changes. It was tabled by Finance Minister Bill Morneau in April and is being studied by the House Finance Committee, as well as the Senate National Finance Committee. It's expected to pass, as all budget bills do.

Bills awaiting consideration of Senate amendments

• Bill C-58, the legislation that changes Canada's Access to Information Law in several ways, including giving the new information commissioner new authorities. Though it has largely been panned as a bad bill that will not improve an already troubled freedom of information system. It was first ushered in under the Treasury Board portfolio in June 2017. The Senate amended it considerably and has sent it back to the House.
• Bill C-81, the Accessible Canada Act, from Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility Minister Carla Qualtrough. It makes sweeping accessibility law changesand was tabled in 2018. The minister tweeted this week that she’ll be accepting all Senate changes, meaning it is set to pass soon.

What about bills at first reading?

There are 14 other government bills still in the House, but they all are at first reading. All but one of them have been stalled since 2017. Some of this legislation was folded into other bills that have since advanced, so don’t expect to see these bills move.

The one exception is the recently tabled Bill C-94, which allows for payments from federal coffers to be made in relation to infrastructure, the Shock Trauma Air Rescue Service, and to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. This was tabled by Finance Minister Bill Morneau in March, and still has a chance to move forward as it doesn't appear to be a contentious or dense proposal. The bill is six pages long.

There are also no bills currently at report stage or third reading in the House, though expect that to change as soon as the aforementioned bills get moving next week.

In the Senate:

Bills at second reading:

• Bill C-84, which mends the Criminal Code to crack down on bestiality and animal fighting offences. It was tabled by then-justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould in 2018 and just passed into the Senate earlier this month.
• Bill C-91, the Indigenous Languages Act, which is aimed at reviving Indigenous languages and would create a new Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages. It was tabled in February by Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism Minister Pablo Rodriguez and also just passed into the upper chamber recently.

Bills being studied at committee:

• Bill C-48, the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act would introduce a federal ban on tanker traffic off of the B.C. north coast. The Senate Committee on Transport and Communications just recommended it not be proceeded with at all. Now it'll be on the Senate as a whole to decide whether to take that advice and kill the government bill, which was first tabled by Transport Minister Marc Garneau in 2017.
• Bill C-77, which introduces a victims' bill of rights for the military justice system. From Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, it was tabled in 2018 and is currently before the Senate National Security and Defence Committee, though the committee has only held one meeting on it so far.
• Bill C-68, the legislation that makes changes to the Fisheries Act related to make clear the minister’s authority and strengthen the powers for enforcement of the law. It was tabled under the Fisheries, Oceans, and Canadian Coast Guard portfolio in February 2018, and has been studied the last two months in the Senate Fisheries and Oceans Committee. 
• Bill C-78, which updates family and divorce laws, in an attempt to have more disputes settled out of court, and amends the language related to custody. It’s a justice proposal first tabled in 2018, and it’s currently before the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. The committee has just come out of back-to-back studies of other government bills, so its look into this one has yet to begin.
• Bill C-69, which makes a number of considerable changes to environmental assessments and regulations. The Senate Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources Committee has suggested dozens of amendments and it will now be on the whole Senate to determine how it wants to handle the contentious proposal that was first tabled in February 2018.
• Bill C-82, the Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions Act. It's a Morneau initiative first tabled in June 2018. The Senate Foreign Affairs and International Trade Committee has yet to begin studying it.
• Bill C-75, an omnibus piece of legislation that aims to reform a number of areas of Canada's criminal justice system and address court backlogs. It was tabled in March 2018 and has been studied intensely at the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee over this month. This study could wrap soon, and it is yet to be seen whether it'll be amended as it was in the House.
• Bill C-83, which proposes to overhaul how federal inmates are separated from the general prison population, eliminating solitary confinement as it is known. It was tabled in October 2018 and is currently getting studied by the Senate Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee.

