Foreign Affairs Committee on April 19th, 2007

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I agree with Mr. Obhrai, and your recommendation also, because, first of all, we are asking four ministers, four departments, to come. There are not going to be four departments responsible for the response. There will be one department and probably Foreign Affairs, because we are the foreign affairs committee.

When we tabled the document in 2005, it was a Foreign Affairs recommendation. In a sense, they have done the round table.

Now we want to have the Ministers of Natural Resources, International Cooperation, and International Trade. There will be one department responsible for the response, not all the ministers. We cannot invite all the ministers and all the civil servants working on this issue.

It took one year for the round table. It is a huge report about this. It needs to be digested by the government. I really feel we should, as you just mentioned, be asking the responsible ministers of the department to appear in front of the committee after the response of the government. This is what I would suggest, a little bit the same as you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right.

Madam McDonough.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I am entirely favourable to the suggested friendly amendment because that's actually what's intended here, if people read it carefully. I didn't say each and every minister; I said the appropriate ministers and their officials, which of course will take into account what the government's designated responsible ministers and agencies are.

Second, it is worded in a very particular way for good reason: to appear before the committee to discuss the government's response and to present its plan. It is not suggesting that we do that before they have a response and before they have a plan. It is suggesting that we do it after there is a response and a plan.

I'd be very unfavourable to the idea of saying let's just delay passing the motion, because the motion takes into account that we need to hear from the government's response.

I'm entirely favourable to your friendly amendment because I think it's what's intended.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Patry, I don't know if we can work together on this and come up with a motion so that we could solve all problems with one friendly amendment.

What Mr. Patry I think is suggesting is that because one department is going to be providing this report, this response from the government, that would be the appropriate minister, not ministers.

Is that a friendly amendment to you?

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

We can put brackets around the “s”, if that makes you feel better.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right.

Would that work, Mr. Patry?

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

In fact, it was my understanding that of the eight departments and agencies involved there had already been an indication that it was shrunk down to four that are going to be sharing the responsibility, but you know it's not for us to say who the appropriate ministers are. Obviously, it relates to what the government's intentions are.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

So I think in the spirit of that....

Mr. Obhrai.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

As I stated, let's be a little bit more clear. The issue is as soon as the government has made a response, then we can get the appropriate official dealing with that to come, but we need to wait until the government makes a response.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

So I think we should put that into the motion, to say once the government has made a response, then ask the appropriate minister and/or official to come in front of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I think that's exactly what we've said.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Yes, but put it in the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, we're going to make a friendly amendment to that.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

All right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

So that once the response is ready, the appropriate minister—

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

The response is made.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes. So do we have a reading?

Madame Lalonde, I apologize.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you.

I wanted to point out that in the French version, the word "concerné", rather than the word "compétent" should be used. I agree with this friendly amendment, but it would be desirable to have the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of International Cooperation appear before the committee. I do not know whether you have as many people in your area as I have in mine who are from countries where Canadian mines are located that are destroying the environment, corrupting governments, and so on, but this is an issue where something really must be done for Canada's reputation, and I think this involves both Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Madame Lalonde, for that.

I'll just have the clerk reread and make sure the motion is satisfactory.

[The Clerk]

The motion would read:

That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development invite the appropriate minister(s) and/or officials to appear, once the government has responded, to discuss the government's response to

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Just make it simple: “once the government has responded to the advisory group report.”

[The Clerk]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

And then everything else is the same.

[The Clerk]

Okay. It is “That pursuant”, etc., “invite the appropriate minister(s) and/or officials to appear before this committee, once the government has responded to the advisory group's report, and present its plans.”