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/

John Paul Tasker 
CBC News

The federal Liberal government will ask MPs to extend sitting hours in the House of Commons for the rest of the parliamentary session — the last before a fall election — to give them more time to pass a lengthy list of bills in relatively short order.

The motion, which will be debated Monday, calls on MPs to sit until midnight on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings until the end of June to allow for more debate time in the chamber.

With just four sitting weeks left in the House of Commons, the window of opportunity to pass key pieces of legislation — including the budget and the pot pardons bill — is closing quickly.

"We'd like to see everything pass," said a government source, speaking on background to CBC News. "You never want to say, 'No, we're willing to let that die on the order paper.' Right now, we hope with good, constructive debate on all sides we can get a lot done."

There's an added complication: the Liberal government could still introduce enabling legislation for the new NAFTA trade agreement, which would also have to be debated, studied and passed through the two chambers of Parliament in under a month's time.

That's a constrained timeline that even the most innocuous and non-partisan bills often fail to meet. (A bill making changes to the Girl Guides of Canada's articles of incorporation has been stalled in the Senate for months, for example.)

While a final decision on when to introduce the NAFTA bill has not been made, the government source said that, after the steel and aluminum tariffs deal with the U.S. and Mexico, "we are going to move ahead with ratification. It's not on the notice paper, but keep an eye on it."

So it's possible that some parliamentarians will have to stay in Ottawa beyond the end of June to pass that legislation before hitting the summer BBQ circuit ahead of October's expected vote.

While cabinet ultimately ratifies trade deals, legislative changes are often necessary to implement parts of an agreement.

A newly constituted post-election Parliament is not likely to return until December at the earliest — a distant date that could delay implementation of the trilateral trade agreement.

• Jason Kenney now says Alberta can live with amended C-69 environmental assessment bill

The 12 or so government bills currently in the Senate — plus two others in the midst of "pre-study" at committee — have the best shot of securing royal assent and passage before summer. That's largely because the leadership of the four major groups in the Senate — the government representative's office, the Senate Liberals, the Conservatives and the Independent Senators Group — have all agreed to hit a series of scheduling targets to advance legislation through the upper house in a timely manner.

Some of the bills still 'active' and before the House of Commons:

• Bill C-58, changes to the Access to Information Act regime (as amended by the Senate)
• Bill C-81, reforms to laws that protect people with disabilities, "An act to ensure a barrier-free Canada."
• Bill C-88, changes to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act
• Bill C-92, major reforms to Indigenous child welfare systems
• Bill C-93, the pot pardons bill, "An Act to provide no-cost, expedited record suspensions for simple possession of cannabis."
• Bill C-97, the budget
• Bill C-98, which establishes a public complaints and review commission for the RCMP and the Canadian Border Services Agency

However, two major legislative initiatives — Bill C-69, the government's controversial overhaul of the environmental assessment act, and Bill C-48, the northern B.C. oil tanker ban — face less than certain futures.

The Tories would not agree to a date for a final, third reading vote on those two bills to signal their overwhelming opposition to legislation they've described as an affront to Alberta's oilpatch.

While the Liberal Party promised major environmental changes in its last election platform, opposition in the Senate from Conservative and some Independent members has been fierce.

The Senate's energy committee made more than 187 amendments — including amendments long demanded by oil and gas lobbyists — to C-69, while the transport committee recommended the Senate not proceed with C-48 at all.

Peter Harder, the government's representative in the Senate, has said the Senate should pass Bill C-69 as amended by committee and send it back to the Commons. That would leave the government to decide what to do with the mixed bag of changes that strip out some crucial aspects of the draft bill — aspects that the government has defended as necessary to reform a broken assessments process.

Independent Alberta Sen. Paula Simons, who was appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last fall and opposed C-69 as it was initially written, said that while the package of amendments isn't perfect — "It's kind of a Subaru package rather than a Maserati one," she said — she believes it does make it more palatable for her home province.