Bills at report stage:

• Bill C-59, the National Security Act, which is a wide-spanning piece of legislation that proposes national security and oversight reforms. The Senate National Security and Defence Committee has reported it back with amendments. The Senate will now deliberate if it will accept the proposed changes.

Bills at third reading:

• Bill C-71, the gun control bill that includes various measures that tightens the rules around gun ownership. It was amended considerably by the Senate National Security and Defence Committee but the Senate as a whole rejected those amendments so the bill as it was, is now poised to pass and move on to Royal Assent.

Bills passed so far:Since forming government, the Liberals have managed to pass 68 pieces of government legislation, including major changes to Canada's physician-assisted dying regime, cannabis legalization, an anti-harassment policy for federal workers, and six budget implementation bills. They’ve been able to do this in part with the use of time allocation, a procedural tool that limits debates. It’s a tactic that is commonly used, but is always railed against by the opposition.
​
On top of these bills, there are dozens of other private member’s bills left on the agenda, including a proposal to end the captivity of whales and dolphins, legislation to create a new statutory holiday focused on reconciliation with Indigenous Canadians, and a bill that would require comprehensive training for judges on sexual assault. Here’s our latest rundown of the private member’s bills to watch.

READ MORE: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/with-a-few-weeks-left-in-the-session-here-s-what-s-left-to-pass-1.4434812

By Senate GRO (Government Representative Office)
https://senate-gro.ca/news/government-bills-in-the-senate-now/

Bills are proposed laws. They vary in size, effect and the public interest they receive. Typically, Government bills are introduced by a Cabinet Minister in the House of Commons, but this type of legislation can also originate in the Senate if it does not initiate spending or impose a tax.

Here’s a list of government bills currently before the Senate.

The Bill: C-68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence
Status: Third reading.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Dan Christmas, independent Senator representing Nova Scotia.
Summary: This bill aims to fulfill the Government’s commitment to better protect Canada’s freshwater and marine fisheries, helping to ensure their long-term economic and environmental sustainability. Changes include the restoration of protections removed for fish and fish habitats in 2012, as well as the introduction of new ecological safeguards. C-68 also seeks to better recognize the rights of Indigenous peoples with respect to fisheries.

The Bill: C-77, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts
Status: Third reading.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Marc Gold, independent Senator representing Quebec.
Summary: Bill C-77 seeks to make substantial amendments to the National Defence Act through the addition of the
Declaration of Victims Rights to the Code of Service Discipline, in order to harmonize the military justice system with the wider Canadian civilian criminal justice system. Changes also include a requirement that particular attention should be given to the circumstances of Indigenous offenders at sentencing.

The Bill: C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Status: Third reading.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Grant Mitchell, Government Liaison.
Summary: The objective of the bill is to improve the rules for the assessment of major projects to protect the environment and waterways, to rebuild public trust in how decisions about resource projects are made, and to provide certainty and predictable timelines to industry and investors. It also ensures that Indigenous knowledge be formally regarded and integrated into review processes.

The Bill: C-83, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act
Status: Report stage.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Marty Klyne, independent Senator representing Saskatchewan.
Summary: Bill C-83 replaces Canada’s current system of administrative segregation with a much more progressive system of structured intervention units. Under the proposed new system, the Correctional Service of Canada will be required to provide inmates who must be separated from the general population with at least four hours daily out of the cell and at least two hours daily of meaningful human interaction.

The Bill: C-48, Oil Tanker Moratorium Act
Status: At the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Mobina Jaffer, independent Liberal Senator representing British Columbia.
Summary: The bill formalizes a crude oil tanker moratorium on the north coast of British Columbia and sets penalties for contravention of this moratorium.

The Bill: C-75, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Status: At the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Murray Sinclair, independent Senator representing Manitoba.
Summary: This bill is intended to make the criminal justice system more modern and efficient, and to reduce delays in criminal proceedings.

