43rd PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION House of Commons Debates Official Report (Hansard) Volume 150 No. 039 Monday, November 30, 2020 Speaker: The Honourable Anthony Rota CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) 2651 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, November 30, 2020 The House met at 11 a.m. In the meantime, federal Parliament can impose strict parameters on governments in the application of the legislation it passes. If fed‐ eral legislation required compliance with Quebec law and provin‐ cial law, the federal government could no longer authorize plans Prayer that violate those laws. This circumvention strategy may be the pur‐ pose of Bill C‑225, which would amend seven federal statutes. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Bill C‑225 would amend the Aeronautics Act, which governs air‐ ports, and the Fishing and Recreational Harbours Act, which gov‐ ● (1105) erns wharves and harbours for small watercraft. The bill also [Translation] amends the National Capital Act, which governs the activities of the National Capital Commission in Ottawa and the Outaouais, and AERONAUTICS ACT the Broadcasting Act, which governs telecommunications infras‐ Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ) moved that Bill C-225, An tructure, including cellular antennas. Act to amend the Aeronautics Act, the Fishing and Recreational Harbours Act and other Acts (application of provincial law), be The other laws that this bill amends include the Federal Real read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Property and Federal Immovables Act, which governs all federal Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. properties; the Canada Marine Act, which, as we all know, governs ports; and the Canada Infrastructure Bank Act, which governs He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have an opportunity this projects carried out through the bank. Such projects currently bene‐ morning to talk to all my colleagues about Bill C‑225, especially fit from a form of federal immunity from provincial laws and mu‐ since this bill was introduced back in 2018 as Bill C-392 by my nicipal bylaws. party's passionate environmental advocate, the charming member for Repentigny. This Bill C-225 is virtually the same as that one. By passing Bill C-225, Parliament would force the federal gov‐ I will get into more of the details a little later, but first I would ernment to ensure that it is respecting provincial laws and munici‐ like to point out what the bill might represent. It fits perfectly with pal bylaws before authorizing an activity or infrastructure project, my political goals, since it implies more political autonomy for so I believe that this bill is in keeping with Quebec's pursuit of self- Quebec. Everyone seems to be aware of the path towards self-gov‐ government. ernment that Quebec has taken. What would the impact of this bill be? If this bill passes, Quebec We can go back as far as Jean Lesage's famous slogan “Maîtres laws governing environmental protection and land management chez nous”, when environmental matters were perhaps not as ur‐ would apply to the entire province of Quebec. At the beginning of gent as they are today. As for Lesage, he went even further than my speech, I mentioned Jean Lesage. In my opinion, this bill would that slogan. be a way for Quebec to be the master of its own house when it I remember the early days of what was known as the Quiet Revo‐ comes to the environment. lution, when Lesage came up with the wonderful phrase, “the Que‐ bec state as the primary instrument for the collective emancipation The privileges of an airport developer would therefore cease to of Quebeckers”. That phrase, which is also quite famous, means take precedence over the provisions of the Quebec Act Respecting that what we want, perhaps above all else, is to give political sub‐ the Preservation of Agricultural Land and Agricultural Activities or stance to the Quebec nation, and I think this can only be achieved the municipal bylaws. Telecommunications companies would have through self-government. to come to an agreement with the municipalities and respect the wishes of local residents when putting up their towers and anten‐ We know that when the federal government takes action in areas nas. Major federal infrastructure projects and any other similar of federal legislative jurisdiction, Quebec and the provinces cannot projects would be subject to the assessment process of the Bureau force it to respect their laws. In our Constitution, there is a type of d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement du Québec. As a result, hierarchy and we know that federal legislation subordinates provin‐ these projects would have to be given a certificate of authorization cial legislation. from the Government of Quebec before they could go forward. 