THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, THE ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 2, 2020
The Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources met this day at 9 a.m. [ET], by videoconference, pursuant to rule 12-13 of the Rules of the Senate, to hold an organization meeting.
[Translation]
Chantal Cardinal, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, as committee clerk, it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair. I am prepared to receive motions to that effect.
Senator Galvez: I nominate Senator Paul Massicotte as chair.
Ms. Cardinal: Are there any further nominations? The Honourable Senator Galvez moved that the Honourable Senator Massicotte do take the chair of this committee. Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Ms. Cardinal: I declare the motion carried. I invite the Honourable Senator Massicotte to take the chair.
Senator Paul J. Massicotte (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: We will now proceed to the election of two deputy chairs. I am ready to receive motions for the position of deputy chair.
Senator Verner: I’d like to nominate Senator Doug Black as deputy chair.
The Chair: As you know, we have to elect two deputy chairs. Are there any other nominations, aside from that of Senator Black?
[English]
Senator Cordy: I nominate Senator Carignan for the position of deputy chair.
The Chair: Are there any other nominations? Therefore, if there are none, we deem them both appointed to the position. Congratulations to Senator Carignan; and where is Senator Black?
Senator D. Black: In Canmore, in the dark.
The Chair: You are not on my screen.
Senator D. Black: I am in Canmore, in the dark.
[Translation]
The Chair: We will now move on to the other motions, which are routine and consistent with past practice. First, we will adopt the motion to create the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure, better known as the steering committee. For this session, we have agreed that all four parties and groups will have a representative on the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure. Do I have a proposer for motion 3?
Senator Carignan: I so move.
The Chair: The Honourable Senator Carignan moved:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the chair, the deputy chairs and one other member of the committee, to be designated after the usual consultation; and
That the subcommittee be empowered to make decisions on behalf of the committee with respect to its agenda, to invite witnesses, and to schedule hearings.
Does the motion carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Excellent. I declare the motion carried. Let’s move to the next motion, regarding publishing the committee’s proceedings.
[English]
Senator Galvez: Chair, Senator Simons had her hand raised and she sent a message in the chat before we adopted the motion. I think you could not see her.
The Chair: I did not see her; I can’t see the hand.
Senator Simons: Sorry, chair. I was attempting to make an amendment. I don’t know if it’s possible to go back now.
The Chair: We can if we all agree. Do we agree to go back and allow Senator Simons to make comments relative to that motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Simons: I would like to propose the following amendment:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the chair, the deputy chair and one other member of the committee to be designated after the usual consultations; and
That the subcommittee be responsible for considering and making recommendations to the committee with respect to its agenda, the invitation of witnesses and the schedule of hearings.
So, in French the change would be — I’m not supposed to do both languages in one intervention, sorry. You can figure out the French, because you are smarter than I am.
Senator D. Black: Senator Simons, can you summarize the proposed change?
Senator Simons: The proposed change would be that instead of giving the subcommittee the complete and total authority to establish witness lists and schedules, there would need to be some consultation with the whole committee. And I grant you that one of the purposes of the subcommittee is to delegate some of these responsibilities, but one of the challenges we have been discussing within the ISG caucus is that sometimes it leads to a situation — not with this committee — with some other committees we could perhaps recall where the subcommittee has sort of gotten the bit between its teeth and become fairly prescriptive about the witness list. The thought behind this amendment, which is one that in the ISG we’ve been talking about as a model, would be to make sure that you don’t get a subcommittee that becomes disconnected from the need to consult with the entire committee.
Senator D. Black: In practice then, how that would work in your view is the chair and the deputy chair — the steering committee — would then consult with the whole committee before settling on witness lists. Is that the practice?
Senator Simons: Yes. The way I would imagine it working is that we would still make you guys do all the hard work of coming up with the witness list, but then if the bulk of the committee said, “No, we left out a very important voice that we need to hear from,” there would be some capacity for that kind of give and take.
Senator D. Black: You bet. I would second that.
The Chair: Senator Simons, could I ask a question? What are the words? Is it “consult” or “get the agreement?”