The Bill: C-78, An Act to amend the Divorce Act, the Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance Act and the Garnishment, Attachment and Pension Diversion Act and to make consequential amendments to another Act
Status: At the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Pierre Dalphond, independent Senator representing Quebec.
Summary:  This new law will make federal family laws more responsive to Canadian families’ needs — and will put children first.

The Bill: C-82, Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions Act
Status: At the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Mary Coyle, independent Senator representing Nova Scotia.
Summary: This bill enacts implements a multilateral instrument in respect of conventions for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income. The multilateral instrument is an international treaty developed as part of the G20 and OECD’s project to tackle base erosion and profit shifting.

The Bill: C-84, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (bestiality and animal fighting)
Status: At the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Yvonne Boyer, independent Senator representing Ontario.
Summary: This legislation broadens the scope of three criminal offences in order to prohibit certain activities related to bestiality and animal fighting.

The Bill: C-91, Indigenous Languages Act
Status: At the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples.
Senate Sponsor: Senator Murray Sinclair, independent Senator representing Manitoba.
Summary: Bill C-91 provides, among other things, that the Government of Canada recognizes that the rights of Indigenous peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 include rights related to Indigenous languages.

READ MORE: https://senate-gro.ca/news/government-bills-in-the-senate-now/

About the Government Representative Office (GRO)
Government representation consists of three Senators who are responsible for both shepherding the Government’s legislation through the Senate in a timely manner and championing renewal in the changing institution. Although the three Senators represent the Government to the Senate, they do not sit in a partisan caucus and do not lead a caucus. Because of this, the Government representative team has no power to direct the votes of Senate members. The team promotes a vision for the Senate that is less partisan, and more independent, accountable and transparent, along with a strong focus on the role of the Senate as a complementary body to the House of Commons.

Formed in the spring of 2016, the GRO is a departure from previous Senate practice in which the Government Leader in the Senate was part of the same caucus as the Government. While the old model was characterized by top-down partisan control manifested through whipped party votes, the new model relies on Senators’ exercise of judgment within the framework of the institution’s complementary role.

​READ MORE ABOUT GRO: https://senate-gro.ca/about/

By Amy Smart
THE CANADIAN PRESS

Significant changes could be coming to the way fisheries are managed in Canada, giving hope for the rebound of some species and the protection of others, says an ocean conservation group.

Josh Laughren, executive director of Oceana Canada, said proposed amendments to the Fisheries Act would prompt the government to rebuild stocks that fall below sustainable levels.

And while the changes still include an “off ramp” for government to make decisions in the interest of short-term economics over longer sustainability, they would require those decisions to be made public, which Mr. Laughren said is a step toward ensuring past mistakes aren’t repeated.

“We’ve kind of sleepwalked through this incredible decline in abundance and it’s been hidden by some of the economics of it,” Mr. Laughren said in an interview.

More than half of the entire value of Canadian fisheries now comes from Atlantic invertebrates like lobster, crab and shrimp, he said, pointing to a 2015 report by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Not only does that make the industry more vulnerable to pathogens and disease, but the profitability of those fisheries have obscured the depletion of other marine species like groundfish. Since 1970, Canada has seen fish biomass decline by 55 per cent, an expert panel convened by the Royal Society of Canada found.

In the United States, fisheries laws have more bite because they clearly define “overfishing,” and when it occurs, action to stop and reverse the impacts is required within months. Forty-five stocks have been recovered since the law was introduced and 28 of the most successful ones were generating 54 per cent more revenue than when they were overfished, he said.

Bill C-68 was introduced a month after the Liberal government was sworn in and had its second reading in the Senate in December.

Mr. Laughren said he’s very hopeful the bill could improve biodiversity in a way that also creates more economic opportunity.

“Abundance provides options, abundance makes allocation a hell of a lot easier and provides more value. I think we’ve kind of forgotten about how important that is,” he said.

Others are more wary.

Paul Lansbergen, who represents commercial fisheries as president of the Fisheries Council of Canada, said that beyond protecting fish stocks the law should also protect “sustainable” fishing rights.

