This enactment requires the Standing Committee established by the House of Commons to consider matters related to the environment and sustainable development to study the development and publication of a set of indicators to measure the well-being of people, communities and ecosystems in Canada and make its recommendations to the House.

Preamble

Whereas promoting the well-being of Canadians is of the first importance in the work of Parliament;

Whereas the citizens of Canada, including members of Parliament, are better able to promote and enhance the well-being of the nation if they are well informed about the state of well-being of people, communities and ecosystems in Canada;

And whereas such information would provide a meaningful understanding of genuine progress; Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:

Short Title

1. This Act may be cited as the Canada Genuine Progress Measurement Act.

Interpretation

Definitions

2. The definitions in this section apply in this Act.

“Commissioner” means the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development appointed under subsection 15.1(1) of the Auditor General Act.

“Standing Committee” means the standing committee established by the House of Commons to consider matters related to the environment and sustainable development.

Study of Indicators

Committee study and recommendations

3. (1) The Standing Committee must carry out a study on a set of indicators of the economic, social and environmental well-being of people, communities and ecosystems in Canada and, on the basis of that study, must make recommendations respecting

(a) the definition, development and periodic publication of the set of indicators;

(b) the broad societal values on which the set of indicators should be based;

(c) the role that the Commissioner should play in the development and publication of those indicators;

(d) the role that the Government of Canada, and particularly Statistics Canada, should play in the development and publication of those indicators;

(e) whether an advisory committee consisting of members of the public, including persons with expertise in economic, social, environmental and statistical matters, should be created to advise, on a continuing basis, on the development, calculation and publication of the set of indicators, and how such an advisory committee should function;

(f) whether further legislation is advisable to govern the development and publication of those indicators; and

(g) other aspects of the definition, development and publication of those indicators.

Committee process

(2) The Standing Committee, as a part of its considerations with respect to paragraphs 1(a) and (b), must

(a) receive input from the public through written submissions and public hearings; and

(b) seek information and advice from individ­uals and organizations in Canada and other nations, and from international agencies, that have expertise in the measurement of the well-being of people, communities and ecosystems.

Specific indicators and composite indices

(3) The set of indicators must include indicators that are specific to single aspects of well-being and one or more composite indices calculated from a number of the specific indicators.

Publication

(4) The set of indicators must be

(a) published annually in the Canada Ga- zette and in at least one daily newspaper in each official language, subject to any requirement in the report of the Standing Committee as adopted that they be published more frequently; and

(b) made available to the public, in both physical and electronic form, in the manner determined by the management committee established under subsection 4(1).

Report

(5) The Standing Committee must report to the House of Commons its recommendations on the matters set out in paragraphs (1)(c) to (g) no later than the third day on which the House sits following the expiry of twelve months after the coming into force of this Act.

Management committee

4. (1) If the report of the Standing Committee as presented by the Committee or as amended by the House of Commons is adopted by the House, the Chief Statistician of Canada and the Commissioner must, subject to the recommendations in the report as adopted, establish a management committee consisting of the Chief Statistician of Canada and the Commissioner and such other members as they jointly appoint. Function of management committee

(2) The management committee must direct the development and publication of the set of indicators subject to the recommendations in the report as adopted.

Interim partial publication

5. (1) The specific indicators and composite indices referred to in subsection 3(3) must be published twice by Statistics Canada, namely one year and two years after the date of the adoption of the report. Publication of results of application

(2) The results of the application of the set of indicators must be published in full, subject to the recommendations in the report as adopted, by Statistics Canada no later than three years after the date of the adoption of the report.

Annual report by Commissioner

6. Within 90 days of the first publication of the results referred to in subsection 5(2) and every year thereafter, the Commissioner must prepare and submit to the House of Commons an annual report analysing and evaluating, on the basis of those results, the current well-being of the people, communities and ecosystems in Canada.

The post C-436 Canada Genuine Progress Measurement Act appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Given limitations of words and space, let me cover some of the main points.

Budget 2012 cuts government spending, overall, by about $5 billion for next year. (Green Scissors, my submission to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, cut by $6 billion, but went after very different things—like government advertising and the Prime Minister’s Office budget.)

Budget 2012 delivers the expected news of increasing the age of entitlement to Old Age Security to 67, while deeply cutting CIDA, CBC, Environment Canada, Statistics Canada, Parks Canada, Library and Archives, and DND (cuts there largely due to the end of involvement in Afghanistan). It also cuts $7.5 million from Elections Canada, $14 million from tourism, and over $50 million from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (leading to the announced closing of the Canada Plant Health Centre on East Saanich Road). It also did away with the youth volunteer-service program, Katimavik.

There is no mention of climate change. The hoped for extension of the eco-Energy home energy retrofit programme was not to be, ditto hopes for funding to keep the Polar Environmental Arctic Research Laboratory–Canada’s critical research lab on Ellesmere Island and the world’s closest to the North Pole–from closing. No reprieve there, nor for funding of climate science. Scientific research through the National Research Council is now directed to focus on work that is ‘business-led and industry-relevant.’ (I can just imagine what Einstein would have said about that.)