Senator Simons: That the subcommittee be responsible for considering and making recommendations to the committee with respect to its agenda, the invitation of witnesses and the schedule of hearings.
The Chair: So using those words, we need to not only consult, we need to get the approval of the committee.
Senator Simons: Making recommendations to the committee, yes. I think, in many cases, this would be pro forma.
[Translation]
Senator Carignan: This is not clear. As far as consultation is concerned, that’s fine, but if the list of witnesses has to be decided in committee, it could become complex and very cumbersome in terms of the process. In any case, in practice, we always consult informally.
Whether I sit on a steering committee or not, we are always consulted, practically speaking, anyway. Consulting doesn’t bother me too much, but at some point someone has to decide on the list. I think that’s the role of the steering committee, unless I’m mistaken.
[English]
Senator Galvez: I also second the amendment to the motion because you know that the ISG is not a caucus. We are all independent. And at steering, the representation is not completely democratic because you have one representative per group, but that representative represents more than one third of the group.
And also, I think it will be much more transparent if steering comes and tells us, “Well, this is the preliminary list,” and then we have the occasion to consider, as Senator Simons said, that this person is missing or that this subject is missing. So the thing is to consult, and in many committees, this is done informally and there is no need for this amendment. But I think that it will start to become more formal if we go through the actual path of amending the motion.
In the end, it is the whole committee that has the power over steering. It is not the other way around. Actually, as the chair said at the beginning, this is just a tradition, but it’s not settled in any of the rules of the committee or the Senate.
The Chair: If I could add something, I think I understand the intent of the motion. I am a little aware of it. I would agree with Senator Carignan, I have no problem with consulting. But the words you have, Senator Simons, suggest it’s the reverse of consulting, where they decide and the subcommittee doesn’t have the authority to decide. I agree with consulting, so Senator Simons, if you agree, I suggest we punt on this. I think we all agree conceptually that we have no problem with consulting.
We should come back with exact wording at our next meeting and get it approved. I have no problem. I intend to consult widely anyway for any speaker, but to be formal about it, I think we should have wording to say that. I think we should stick with “consulting” and not take away all the powers of the subcommittee.
Senator Patterson: Agreed.
The Chair: We can get on that, get the wording done, then we can come back and agree and approve.
Senator D. Black: I must have misunderstood what Senator Simons was saying because I thought the thrust of it was consultation. So if I’ve missed that, I completely agree with what you are saying, let’s revisit the matter, and then I would withdraw my seconding of the motion.
But absolutely, consultation is key to an effective committee. And if that’s the concept, that has to happen.
The Chair: Senator Simons, are you okay with punting on it and getting the wording right?
Senator Simons: We could do a friendly amendment saying:
That the subcommittee be responsible for considering and consulting with the committee with respect to its agenda, the invitation of witnesses and the schedule of hearings.
The Chair: I think that’s very good. I would agree with that.
Senator D. Black: That’s great. Absolutely.
Senator Cordy: I’m fine with that. I think we take it for granted that steering committees are going to consult, but if you want it in so that it is not taken for granted, I think that’s right.
Ultimately, the steering committee can’t be going back and forth 25 times. Steering committees that I’ve been on have always gone back to committee, but I think putting that in, Senator Simons, ensures that the steering committee will always consult.
The Chair: Senator Carignan, are you okay with the proposed amendment?
[Translation]
Senator Carignan: Yes, but we must be consulted. We must not get into a situation where it becomes more than consultation, because the committee will have difficulty meeting and it will not be functional. We need to keep the committee functional and able to provide direction. If we are consulted, that’s fine with me.
Ms. Cardinal: Senator, I have some senators on the list who would like to ask a question.
Senator Carignan: Go ahead.
Ms. Cardinal: I have senators Patterson, Miville-Dechêne and McCallum.
[English]
Senator Patterson: I just want to say that the work of the steering committee is critical to the success of this committee. Effective steering committees — and Mr. Chair, you and I have been on the Energy steering committee — spend significant time preparing for meetings, dealing with the timetable, the witnesses, the budgets. This is detailed, difficult work, and I would not want to see this put to the committee as a whole. I am fine with the idea of consulting as proposed in the revised amendment. That’s, of course, what steering committees will do, and that’s why we have selected capable people to be chairs and deputy chairs of this committee.