2652 COMMONS DEBATES November 30, 2020 Private Members' Business Along the same lines, federal government property, including term “social licence” is on everyone's lips these days. In 2015, the large tracts of the Gatineau urban area that belong to the National Liberal Party said that social licence should be a priority for Capital Commission, will have to comply with development plans projects to be accepted and authorized. and municipal regulations adopted by local authorities. In addition to providing better environmental protection and I take no pleasure in this, but I will quote from the 2015 Liberal more cohesive land development, the bill will establish legal cer‐ Party platform: “While governments grant permits for resource de‐ tainty in areas marked by numerous judicial disputes related to velopment, only communities can grant permission.” Being a chari‐ shared jurisdictions. By approving a project that contravenes a table man, I thought to myself, why not support my Liberal col‐ provincial law, the federal minister would be contravening a federal leagues so they can fulfill one of the election promises they made in law. This would resolve the issue of conflicting jurisdictions once 2015? and for all. ● (1110) We all know the Canadian constitutional context. Constitutional‐ ly, Quebec land belongs to Quebeckers. Its occupation, use, devel‐ I do so purely out of the goodness of my heart. We in Sague‐ opment and protection fall primarily under the laws and regulations nay—Lac-Saint-Jean are good people. Out of the goodness of my of Quebec and its municipalities. The British North America Act of heart, I am willing to do this for my Liberal colleagues. 1867, however, distributed legislative powers between the provinces and the federal government, which gives to Ottawa many powers that cover the environment and land. We live in a democracy. Our laws and regulations are passed by the representatives of the people and reflect a certain social licence. The British North America Act was signed in 1867, at a time Bill C-225 will help deliver on a Liberal election promise, in a when telecommunications, for example, did not exist. As a result, sense. anything that was not named directly in this legislation now falls under federal jurisdiction. Telecommunications are part of that. I gave some examples earlier illustrating how the federal govern‐ Other examples are navigation, wharves and ports. I could also ment's prerogative over Quebec's environmental laws can some‐ mention public property, such as land and buildings that belong to times lead to unfortunate circumstances. We can come back to that. Ottawa, as well as interprovincial transportation, including trans‐ portation infrastructure, such as pipelines. Over the years, we have adopted several laws, regulations and in‐ This topic came up quite often during the last election campaign. stitutions that have helped us protect our land and ensure its harmo‐ Our Conservative colleagues had the unfortunate idea of develop‐ nious use. Examples include Quebec's environmental protection ing an energy corridor that would have seen a pipeline built across legislation, the Act Respecting the Preservation of Agricultural Quebec. Judging by my colleagues' quick reaction and raised eye‐ Land and Agricultural Activities, and the Act Respecting Land Use brows, I can see that they are not happy about that comment, but Planning and Development, which governs development plans and this bill could provide a framework for similar excesses at the fed‐ zoning regulations, as well as the Government of Quebec's mecha‐ eral level. This is something that can be discussed later. nism for ensuring social licence, the BAPE, our bureau of environ‐ mental public hearings. However, certain activities and infrastruc‐ The Constitution does not classify environmental protection as a ture are only partly covered by our laws, because they fall under jurisdiction in itself. Either provincial or federal laws will apply, federal jurisdiction. Wharves, harbours, airports and telecommuni‐ depending on the project. If a project is under the exclusive juris‐ cations infrastructure, as I was saying earlier, are all federal proper‐ diction of the federal government, the provincial laws will only be ty. enforced if they do not prevent Ottawa from exercising its own powers. There are all kinds of examples in our past that demon‐ strate why this bill is necessary. In these cases, even though Quebec laws and municipal bylaws are not completely squeezed out, they can apply only if they do not For instance, Quebec or a municipality could probably adopt reg‐ have a substantive effect on the activity that is the federal govern‐ ulations or bylaws allowing cell towers to be painted green. That ment's responsibility. Earlier I was talking about certain cases. In would be entirely possible, and the courts would accept it. Con‐ 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that the Act Respecting the Preser‐ versely, any laws or regulations made regarding the location of vation of Agricultural Land and Agricultural Activities could not towers would be struck down, which has happened on several occa‐ protect a parcel of agricultural land from a developer who wanted sions.