“The most significant policy issue facing the sector is a concern of stability of access to the fishing resource,” he told the Senate standing committee reviewing the bill.

“The use of fisheries is missing in the current wording of the bill.”

Mr. Lansbergen said the council will reserve an opinion on the law until accompanying regulations are revealed. But he told the committee it represents a significant change that will have long-standing implications for the sector and the health of the oceans and fish resources.

Canada’s seafood industry employs 80,000 people and accounts for $7-billion in exports to more than 130 countries.

Mr. Lansbergen said Canada is already a “global leader” in sustainable fisheries management, noting that 80 per cent of wild seafood production is certified by the Marine Stewardship Council.

He warned against forcing commercial fishermen to give up their licences.

“Taking away long-standing licences and quotas does not respect past investments and has eroded the sector’s confidence to invest and could undermine conservation efforts,” he said.

Martin Mallet, executive director of the Maritime Fishermen’s Union, said he’s hoping the bill passes without too many hiccups, adding most fishermen associations in Atlantic Canada support the bill.

Mr. Mallet said the union particularly likes the way the bill would enshrine an existing owner-operator policy into law so it can be better enforced.

It would give stronger protection to East Coast fishermen against unaffordable quota costs that have made fishing more expensive than it’s worth in some other jurisdictions, he said.

“The West Coast fisheries are an example of what could happen if you don’t have this type of regulation. You end up having companies and investors basically buying the rights to the fish,” he said, with fishermen then leasing the quota from them.

It can mean less economic benefit funnelled into local communities, he said.

Bill C-68 also provides new authorities for Indigenous participation in the fisheries along with their co-management.

Terry Teegee, regional chief with the British Columbia Assembly of First Nations, said he generally supports the bill but would like even stronger protection for First Nations’ inherent and constitutionally protected rights.

Many of the sections regarding Indigenous participation use language like “may” instead of “shall,” which means it doesn’t compel action, he said.

Mr. Teegee said Indigenous knowledge systems should be recognized on a level playing field with government science. Committing to rebuild fish stocks and habitat restoration could be seen as an act of reconciliation, he said.

“I think the bill itself is better than it was but certainly I think there can be improvements and more commitments to Indigenous people,” he said.

The clock is ticking on the bill head of the federal election this fall but Mr. Teegee said fisheries protection shouldn’t depend on who holds power.
​
“Right now we’re seeing climate change and we’re seeing fish stocks declining. We need to really fix things and make some interventions,” he said.

READ MORE: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-conservation-group-says-proposed-amendments-to-fisheries-act-give-hope/ 

​SHANNON LOUGH
Coast Mountain News

As the federal government reviews the Fisheries Act, two North Coast B.C. residents flew to Ottawa to present how they think the act should be improved.

There are eight key areas to Bill C-68 and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples is listed as number two.

John Helin, mayor of the Lax Kw’alaams Band near Prince Rupert, painted a grim picture of his Indigenous community as he spoke to the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans – how members are struggling to make a living, and his experience with fisheries enforcement officers “racially profiling” members.

“We have a fleet of 70-80 gillnetters that can’t make a living anymore fishing for salmon. We have a fish plant in my community that at its peak, employs up 100 members in the village and we’re having a lot of challenges keeping that operation going,” Helin said.

To keep the fish plant going, they’ve diversified by processing groundfish, but he said with all the other fisheries coming into the area, they’ve lost an opportunity.

“There was a herring fishery in our day in the 70s and 80s, a seine herring fishery, and it wiped out that fish. To this day, that stock doesn’t come back. So herring is a staple, not just for people, but for other fish in the sea that feed off herring. So it’s alarming to us when DFO allows one guy to go out fishing and everyone else agrees to tie up,” Helin said.

Helin said the band wants to sign a comprehensive fisheries agreement with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, but had never done so since losing a fisheries case. He said it’s resulted in members being targeted on the water.