So I am okay with that, but let’s not diminish the vital work that steering committees do in preparing efficient work for the full committee. Thank you.
Senator McCallum: I wanted to speak about Indigenous issues. Having been on the committee last year, my concern is that Indigenous issues are not thought of as important and, in the speech I did last year, 80% of the witnesses came from lobbying groups and 4% were Indigenous, when most of the adverse impacts were directed at Indigenous issues.
So when we look at this, the subcommittee should be especially mindful of Indigenous issues — and that with their bias, whether they support industry or they support something else, they are made to realize that there needs to be fairness. Thank you.
The Chair: Well noted, Senator McCallum, and we will make that effort sincere.
[Translation]
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Mr. Chair, briefly, we will have to develop a better way of taking or yielding the floor. Immediately after the amendment was tabled, I raised my little electronic hand. I know it’s not necessarily very easy to see, and I understand that there was a discussion with everyone, but we have to give everyone a chance to speak.
What I meant was that it seemed to me that ultimately it was the committee as a whole that had the final authority on a decision. However, I tend to agree with the compromise you propose, in that I think that by proposing a list and sending the documents before the committee meetings, we can ensure that if there is an important witness who has been forgotten, he or she can be added to the list. That is simply a prudent approach, as Senator Simons explained, to ensure that important witnesses who could inform the debate are not forgotten.
The Chair: I agree. It’s hard for me to see the electronic raised hands; and going to chat and coming back is a bit difficult.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: My hand was raised.
The Chair: I know.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: I understand; it’s difficult.
The Chair: Did anyone else ask for the floor in the chat?
Ms. Cardinal: Not according to what I can see; all of the hands were lowered, so we’re good.
The Chair: I think everyone is in agreement on the adoption of the proposed amendment.
[English]
Senator Simons, I think we all agree with your amendment. Are there any other comments before we vote on the proposed resolution, as amended?
Let’s ask. All in favour of the proposed resolution, as amended?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Okay. Confirmed. Let’s go back to the routine stuff.
We are at the motion to publish the committee’s proceedings. Do I have a proposer for motion 4?
The Honourable Senator Galvez moved:
That the committee publish its proceedings.
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
[Translation]
Motion 5 is about the financial report and reads as follows:
That the committee adopt the draft first report, prepared in accordance with rule 12-26(2).
The draft report prepared by the clerk was distributed by email. Can someone move the motion?
Senator Galvez: I so move.
The Chair: The Honourable Senator Galvez moved:
That the committee adopt the draft first report, prepared in accordance with rule 12-26(2).
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
[English]
Do I have a proposer for motion 6, which deals with research staff? It reads:
That the committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign analysts to the committee;
That the chair be authorized to seek authority from the Senate to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical, and other personnel as may be necessary for the purposes of the committee’s examination and consideration of such bills, subject-matters of bills, and estimates as are referred to it;
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to retain the services of such experts as may be required by the work of the committee; and
That the chair, on behalf of the committee, direct the research staff in the preparation of studies, analyses, summaries, and draft reports.
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
I now invite the analysts to the turn their video on.
Madam Clerk, is that accurate?
Ms. Cardinal: Yes. It is just to introduce them.
The Chair: I will now introduce the analysts Jesse Good and Sam Banks. I have to say I have dealt with these people for a long time. We are very lucky to have both of them join us on this committee. I think Senator Galvez will agree with me and other people who have dealt with both Jesse and Sam. We are certainly well supported and well advised, I am sure.
Senator Patterson: Hear, hear.
The Chair: Authority to commit funds and certify accounts. Do I have a proposer for motion 7?
Senator Patterson: So moved.
The Chair: The Honourable Senator Patterson moved:
That, pursuant to section 7, chapter 3:05 of the Senate Administrative Rules, that authority to commit funds be conferred individually on the chair, the deputy chairs, and the clerk of the committee;
That, pursuant to section 8, chapter 3:05 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority for certifying accounts payable by the committee be conferred individually on the chair, the deputy chairs and the clerk of the committee; and
That, notwithstanding the foregoing, in cases related to consultants and personnel services, the authority to commit funds and certify accounts be conferred jointly on the chair and deputy chairs.