"We've got the package out of committee, which is a victory. The House will have to decide which of the amendments we've put on the menu they wish to order," she said in an interview.

"It's a very big bill and it had some areas where the government would concede they made mistakes, where they left things out, where they didn't think through the consequences of a thing. I'm happy to see the government acknowledging that. I hope we can get a bill back from the Commons that I can support."

• Senators propose sweeping rewrite of controversial environmental assessment bill

• Garneau says he's open to amendments as opposition to B.C. tanker ban bill mounts

After the bill clears the Senate, as it is expected to do next week, the government will have to set aside precious debating time for MPs to consider a bill that has been radically reformed since it was first passed through the lower house in June 2018.

The Liberal government is on track to pass fewer bills in its four-year mandate than the previous Conservative government did in the four years it held a majority government — and the newly independent Senate is partly responsible.

"We have respect for the Senate, and it's been amending legislation. It's a totally new world. This Parliament is entirely different than any other Parliament before this, so it just means bills are amended and it takes a little longer. It all just takes more time," the government source said.
​
So far, the Senate has successfully amended 19 out of the 68 government bills that have become law (three of those bills will receive royal assent tomorrow), or roughly 28 per cent of all bills that have passed.

READ MORE: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-extend-commons-hours-pass-bills-1.5148943

​WATERCANADA
By Katherine Balpataky

On Wednesday, the House of Commons passed a newly updated Fisheries Act that now aims to protect fish populations and safeguard fish habitat.

Bill C-68, introduced in February, is now headed to the Senate. The proposed legislation directs the minister of fisheries and oceans to manage fish stocks sustainably, restoring the protections that were lost with changes that were made in 2012.

These protections include a requirement to consider impacts on Indigenous rights and people, the ability to quickly put in place short-term measures to respond to threats to fish that may suddenly arise, and ecosystem-based management, and additional funding for enforcement.

A new public registry with information about licenses and project decisions that address the issue of transparency was also included in the Act.

Sigrid Kuehnemund, vice-president of ocean conservation for WWF-Canada, said, “Decades of unsustainable fishing practices have shrunk many marine species populations, resulting in biodiversity loss and economic loss for coastal communities. In the face of such loss, it is essential for any modern fisheries legislation to go beyond protecting existing fish habitat and to ensure the recovery and rebuilding of fish populations. If implemented and supported by strong regulations that set targets and timelines for rebuilding stocks, this act will be an important step to ensuring the long-term sustainability of fish populations and fisheries in Canada.”
​
Elizabeth Hendriks, vice-president of freshwater conservation for WWF-Canada noted that the modernized Act also protects the flow of water, which is key to healthy river systems and aquatic species.
“A naturally flowing river is a key feature of a healthy river, and it is a huge win for nature that this is recognized in the new proposed Fisheries Act,” saidHendriks. “When we disrupt flow by blocking it with a dam or changing runoff with nearby forestry practices, we risk disrupting the entire ecosystem, driving wildlife declines, and community impacts.”

First Session, Forty-second Parliament,
64-65-66-67 Elizabeth II, 2015-2016-2017-2018

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA

AS PASSED
BY THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
JUNE 20, 2018​

RECOMMENDATION
Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence”.

SUMMARY
This enactment amends the Fisheries Act to, among other things,

(a) require that, when making a decision under that Act, the Minister shall consider any adverse effects that the decision may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, include provisions respecting the consideration and protection of Indigenous knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada, and authorize the making of agreements with Indigenous governing bodies to further the purpose of the Fisheries Act;

(b) add a purpose clause and considerations for decision-making under that Act;

(c) empower the Minister to establish advisory panels and to set fees, including for the provision of regulatory processes;

(d) provide measures for the protection of fish and fish habitat with respect to works, undertakings or activities that may result in the death of fish or the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, including in ecologically significant areas, as well as measures relating to the modernization of the regulatory framework such as authorization of projects, establishment of standards and codes of practice, creation of fish habitat banks by a proponent of a project and establishment of a public registry;

