Human Resources Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Ms. Yelich.

Mr. Storseth is next.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I feel obligated to express my disappointment with this motion and with the NDP. We agreed to undertake the study on the social economy and poverty; that's something I voted for because I thought it was important. Now we have this motion coming up, and I'd like Mr. Martin to address why the NDP is filibustering on something that is very important and very crucial for us to look at--the issue of employability and labour shortages in this country. It is extremely exasperating and it is affecting my riding in my province of Alberta. The notion I get from all the witnesses we bring before us is that this issue is very important all across this country and, I would venture to guess, in the ridings of the members themselves.

Why is the NDP so intent on filibustering this study?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Lessard.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Chairman, let me first remind you that this committee was not consulted, even though we're talking about significant cuts that directly affect our work.

I'd like to propose an amendment to change some aspects of Mr. Martin's motion. The proposed changes are in line with Mr. Lake's comments, namely that the committee should hear from those affected by these cuts, and that is shouldn't necessarily wait until after the cuts have been made.

I'm not sure if the English version gives another impression, but the motion in French reads as follows:

Que, considérant les compressions du gouvernement at DRHDC annoncées le 25 septembre 2005, que le Comité convoque immédiatement devant le Comité : - la Ministre, pour expliquer les motifs derrière ces compressions [...]

I would propose the following instead: “-la Ministre, pour qu'elle explique les motifs derrière ces compressions[...]”.

It's a question of meaning. Basically, the essence of the motion remains the same.

Point two of motion continues thusly:

- le personnel du ministère, pour expliquer l'impact de ces compressions [...]

Here, I would suggest the following wording: “-le personnel du ministère, pour qu'il explique l'impact de ces compressions[...]”

The motion concludes with the following:

- et des individus et des organisations touchés par ces compressions.

I propose that the following be substituted: “- et des individus et des organismes touchés par ces compressions, pour qu'ils expriment leur opinion face à ces compressions.”

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

The clerk informs me that it doesn't need to be an amendment. It's just cleaning up the language, and we'll do that and we'll take care of that. Thank you for pointing that out.

Mr. Martin, did you want to comment?

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Yes, since it's past one o'clock, I'd like to move the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay.

We need to deal with the amendment, and I'm going to read the amendment to you right now. So it would be adding one more bullet: “and representatives of Canadians adversely affected by ineffective and inefficient government spending”.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask a question of the committee, and I guess the mover of the motion. Would he be willing to roll in his previous motion of the social economy initiative, so we can tackle this all at once and get it out of the way? Is that a possibility?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

These are separate motions, so they've got to be dealt with separately.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

And we're on the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We're on the amendment right now. Let's deal with the amendment.

What's that?

[An hon. member]

He wants to know if it's every Canadian we're inviting.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Mr. Chairman, the social economy issue does mean this. It is part of....

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

This is a separate motion right now. Right now we're dealing with the amendment that has been proposed.

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Monsieur Lessard.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

The vote has been called. There is no debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Yes, that's what I'm doing right now.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Then we should vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'm going to call for the vote now, if the committee is ready, on the—

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I just want to suggest one word. It's minor, but I think it would be more properly worded “and representatives of organizations”, on that last bullet point that's on Mr. Martin's motion. It should be “representatives”, not “individuals”. It would be clearer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

And “earliest possible convenience”.

[The Clerk of the Committee]

Can you read it?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

So basically his last bullet point, not the one I added, would say, “and representatives of organizations adversely affected by those cuts”.