Is it agreed, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
[Translation]
Motion 8 concerns travel.
Can someone move the motion?
Senator Patterson: I so move.
The Chair: The Honourable Senator Patterson moved:
That the committee empower the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure to designate, as required, one or more members of the committee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the committee.
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
Motion 9, on the designation of members travelling on committee business.
Do I have a proposer for motion 9?
Senator Patterson: I so move.
The Chair: The Honourable Senator Patterson moved:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to:
(1) determine whether any member of the committee is on “official business” for the purposes of paragraph 8(3)(a) of the Senators Attendance Policy, published in the Journals of the Senate on Wednesday, June 3, 1998; and
(2) consider any member of the committee to be on “official business” if that member is: (a) attending an event or meeting related to the work of the committee; or (b) making a presentation related to the work of the committee; and
That the subcommittee report at the earliest opportunity any decisions taken with respect to the designation of members of the committee travelling on committee business.
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
Motion 10, regarding the travelling and living expenses of witnesses.
Do I have a proposer for this motion?
Senator Simons: I so move.
The Chair: The Honourable Senator Simons moved:
That, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witness expenses, the committee may reimburse reasonable travelling and living expenses of one witness per organization upon application, but that the chair be authorized to approve expenses of a second witness from the same organization should there be exceptional circumstances.
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
[English]
Do I have a proposer for motion 11 on communications?
The Honourable Senator Senator Simons moved:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to direct communication(s) officers assigned to the committee in the development of communications plans and products where appropriate and to request the services of the Senate Communications Directorate for the purposes of the promotion of their work; and
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to allow coverage by electronic media of the committee’s public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its proceedings, at its discretion.
Is it agreed, senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried.
Other business. I should note that the schedule for the committee meetings has not been established yet. I suspect it will be the same thing as the last years, but that is not official yet.
Before we adjourn, I should make a comment. Thank you very much for your nomination as chair of this committee. I am quite pleased with the membership we have. We have some dedicated and very intelligent, very experienced people at committees. I think we have the opportunity to do good work. Canadians expect us to do good work. They expect us to make a strong effort to achieve consensus on issues, which I will push hard to achieve also. Obviously, we all have to be flexible but respond to the real issues.
As you know, as the first thing, we have legislation coming up but probably not before spring, from our information from the minister in question. Therefore, we will probably have time to do some special studies. I would ask you to submit and provide me with any suggestions or comments you have. Some already have, but you can individually do that. Then, when we meet next time, I will circulate to all of you the proposed list of witnesses and so on, then we can decide. If you can submit any suggestions that you have, that would be much appreciated. We can gain some time on our eventual study of projects.
Senator McCallum: I wanted to remind everyone that I have an order of reference on the floor with regard to studying the adverse impacts of resource extraction on First Nations’ lives and lands, and to add to it a balance of the impacts that this has had to industry in terms of unemployment, that we need to find a balance, looking at the orphan wells, all these issues. I will be pushing to have a vote on that in the next while.
I have asked several senators to speak on it. I know it is a hard topic to broach, and if there is no more forthcoming, I will be asking for a vote soon. Thank you.
The Chair: Are there any other comments from anyone else for other business?
Senator Galvez: Yes. I know that on the Senate floor, there were instructions that the committees will work only under reference work. I just want to confirm that we have the freedom and liberty to start other studies apart from ones that are going to be referenced by the Senate.
The Chair: We need to seek that. There is no question we want that flexibility.
Any other comments or questions from the floor?
Senator Cordy: Yes, chair. To the point, Senator McCallum, you should still send your suggestion into the steering committee, because even if your motion passes the Senate, it doesn’t guarantee that the committee has to study it because committees make those decisions on their own. I made that point last night in the chamber. So, if you’ve got that, make sure that you send it to the steering committee so that will be taken into consideration.
Senator McCallum: Okay. Thank you.
The Chair: Are there any other comments? If that is the case, the meeting is now adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)