Danielle In The House, November 7: Responsible Energy Development Act

Ms Smith: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m hoping to be able to meet with some members of CAPP and SEPAC next week. We’re lining up a meeting for early in the week to be able to go through some of the amendments that the minister has brought forward as well as the amendments that we’re bringing forward. I know we’re going to be getting through this over the course of the next halfhour or so, so I’m just wondering if the minister can help me answer a couple of questions.

We know that we’re trying to balance the interests and rights of a number of different parties here: environmental groups and landowner groups as well as the energy companies. Now, I’m curious. From the minister’s perspective when he made the decision to put “review” in there in the first place, who was it that he was consulting with to get that language? Then when he made the decision to switch to the word “appeal,” on whose consultation and what advice did you get to make that change?

The reason I’m asking that is because when I meet with these energy industry companies next week and they’re asking me the question about this change from “review” to “appeal” and the kind of impact that it might have on how this legislation is interpreted, I want to be able to have an answer for them about where the consultation began, why “review” was chosen, why it’s now switched to “appeal,” what impact that would have. Is this in response to something that the energy companies have brought forward to you as a concern? Is it something that the environmental groups have brought forward as a concern, or is it something that the landowners have brought forward as a concern? If you could address each of those three different groups so that I can have some satisfactory responses if we do indeed make this change so that I can understand the difference in the terminology.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.