“It got so bad where one of the fisheries enforcement guys boarded my son’s boat, he was fishing my boat, and he had his 10-year-old kid on the boat, and this guy pulls his gun on the deck of my son’s boat without provocation. That went to court and it was tossed out. That shows how we’re treated in our own traditionally territory,” he said.

“When you talk about reconciliation, consultation, they’re just empty words for us. So hopefully coming before committees like this, we can make the improvements that we want.”

Earlier in the day, third-generation fisherwoman, fisheries biologist and Prince Rupert resident Chelsey Ellis presented her suggested amendments to Bill C-68, saying more and more licenses and quota are being transferred from fishermen and away from coastal communities.

“For the few young fish harvesters trying to persevere, it’s getting harder to earn a living and find a safe, reliable and professional crew to work with,” Ellis said, adding young people are not joining the industry because they don’t see a future in it.
​
She called for measures to prioritize and incentivize licenses and quota for “those taking the risks and working long hard hours” to harvest Canadian seafood, and the promotion of independence of owner-operator enterprises within all commercial fisheries.

Article by Michael Finley
Gowling WLG

A new definition in Bill C-68, the new Fisheries Act (the "Act"), has the potential to significantly broaden the Act's concept of "fish habitat".  As mentioned in a previous article, the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans recommended adding the concept of water flow to the definition of "fish habitat" by inserting the following provision prior to the third reading of the Bill:

Deeming — habitat

(2) For the purposes of this Act, the quantity, timing and quality of the water flow that are necessary to sustain the freshwater or estuarine ecosystems of a fish habitat are deemed to be a fish habitat.

Bill C-68 is currently before the Senate Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, and includes this provision.  This article addresses why the above provision was inserted into Bill C-68 and what the implications of this change might be if it remains in Bill C-68 following Senate committee review.

First, the "why".  The above provision, which, for the purposes of this article, will be called the "deeming provision", has its genesis in a broader concept known as "environmental flow".  The Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat has adopted the below definition, endorsed at the 2007 International River Symposium held in Brisbane Australia:

Environmental flow describes the quantity, quality and timing of water flows required to sustain freshwater ecosystems and the human livelihoods and well-being that depend on these ecosystems.1

A number of witnesses at the committee stage of Bill C-68, advocated for the inclusion of environmental flows somewhere in the Act, including West Coast Environmental Law, Ecojustice, Oceana Canada, and the Tsleil-Waututh.

Notably, though the deeming provision might suggest otherwise, environmental flow does not necessarily require or imply a pristine aquatic ecosystem, devoid of human use.  Rather, the concept of environmental flow presumes a variety of uses.  As the International Union for the Conservation of Nature notes:

Intuitively, it might seem that all of the natural flow, in its natural pattern of high and low flows, would be needed to maintain a near-pristine ecosystem. Many ecologists believe, however, that some small portion of flow could be removed without measurable degradation of the ecosystem. How much could be removed in this way is more difficult to assess, with estimates ranging between about 65% and 95% of natural flow having to remain, with the natural patter of flow also retained. Once flow manipulations move past this, then river ecologists can advise on patterns and volumes of flows that will result in a range of different river conditions. This information can then be used to choose a condition that allows an acceptable balance between a desired ecosystem condition and other social and economic needs for water. The flows allocated to achieve the chosen condition are the environmental flow.2

Concern about maintaining environmental flows reflects the reality that many of Canada's aquatic systems are under increasing pressure from human activity, and that water is not an unlimited resource.  From an environmental-protection perspective, the benefit of an environmental flow approach is that it is inherently holistic.  Considering environmental flows involves thinking about the total health of a water body and attempts to account for the total effect of individual water uses on the system as a whole. 

However, while it is easy to understand that a certain level of water flow (or indeed, a seasonal variability of flow) is environmentally necessary, it is not as easy to "operationalize" the concept.  What, for example, is a dam operator or industrial user of water to do in order to maintain the environmental flow of the waterway they benefit from? Many water users alter flows daily, simply by nature of their operations.