Also announced in the budget was the surprise termination of the National Round Table on Environment and Economy– the only effort remaining within the government to develop consensus between industry and environmentalists to pursue sustainable development. As I was feverishly reading the budget document in ‘lock-up’ (the invitational, embargoed preview of the budget), I scanned for any reference to climate change, I got excited when I saw the word ‘climate,’ only to focus and realize it was a discussion of the ‘investment climate.’

Instead, Budget 2012 commits the country to expansion of fossil fuel production: oil sands, pipelines, super-tankers, seismic testing and off-shore drilling. Consistent with that is the funding of an attack on environmental charities with a new $8 million to spend on going after groups alleged to be conducting ‘political’ advocacy, a charge which has been directed at groups opposing the Enbridge super-tanker scheme.

The budget was very grim news indeed, but did not really prepare me for the introduction of the omnibus Budget Implementation Bill. It’s bizarre tabling was without prior notice—not even the usual advance ‘lock-up’ with technical briefing.

I picked up my copy and made for my desk in the House, where I sat, reading, near tears, for the next three hours. C-38 is over 400 pages repealing, amending or otherwise revising 70 different pieces of federal legislation. Aspects never even hinted at in the budget itself include removing oversight from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, changing entitlement to Employment Insurance (this is still vague but appears to allow refusing EI to anyone if there is any job available, even one not in their field), and allowing the Cabinet to overrule the National Energy Board (NEB).

Not Mentioned In the Budget

Nearly half of the budget implementation bill is directed at rewriting Canada’s foundational environmental laws. The Budget itself never mentioned that the Fisheries Act was to be re-written, gutting habitat protection and restricting federal action in many instances to commercial, recreational, and Aboriginal fisheries. This essentially means that if humans aren’t catching a fish, there is no protection for its habitat.

There nothing was mentioned in the budget speech about the changes to the Species at Risk Act which put the NEB in charge of permitting destruction of endangered species and their habitat along the proposed route of a pipeline; nor about the supplanting of the NEB as arbiter of pipelines under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. The NWPA is amended such that pipelines are no longer considered an obstruction to navigation–even if they are.

Although it was abundantly clear that a large focus was to be ‘streamlining’ the environmental assessment process, the advance hype focused on time limits for hearings. It was nowhere mentioned that the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act was to be repealed. C-38 wipes out the entire CEAA and introduces an entirely new law. Under the new act, ‘environmental effects’ (that which is to be studied under a federal EA), is, for many circumstances, restricted to fish and migratory birds.

Not Clear On the Concept

With so many new laws and the repealing of old laws and complex text, the Conservative ministers speaking in the House in support of C-38 frequently claim the budget implementation act will include measures that are simply not there at all, or misstate how the new laws will operate.

I go up to them afterward and, for example, ask ‘I cannot find any reference to increased tanker safety in C-38. Can you show me what section you were referring to?’ Or, ‘I can’t find anything that says environmental reviews will only be transferred to the province if the environmental assessment in that province is ‘as good or better’ than the federal one. Where is that?’ Of course, when I ask these specific questions, it is because I am pretty sure that I haven’t missed anything.

The ministers tend to look back at me, blinking slightly. They mention that it is a very long and complex bill. Yes it is, but I have read it and I missed the section they just told the House was in the Act. Where is it? Then the look on their face is like the ‘lapine’ word from Watership Down for a rabbit caught in headlights on a road: ‘tharn’.

There is much more, but for now, I urge constituents to join growing calls for removal of environmental laws from Bill C-38. The Harper Conservatives have gone too far. Previous Progressive Conservative Fisheries Ministers Tom Siddon and John Fraser have both spoken out against the horrifying changes to the Fisheries Act.

Write letters to the editors of the nation’s newspapers. Contact the other Opposition leaders (Rae and Mulcair) and urge that they join me in a strategy to derail this juggernaut of abuse. For more details about Bill C-38, go to www.elizabethmaymp.ca. Together, we can make Stephen Harper regret taking aim at nature.

The post Budget 2012: environmental laws run over by an omnibus appeared first on Elizabeth May.

On March 1^st, the committee heard testimonies from the Department of Human Resources, Canada school of Public Services, and the Treasury Board Secretariat. The Department of Human Resources provides support for organisations promoting the use of official languages in minority situations. They have invested 69$ million over the past 5 years in the Roadmap project. They also spoke of pilot projects in schools, which yielded positive results, to support minority official language communities. Canada school for Public Services strives to “foster a culture of bilingualism across the public service, and contribute to better service to Canadians.” This group focuses mainly on second-language teaching in schools, so that there are more bilingual students entering the workforce. The treasury board provides lateral support for other federal institutions for providing services in both official languages.

The post Standing Committee on Official Languages (LANG) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Seconded by Elizabeth May February 1, 2012

Click here for the full document.

The post Bill C-260 An Act to amend the Statistics Act appeared first on Elizabeth May.

It has never been a perfect division. Some bureaucracies have been controlling and thwarted good decisions. The BBC series Yes, Minister beautifully captured some of the drawbacks of the expert civil service in the machinations of the fictional Sir Humphrey. The classic line from Yes, Minister, ‘This government has the engine of a lawnmower and the brakes of a Rolls Royce,’ was once repeated to me by a frustrated Finance Minister, Paul Martin.

