Skip to content
 

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources

Issue 4 - Evidence - February 28, 2008


OTTAWA, Thursday, February 28, 2008

The Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources, to which was referred the subject matter of Bill S-208, An Act to require the Minister of the Environment to establish, in cooperation with the provinces, an agency with the power to identify and protect Canada's watersheds that will constitute sources of drinking water in the future, met this day at 8:39 a.m. to examine the subject matter of the bill.

Senator Tommy Banks (Chair) in the chair.

[English]

The Chair: Honourable senators, before we go to the order of business, which I hope we will be able to conclude in very short order today, Senator Sibbeston has asked for some time at the beginning of the meeting.

Senator Sibbeston: Thank you.

I want to apologize to Senator Nolin for the incident we had the other night at the end of our meeting. I am sincerely sorry. I also want to apologize to the staff for insinuating that they did anything but good work.

The Chair: Thank you, kindly.

Senator Sibbeston: I apologize to you, too, for having to put up with me.

The Chair: I apologize for yelling at you. Thank you very much, Senator Sibbeston.

[Translation]

Senator Nolin: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I accept Senator Sibbeston's apology, which I believe was appropriate. Without wanting to drag this issue out, I think that it is important to remind everyone that we live in a democracy, which is the result of a long historical process. The recognition and coexistence of our two major original cultures must be respected, accepted and experienced by everyone in an equal and respectful manner. I therefore accept this apology.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, Senator Nolin. That obviates the necessity of everything else that we were going to consider this morning. We can go directly to the two orders of business, the first of which is the subject matter of Bill S-208. When we conclude this piece of business, senators, we will go in camera for a brief discussion of what we have determined we think ought to be the beginning focus of our trip to the Arctic. We will hear from our analysts as to the suggestions that they have put together. We need to move on that aspect fairly quickly so that we can make travel arrangements, which, as Senator Adams and Senator Sibbeston have told us, are not easy to make in the North.

Senators, we have discussed the subject matter of Bill S-208 long and hard. We should now come to the question. I propose that it should be a straight up and down question, a ``yes'' or ``no'' question.

I have devised a motion that I will read. If you concur that the motion accurately reflects the question, then we will do a straight up and down vote on it. I would like it to be a recorded vote so that members are recorded as to their views on this matter.

I would remind everyone that this is not a vote on the bill; this is not a clause-by-clause consideration of the bill. The order of reference from the Senate asks us to advise the Senate as to the constitutionality or abrogation of convention that might be contained in this bill, on the one hand, and the redundancy that this bill might contain with respect to existing acts that deal with the same subject matter.

As you will hear from the motion that I have drafted, our answer to the Senate will be that we recommend second reading debate on the bill proceed or not. I remind committee members again that if second reading debate on the bill proceeds in the Senate and if the bill should pass second reading, it is a reasonable assumption that the bill, per se, will be sent to committee. Even if the bill were otherwise not to offend against the two questions that have been asked, having to do with constitutionality and redundancy, there are things in the bill that have to be modified at the very least. For example, certain dates have been completely overtaken by the passage of time. That is the nature of what we are talking about here: advice to the Senate.

Senator Kenny: I would like to inquire if this is a confidence bill.

Senator Mitchell: If the government does not pass it, we are calling an election.

Senator Nolin: Talking of convention, chair.

The Chair: I would remind committee members that no one can call an election except Her Excellency the Governor General.

I have crafted a motion, and I would like your comments on it. It says:

That pursuant to the Order of Reference referred by the Senate on November 13, 2007, with respect to the subject matter of Bill S-208, your Committee now reports as follows:

In a vote —

— and I expect it may be on division —

— the Committee finds that reservations as to the constitutionality and redundancy of the Bill should not preclude further consideration of the Bill by the Senate and therefore recommends resumption of debate at second reading.

I think that motion answers the question. If the motion passes, the committee would report to the Senate in that manner. If the motion fails, there would be a different motion. However, we must have a ``yes'' or ``no'' question on which we can vote.

Are you comfortable with that question, Senator Nolin?

Senator Nolin: Yes, I am.

The Chair: Does everyone understand the question clearly?

Senator Adams: I think Senator Trenholme Counsell will vote too, and she should know what the motion is.

Senator Trenholme Counsell: I apologize for my tardiness.

The Chair: I have placed a motion before us, and perhaps we could pass a copy to Senator Trenholme Counsell. The effect of voting ``yes'' to the motion is that we would recommend that second reading debate on Bill S-208 would continue. If we were to defeat the motion, we would make a recommendation that second reading debate on the bill would not continue.

Senator Milne: Would we have to pass another motion?

The Chair: Yes, if this one fails, there would be a separate motion.

Senator Nolin: I will not oppose the motion. It needs to be clear. I think it is important that we have a debate at second reading stage and here in committee. It was a valid exercise for us to look into these matters, and I think it was helpful for the future study of the bill. I think the way the motion is written covers all the options, and all the options remain open.

The Chair: Yes.

Senator Nolin: I do not see voting for this motion as meaning that I accept the principle of the bill. I accept that the study of the bill should go further.

The Chair: That is exactly what the motion says.

I will now proceed formally. I would like to ensure that everyone's vote is recorded because in the past, when we have done things less formally and more quickly, there has been some question about who voted and how they voted.

Senator Nolin: If we are unanimous, we are unanimous, and you have the list.

The Chair: Let me ask this question as a test: If we were to conduct a roll call vote, would anyone consider voting in the negative on the motion before us?

Having heard no one, I declare that the motion passed unanimously and that we recommend —

Senator Milne: We had better move the motion first. I so move.

The Chair: Senator Milne moves the motion.

Senator Adams: Even with the passing of this motion, we have another bill which is similar. I want to ensure that if we lose the vote, the other one will not be affected.

The Chair: The other bill is not affected by this motion at all. We will be dealing with them both.

Senator Adams: At least it will not prevent the other one from going to the committee. I want to make sure of that.

The Chair: We cannot presume to which committee the Senate will refer a bill. However, in my view it is probable that this bill and the other water bill — the one having to do with the Food and Drugs Act — will likely be referred to this committee should they pass second reading.

The motion having been moved, I declare it passed unanimously.

Senator Kenny: Did you put it up for a vote, Mr. Chair?

The Chair: I did not. All in favour?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: Opposed?

Abstentions? The abstentions have it, as they did last night.

Senators, we will now take a very brief 30 seconds to suspend the meeting so we can go in camera to discuss the business of the committee.

Senator Milne: Before we go in camera, I think it should be recorded that the motion passed unanimously.

The Chair: You are quite right. The motion passed unanimously.

The committee continued in camera.


Back to top