Evidence of meeting #1 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was motions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
My point exactly. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
That's one of those important motions--
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
It's just a point of clarification more than anything.
I understand that that's the Marleau and Montpetit definition. Now, I could be corrected on this, but I was of the understanding from other committees that the House leaders made an agreement to put the motions that were already in place back in the same spot as they were. I could be wrong on that, but that's what I had heard in other committees.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Only routine motions?
The clerk is 100% positive that there hasn't been an agreement?
4:15 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
If that's the case and this isn't a routine motion, then I'm hoping that it and the other motions that were important and were brought up before will get back into the same priority they had been given. Nothing has happened that reduces the urgency of those motions. We should have the same order that prevailed before, get those motions dealt with quickly, and then move on to that report. I think that report is important.
I would urge the chair to do one more thing. Maybe I don't understand parliamentary committee protocol enough, but on any board where I was either a chair or a member in the past, before becoming a member of Parliament, the chair had the authority--they used it judiciously, but they had the authority--to say that we're not going to have any more discussion about this.
You needn't fear being accused of being partisan. We know very quickly where a lot of us stand on a lot of issues. We know very quickly. Yet we choose to continue to debate and debate, going on endlessly, wasting a lot of valuable time and a lot of dollars, frankly, at taxpayers' expense.
Having said that, I would ask...and I believe that we can deal with these motions. We can deal with the rest of the committee work, including the completion of that report. I will honour your decision, whatever it might be, when you say, “We've had enough discussion. I'm calling the vote.”
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I appreciate that, Mr. Valeriote. I do believe that should be up to the chairman's discretion, as long as he isn't deliberately trying to cut someone out. But I will have to have that same support from everybody, not just from you.
There comes a time in a general discussion, I think we all know as adults, when you're just beating a dead horse a second time. But a lot of times, when I have tried to say move on or end discussion, I get reminded by someone around the table that, “Hey, I was on the list. I want to speak.”
So I need to be backed up if you want that. I have no problem doing that. I'll try to be fair on it.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Okay.
Mr. Easter, then Mr. Shipley, and hopefully we're going to end the discussion on this motion.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Chair, I do believe the discussion on the report is going to take longer than the timeframe you've outlined there.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
I said I do believe the discussion on the report is going to take longer than the timeframe you've outlined there.
Listen, when we do the report it needs to be the best work that we can do. I know I have a lot of problems with several of the recommendations. Also, I think there are quite a number of witnesses who are not quoted, and the quotes will have to be inserted. I can tell you right now it's going to take some time.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Is probably not enough.
To be honest, I don't mind if we could even take a committee meeting that starts at 3:30, if it were possible. I wouldn't even mind going into the evening to try to get through a fair bit of work, but that's up to the committee to decide.
I do think that before the break week, which starts Easter Monday, we absolutely have to meet on the hog crisis for a couple of meetings. We need to give some direction to the government. We need to hear from the industry where it's at. We're losing farmers every day.
On the SRM issue, which has been on the go a long time, unless somebody can tell us where the government's at.... I do know of two plants that are in trouble over SRM. I don't want to end up meeting some of these people on the Easter break week, wondering why in the hell we're not anywhere on the issue. I really do think it's urgent that we deal with at least those two questions specifically, the SRM removal and the hog industry question, right off the bat so that we can make some recommendations to the minister.
Just a question. Pierre's not here, but maybe somebody.... When do we have to have the estimates dealt with?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
March 23. So we have to have a meeting in that regard too, because we all have to be able to ask questions to the department, or the minister, or whoever. That's certainly going to take a meeting.
I want to get the competitiveness report done, but I think there are two or three urgent priorities we have to meet on first, and then let's try to get it done.
I'm going to vote against the motion and leave it up to the steering committee to sort out, to put in the days, and maybe make a recommendation that we meet longer.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I won't take much time.
Let's look at the calendar. I want to try to accommodate the issue that Wayne just brought up in terms of the supplementary estimates--and it will be one meeting. We have a meeting on March 15, a meeting on March 17, and a meeting on March 22. If the supplementary estimates have to be done by March 23, pick one of those meetings. We will work on the report for the other two.
We then have meetings on March 24, 29, and 31 before the break. That gives us three more meetings. Wayne, I'm suggesting that we still take those three meetings. That leaves two meetings, then, to deal with the issues that you want. I don't have an issue with dealing with your motions, but some of those will hopefully get rectified even in our report. That gives us two meetings at the end to deal with the motion. I don't think anybody will be concerned about staying if they can. If we know far enough ahead, there will be consensus to extend the meeting to deal with the report.
All I'm saying is that if we're actually really serious about doing the report, then let's make the accommodations around getting the report done rather than the accommodations around the motions. I believe we can do both of them if we put our minds to it.
March 15 and 17, we'll give you one of those days or March 22 to do the supplementary estimates. We'll come back on March 24, 29, and 31. We can finish the report on, say, March 24, which gives you March 29 and 31, or you can finish the report on March 31 and do your motions on March 24 and 29.
All I'm saying is we have a timeline. We have some time back here. Let's make the best use of it. Let's put our time on the table, get the report done and get to the motions that affect the pork and beef industries. I'm not opposed to that.
That's my motion. I'm going to keep the motion on that it still be three meetings. If we want to extend it, the steering committee can change it. I have a motion on because I think we need to get serious about getting it done.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
If there's any stomach--that's the word I'll use--for what Bev is posing, I would have asked anyway that if you come up with dates for three meetings, or for whatever, we be committed to that, and that literally they'll be extended for as long as it takes to get this done so as not to jeopardize another date.
Another suggestion I would throw out here is that we not waste our next committee meeting time on a subcommittee, that we use it for business. We'll meet prior to that or something with the subcommittee so it doesn't eat up committee time. I think we could do that.
Frank, you had a question.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
Bev, you were talking about the subcommittee and then you introduced the idea of the time spent on the report and the motions. If the time had to be extended to finish the report, if we needed more time for the report, would it be at the expense of the days delegated for the motions, or would it go over or past on the other end, at the end of those motion days?