At its apex, Ottawa once had a superior civil service peopled with skilled mandarins. And we had quite excellent cabinet ministers who worked well with, and respected, the advice of their civil service. People like Harry Swain and Gordon Smith, former deputy ministers now living in Victoria, worked with a long list of ministers.

Not all relationships were perfect, but for many decades, Canada’s government could meet the Constitutional aspirations of ‘peace, order and good government.’ No longer.

Jim Travers of the Toronto Star recently described the Harper government’s attack on our institutions as ‘vandalism.’ The independence of the regulators and senior civil servants has never been so brutalized.

The list is long. The firing of the President of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), Linda Keen, was one of the most egregious acts. When our MP Gary Lunn fired her in January 2008, she was acting to ensure public safety by insisting the Chalk River nuclear reactor live up to its licence requirements. Both the PM and Mr Lunn vilified her as though she was a Liberal partisan. She had merely been appointed by a previous Liberal government. The legislation that guided her actions required her to act to ensure reactors did not operate when out of compliance with licences. Attacking her with the charge she was insensitive to the needs of cancer patients, the government claimed getting the reactor on-line was a matter of life and death.

In the same way that a fire marshal cannot re-open a hospital if the sprinkler system isn’t working, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission had to comply with its Act. Firing Linda Keen was followed by amending the Act to require that the CNSC consider the needs to produce radio-nuclides for medical diagnosis. A year later, when the reactor broke down again, the government announced that producing radionuclides was no longer important.

Meanwhile, serious damage had been done to the principle of independent, arms’ length regulation. As Auditor General Sheila Fraser warned, it had a ‘chilling effect’ throughout the whole civil service. But the sackings were just beginning.

Anyone in the civil service who criticizes Harper government policy now realizes they are putting their job on the line. Here is a short-list of those who have been told they will not be re-appointed after becoming thorns in government’s side: Paul Kennedy, head of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission, Pat Stogran, Veterans Affairs Ombudsman, Peter Tinsley, chairman of the Military Police Complaints Commission who was investigating the torture of Afghan detainees, Marty Cheliak, the head of the Canadian Firearms Program who was actually shifted out of his position by the Harper government claiming he had to undergo routine French training. The head of Elections Canada, Philip Kingsley was hounded out of his role and his successor, Marc Mayrand, has been under fairly constant assault including a number of court cases against Elections Canada by the Conservative Party.

There have been other positions, simply eliminated by the government, so that a firing is not just personal–it ends the existence of a position in government. In that category, go Dr Art Carty, Science Advisor to the PM, Karen Kraft Sloan, Ambassador for Environment and Sustainable Development, Jack Anawak, Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs. That’s right. None of those positions exist anymore.

Public attacks on those who criticise form another list. The most prominent example was Richard Colwin, the Foreign Affairs official who was subpoenaed by the Parliamentary committee looking into Afghan torture allegations. He was attacked as though he was a Taliban stooge. One could add Rémy Beauregard who headed the NGO Rights and Democracy, run with a board appointed by the federal government with federal grants. He was hounded out of his job and then died suddenly of a heart attack following a board meeting.

Pubic resignations are rare. Munir Sheikh, Canada’s Chief Statistician (a role equivalent to Deputy Minister to Statistics Canada) had been prepared to implement a policy which he believed to be deeply flawed–cancelling the long-form census. But when Minister of Industry Tony Clement, to whom he reported, told the media that no one at Statistics Canada had warned him that the long-form census was critical, Sheikh felt he had no honourable choice but to quit. He had, of course, warned the minister that killing the census would undermine policy-making across the board.

Without good information, a government is flying blind. It’s like shutting down traffic control at the airport. What Munir Sheikh did encapsulates how the civil service is supposed to work. He made a case to Clement. The Harper government (rumour has it the order to kill the long-form census came directly from the Prime Minister’s Office) ignored his warnings. But he kept his criticisms to himself and would have implemented the change, if not for the fact that the Minister lied and said no-one had warned him.

The most recent loss and the one that prompted me to write about these disturbing assaults on the fabric of our institutions is that of Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page. The position was, ironically, created by the Harper government. It was part of the 2006 Accountability Act, but no one filled the position until Kevin Page was appointed in 2008. With a skeleton staff and a small budget, the PBO under Page has provided clear and transparent assessments of Canada’s fiscal policy and worrying trends. Page has been in a struggle with government from the beginning. He announced last month that he would not seek re-appointment when his term ends.

It is no wonder that morale in the civil service is at an all time low. People doing their job in an impartial way are treated as partisans and enemies. The atmosphere is toxic. Good people are leaving government. We are losing ‘peace, order and good government’ to a mood of oppression and fear. It does look a lot like vandalism.

Elizabeth E. May, O.C. knows her way around Ottawa. She served as Senior Policy advisor to the federal Minister of Environment 1986-88. She is leader of the Green Party of Canada.

The post The Harper hit list: keeping track of the heads that have rolled appeared first on Elizabeth May.