(e) empower the Governor in Council to make new regulations, including regulations respecting the rebuilding of fish stocks and importation of fish;

(f) empower the Minister to make regulations for the purposes of the conservation and protection of marine biodiversity;

(g) empower the Minister to make fisheries management orders prohibiting or limiting fishing for a period of 45 days to address a threat to the proper management and control of fisheries and the conservation and protection of fish;

(h) prohibit the fishing of a cetacean with the intent to take it into captivity, unless authorized by the Minister, including when the cetacean is injured, in distress or in need of care; and

(i) update and strengthen enforcement powers, as well as establish an alternative measures agreements regime; and

(j) provide for the implementation of various measures relating to the maintenance or rebuilding of fish stocks.
​
The enactment also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

READ MORE: http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-68/third-reading

By OCEANA Canada

TORONTO, June 20, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Today, the new proposed Fisheries Act, Bill C-68, was passed by the House of Commons and will now be studied in the Senate. The Bill includes a historic change in how Canada manages our fisheries: for the first time since the Fisheries Act was enacted in 1868, this Bill would direct the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to manage fish stocks sustainably, and to put rebuilding plans in place for depleted stocks.

“The new amendments in Bill C-68 are a big step forward. If backed by strong regulations, this proposed Act could put Canada’s fisheries on a path to abundance and provide greater economic benefits to communities,” said Josh Laughren, Executive Director, Oceana Canada.

"Thanks to Minister LeBlanc’s leadership, the new provisions bring Canada closer to modern fisheries management laws in other leading fishing nations.”

While applauding the Bill, Oceana Canada noted there could still be stormy waters ahead. Bill C-68 allows the Minister to exempt stocks from rebuilding and sustainability requirements if it is deemed that there are adverse socio-economic or cultural impacts, as long as the reasons are made public. 

“We applaud the transparency of decision making,” said Laughren. “However, we must ensure that the exceptions allowed in the proposed Act are rarely made and only for good reason, when absolutely necessary. Strong regulations, providing guidance on the use of exceptions and outlining requirements for science-based targets and timelines for fisheries rebuilding, are essential for this proposed Act to succeed in restoring Canada’s fisheries.”

Oceana Canada is calling on the Senate to quickly take up consideration of the Bill, and to support the new provisions for rebuilding and sustainably managing Canada’s fisheries, for the long-term benefit of our oceans and all who rely upon them.

In the fall of 2017, Oceana Canada released the 2017 Fisheries Audit that revealed that Canadian fisheries are in trouble: only one third of stocks are considered healthy and 13 per cent are in critical condition. Research shows that successfully rebuilding fish stocks occurs in jurisdictions where rebuilding plans are mandatory for overfished stocks. Oceana Canada will continue its work to ensure rebuilding is strongly mandated in the Fisheries Act amendments.

For more information, please contact: Kara-Ann Miel, Communications Director, Oceana Canada, 647-535-6326, kmiel@oceana.ca
​
About Oceana Canada
Oceana Canada was established as an independent charity in 2015 and is part of the largest international advocacy group dedicated solely to ocean conservation.
Canada has the longest coastline in the world, with an ocean surface area of 7.1 million square kilometres, or 70 per cent of its landmass. Oceana Canada believes that Canada has a national and global obligation to manage our natural resources responsibly and help ensure a sustainable source of protein for the world’s growing population. Oceana Canada works with civil society, academics, fishers, Indigenous Peoples and the federal government to return Canada’s formerly vibrant oceans to health and abundance. By restoring Canada’s oceans, we can strengthen our communities, reap greater economic and nutritional benefits, and protect our future. oceana.ca.

First Session, Forty-second Parliament,
64-65-66-67 Elizabeth II, 2015-2016-2017-2018

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA

​AS PASSED
BY THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
JUNE 20, 2018

RECOMMENDATION

Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “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”.

