CANADA VOLUME 137 S NUMBER 030 S 1st SESSION S 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, March 16, 2001 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1755 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, March 16, 2001 The House met at 10 a.m. an environment in which wildlife can prosper, live and provide enjoyment for each of us. _______________ It is important to recognize our support of the intent of this Prayers particular bill. I want to be sure that everyone out there recognizes that the Canadian Alliance, myself in particular, and its constitu- _______________ ents support the protection of wildlife. What we need to recognize here, though, is how the bill will be GOVERNMENT ORDERS handled. I wish to refer to certain provisions in the bill. The first provision of the bill is the selection of the list of species and endangered wildlife that will be registered and protected by the D (1005) bill. [English] Clause 14 deals with this particular part of the activities, so I will SPECIES AT RISK ACT refer, then, to clause 14, which suggests that a committee be established. It is called the COSEWIC committee and many of the The House resumed from February 28 consideration of the listeners will wonder what in the world we are talking about. That motion that Bill C-5, an act respecting the protection of wildlife is an acronym for a long title, Committee on the Status of species at risk in Canada, be read the second time and referred to a Endangered Wildlife in Canada. As shorthand we say COSEWIC. committee. This is really what we are talking about. The committee is established by this particular bill. Mr. Werner Schmidt (Kelowna, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, Bill C-5, which is before the House today, is a very I am so happy that there are at least some members opposite in significant bill, a bill that I think we would all do well to look at the House listening to the debate, because it is really important. very seriously, because it attacks and has within it a consideration Some of the points we will make are points that the Minister of the of some of the basic principles that govern and underlie democracy. Environment in particular should recognize and change in this I wish to address two parts of the bill. The first has to do with the legislation, and we want the minister and all members opposite to concept of how the selection of the endangered species at risk is know that the idea of protecting endangered species is indeed an done. The second has to do with the right of private property and area and an action that we support. how the bill deals with that particular aspect. With the establishment of the committee, we need to recognize I would like to have the members of the public who are out there who its members are. This committee shall carry out its functions watching this debate understand exactly what it is we are talking ‘‘on the basis of the best available information, including scientific about here this morning: Bill C-5, which is here to protect knowledge, community knowledge and aboriginal traditional endangered wildlife species. knowledge’’. That is what the committee is supposed to do. This is a major issue. I will focus on the purpose of the bill as it is stated in this particular legislation. It reads: D (1010) The purposes of this enactment are to prevent Canadian indigenous species, subspecies and distinct populations of wildlife from becoming extirpated or extinct, Who are these people? The committee is to be composed of to provide for the recovery of endangered or threatened species, to encourage the members appointed by the minister after consultation with the management of other species to prevent them from becoming at risk. Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council and with any I wish to completely endorse the purpose of the bill. Clearly one experts that the minister considers to be appropriate. I would like to of the things we want to be very concerned about in our society and underline the word experts. The second part of the clause, sub- in Canada is that we do protect our wildlife. We do want to create clause 16(2), is extremely significant: 1756 COMMONS DEBATES March 16, 2001 Government Orders Each member must have expertise drawn from a discipline such as conservation If the Minister is of the opinion— biology, population dynamics, taxonomy, systematics or genetics or from community knowledge or aboriginal traditional knowledge of the conservation of D wildlife species. (1015) That is a blue ribbon membership for the committee. These are The section refers to the minister now, not the governor in very significant and very powerful people. They are people who council. understand the reality of science and understand what it is to use knowledge and to make observations that others can verify. They The section goes on: are not subject to political interpretation or the vagaries of some- —that there is an imminent threat to the survival of a wildlife species, the Minister body’s imagination. They are based on facts and on observations must— which can be replicated by other people. It is interesting to note here that it is not that the minister may, The people who are supposed to comprise this committee are but that he must. independent and objective. This is very desirable and highly commendable. I support the minister in identifying this as the way It goes on: the committee should be comprised. —on an emergency basis, after consultation with every other competent One might say that the blue ribbon committee will go about minister— doing its business, but what is the principle involved in creating the list of Canadian endangered wildlife? What are the decision Notice they are all ministers. making principles underlying this committee of scientists? The —make a recommendation to the Governor in Council that the List be amended to principles involved are truth and integrity. list the species as an endangered species. What are we talking about when we talk about truth and There is no reference here to the committee at all. Subclause integrity? Truth concerns a clear knowledge of the facts. I am 29(2) reads: speaking of things that are commonly accepted as being true in The Minister may arrive at that opinion on the basis of his or her own information fact. They can be believed and acted upon with confidence and or on the basis of COSEWIC’s assessment. courage, recognizing that what has happened before will happen again because the basis on which the decision is made is verifiable This really creates a dilemma for the scientists and for Cana- by an independent person in an objective and independent manner dians who are to place confidence in the Minister of the Environ- and the findings can be replicated. ment and cabinet itself. Integrity means that the people on the committee will actually There is no attempt in this criticism to suggest that we should not say what was discovered, what has been put there, and that the have legislation of this kind. That is not the purpose of my basis on which those decisions are made is indeed one that is criticism. The purpose of my criticism is to recognize that the verified by the various observations that have been taken. On the principle of truth and scientific integrity needs to be observed committee we will have scientists who are objective and reach throughout the legislation. It should be there in a consistent fashion conclusions on the basis of verifiable interpretation, experiments all the way through. I submit to the House that clause 29 does not and observations that could carried out by other people. allow this to happen. There is no problem with the committee or with the intent of the bill. Why then is there a problem with the bill? There is a problem We need to move from there to the next step in the debate, which with a provision in another clause of the bill. Subclause 27(1) has to do with why it is so important that we have this truth. makes a very interesting observation: The hon. members opposite are all Liberals and they had a leader The Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Minister, by at one time by the name of Trudeau who initiated and passed in the regulation, establish the List of Wildlife Species at Risk and amend the List by adding a wildlife species to the List, by reclassifying a listed wildlife species or by House a constitutional amendment called the charter of rights and removing a listed wildlife species from the List. freedoms. At the end of the charter of rights and freedoms this is what he wrote: All the work of the committee, all the science involved, suddenly We must now establish the basic principles, the basic values and beliefs which becomes subject to whatever the governor in council decides. This hold us together as Canadians so that beyond our regional loyalties there is a way of puts into question the whole integrity of establishing a committee life and a system of values which make us proud of the country that has given us in the first place. In this clause we have a group of scientists who such freedom and such immeasurable joy. are ignored and whose integrity is at least insulted if not denied.