Bill C-5 besteht die Abstimmung des Unterhauses nach dem beschleunigten Prozess

Some key points:

>The federal government’s controversial Bill C-5 is off to the Senate next week for a truncated study. Opposition parties amended the proposed legislation to ensure the government cannot override certain laws (including the Indian Act, Canada Labour Code and Criminal Code) but most environmental law and regulations can still be circumvented if a project is deemed “in the national interest.”
>
>…
>
>The bill would grant cabinet the power to override laws and regulations to get major projects built. In a marathon committee meeting Wednesday evening, the Bloc Québécois and Conservatives worked together to increase transparency and reporting requirements in the bill and prevent the government from overriding more than a dozen laws.
>
>But the government can still override important environmental statutes including the Fisheries Act, Species at Risk Act, Canadian Navigable Waters Act, Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Migratory Birds Convention Act and Impact Assessment Act. The same goes for regulations including Wildlife Area Regulations, Marine Mammal Regulations, two migratory birds regulations as well as port and mining effluent regulations.
>
>MPs had their last chance to amend the bill Friday afternoon in the House of Commons.
>
>Green Party Leader Elizabeth May tried to add the Species at Risk Act to the list of laws cabinet cannot override. The Liberals and Conservatives defeated May’s motion, with Liberal MP Nate Erskine-Smith breaking rank and voting with the Bloc Québécois, Green Party and NDP. Erskine-Smith has been critical of Bill C-5 and previously voted against his own government’s order to limit debate on the bill, which would also remove some federal barriers to internal trade.
>
>…
>
>Elizabeth May, in the bill’s final moments before the House of Commons, reiterated what many have said since it was introduced: that the speed of the bill and the vagueness of its application means much now rests on what exactly the government decides to do with it.
>
>“There are many great projects … I’d love to see move ahead: east-west-north-south electricity grid, a passenger rail and bus interlinked system,” she said.
>
>“There are many projects in the national interest, but we don’t know what they will be and the factors in the bill are not requirements. We could have a great project that we all want to see go ahead — or we could have a nightmare.“

Given the state of political affairs today, it might be more prudent to have more specific bills with guardrails built in to ensure that things remain on track, rather than broader bills that rely on the goodwill of the people in charge to do the right thing. That might be fine at this very moment, but as we can see in the world around us, that can also be weaponized very quickly by those with ill-intent.