SUMMARY
Part 1 enacts the Impact Assessment Act and repeals the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. Among other things, the Impact Assessment Act

(a) names the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada as the authority responsible for impact assessments;

(b) provides for a process for assessing the environmental, health, social and economic effects of designated projects with a view to preventing certain adverse effects and fostering sustainability;

(c) prohibits proponents, subject to certain conditions, from carrying out a designated project if the designated project is likely to cause certain environmental, health, social or economic effects, unless the Minister of the Environment or Governor in Council determines that those effects are in the public interest, taking into account the impacts on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada, all effects that may be caused by the carrying out of the project, the extent to which the project contributes to sustainability and other factors;

(d) establishes a planning phase for a possible impact assessment of a designated project, which includes requirements to cooperate with and consult certain persons and entities and requirements with respect to public participation;

(e) authorizes the Minister to refer an impact assessment of a designated project to a review panel if he or she considers it in the public interest to do so, and requires that an impact assessment be referred to a review panel if the designated project includes physical activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and the Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act;

(f) establishes time limits with respect to the planning phase, to impact assessments and to certain decisions, in order to ensure that impact assessments are conducted in a timely manner;

(g) provides for public participation and for funding to allow the public to participate in a meaningful manner;

(h) sets out the factors to be taken into account in conducting an impact assessment, including the impacts on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;

(i) provides for cooperation with certain jurisdictions, including Indigenous governing bodies, through the delegation of any part of an impact assessment, the joint establishment of a review panel or the substitution of another process for the impact assessment;

(j) provides for transparency in decision-making by requiring that the scientific and other information taken into account in an impact assessment, as well as the reasons for decisions, be made available to the public through a registry that is accessible via the Internet;

(k) provides that the Minister may set conditions, including with respect to mitigation measures, that must be implemented by the proponent of a designated project;

(l) provides for the assessment of cumulative effects of existing or future activities in a specific region through regional assessments and of federal policies, plans and programs, and of issues, that are relevant to the impact assessment of designated projects through strategic assessments; and

(m) sets out requirements for an assessment of environmental effects of non-designated projects that are on federal lands or that are to be carried out outside Canada.

Part 2 enacts the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, which establishes the Canadian Energy Regulator and sets out its composition, mandate and powers. The role of the Regulator is to regulate the exploitation, development and transportation of energy within Parliament’s jurisdiction.

The Canadian Energy Regulator Act, among other things,

(a) provides for the establishment of a Commission that is responsible for the adjudicative functions of the Regulator;

(b) ensures the safety and security of persons, energy facilities and abandoned facilities and the protection of property and the environment;

(c) provides for the regulation of pipelines, abandoned pipelines, and traffic, tolls and tariffs relating to the transmission of oil or gas through pipelines;

(d) provides for the regulation of international power lines and certain interprovincial power lines;

(e) provides for the regulation of renewable energy projects and power lines in Canada’s offshore;

(f) provides for the regulation of access to lands;

(g) provides for the regulation of the exportation of oil, gas and electricity and the interprovincial oil and gas trade; and

(h) sets out the process the Commission must follow before making, amending or revoking a declaration of a significant discovery or a commercial discovery under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act and the process for appealing a decision made by the Chief Conservation Officer or the Chief Safety Officer under that Act.

Part 2 also repeals the National Energy Board Act.

Part 3 amends the Navigation Protection Act to, among other things,

(a) rename it the Canadian Navigable Waters Act;

(b) provide a comprehensive definition of navigable water;

(c) require that, when making a decision under that Act, the Minister must consider any adverse effects that the decision may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada;

(d) require that an owner apply for an approval for a major work in any navigable water;

(e)  set out the factors that the Minister must consider when deciding whether to issue an approval;

(f) provide a process for addressing navigation-related concerns when an owner proposes to carry out a work in navigable waters that are not listed in the schedule;

(g) provide the Minister with powers to address obstructions in any navigable water;

(h) amend the criteria and process for adding a reference to a navigable water to the schedule;

(i) require that the Minister establish a registry; and
​
(j) provide for new measures for the administration and enforcement of the Act.
Part 4 makes consequential amendments to Acts of Parliament and regulations.