Equally there are issues in determining the appropriate environmental flow.  As it stands, there is no single, federally-mandated methodology to determine what the appropriate or required environmental flow is in a given waterway.  Various methodologies to assess the appropriate flow exist.  The World Wildlife Fund suggests that there are over 200 methodologies to determine environmental flow globally, reflecting in part the variety of water resources being assessed.3 The Department of Fisheries and Oceans, through the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, has assessed a number of these methodologies.4 

Bill C-68, as it stands, does not mandate how the appropriate or required environmental flow is to be established for the purpose of the deeming provision.  For dams and fishways, this might be done by regulation, given the Ministerial power at s. 34.3(7) to "make regulations respecting the flow of water that is to be maintained to ensure the free passage of fish or the protection of fish or fish habitat."  However, it is not yet clear what guidance will apply to restrict or limit other types of water use for the purposes of their operations.  Consumptive use, for example, has a different effect on environmental flow than obstruction or temporary diversion of water.5 

Nevertheless, the variability of environmental flows means that regulations will likely be unable to clearly mandate what must be done by individual users.  Instead, it is likely that a case-by case approach will be required. This is because optimal environmental flows vary depending on the water in question.  For example, perennial rivers (those that flow all year) do not have the same characteristics as seasonal rivers that flow only at certain times of year (such as during the spring freshet).6 Given that the environmental flow for a given river system is individual to that system, and given that different uses may affect flow differently, it is unlikely that appropriate environmental flows will be easily established by general regulation.  Instead, it will be necessary to establish the flow for the specific system in question. 

Without guidance, it is not yet clear what types of alteration of flow are permissible and what might require authorization by the Ministry as an alteration of fish habitat for the purposes of the new Act.  Further, it is likely that what one user does on a waterway with respect to flow will impact another potential user's ability to use water.  This means existing uses of a waterway and their impact on environmental flow will have to be assessed when determining whether a future use of that waterway is appropriate or approvable.  Guidance is required from the DFO on these points, either through regulation or policy-making. 

Guidance is also required to understand how users' obligations to maintain environmental flows relate to their obligations under provincial water regimes, such as the Ontario Water Resources Act.  Permits to take water under the Ontario Water Resources Act, for example, often take into consideration appropriate water flow and the health of upstream and downstream environments.  Water uses will require coordination between provincial and federal authorities to ensure that the regulatory burden is not duplicated between regimes.

While including flows in the definition of fish habitat represents a significant change to the Act, considering flow as part of habitat is not new. The previous Act's prohibition of killing fish (former s. 32) and prohibition of harmful alteration or destruction of fish habitat (former s. 35) already indirectly contemplated the concept of maintaining ecological flow. 

Case law bears this out.  For example, Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. was successfully prosecuted under both of these sections of the former Act when, acting on what it perceived to be DFO authorization, Rio Tinto initiated an emergency ramp-down of water flow past its dam in the Kemano river.  It did so in order to allow B.C. Hydro to conduct urgent infrastructure repairs.7 The court found that this rapid decrease in river flow had deleterious impact on salmon fry (juvenile salmon) in the river. 
​
Given that Bill C-68, in its current form, returns the s.35 prohibition on harmful alteration damage or destruction of fish habitat to the Act. If Bill C-68 is approved in its current form, then interference with flow that impairs habitat will, once again, constitute an offence.  It remains to be determined whether any guidance will be provided through regulation or DFO policy.  If Bill C-68 in its current form comes into effect, then in the event of a prosecution, water users who may be charged under the new s. 35. Those who are charged and who seek to make out a due diligence defence will be well-served to understand the hydrological conditions of the watercourse within which they operate. Water users in general would benefit from clear DFO guidance on what must be done to maintain environmental flows. 

READ MORE: http://bit.ly/newfisheriesact