Industry Committee on Oct. 24th, 2006

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Well, the whole idea with this entire process.... It has really taken me by surprise that they've even brought this up. Even after the indications today, Mr. Vincent says the government is not doing anything. But when we're trying to move a policy direction forward, you want to delay another six months before we get started.

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

It isn't six months.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

You want to delay until March, anyway, before we start moving this forward.

We had this telecommunications policy review panel report. It was tabled back in March.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have a point of order, Monsieur Crête.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

The discussion should concern the amendment. We're not discussing the amendment right now; we're discussing the merits. Let's dispose of the amendment first, and, if the member wishes to discuss the merits, he will do so afterwards.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You're correct, Monsieur Crête, that it has to be on the amendment. But as I heard Mr. Carrie making his arguments, it was with respect to the six-month time period until March. That's relative to the amendment, as I see it.

Are you talking about the six months?

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Well, I'm talking about the time period we've had. Here we're looking at a report, Mr. Chair. This was started by the former government back in 2005. We had an expert review panel look at the entire telecommunications industry. It took them ten months to review the whole industry and they came up with 127 recommendations.

This has been available to everyone since March of this year, which is seven months ago, and we didn't hear a thing from this committee until last week that we haven't heard from enough witnesses. They spent ten months talking to witnesses--that was their job--and it wasn't something they took lightly. In ten months they pretty much talked to everybody in the industry. What they wanted to do was come up with recommendations for the government, and this was something the Liberals started. What we're doing with this is...we simply want to put forward what the former government started with this policy direction.

Since this entire process started.... We had the opportunity to start this back when we started our committee. We actually recommended that we start with telecom. At that time we decided instead to work with the manufacturing sector. That's a very good study to do, and I think everybody's encouraged and we'd like to get this completed in a timely manner, by December, so we can be relevant before the next budget.

Until last week we didn't hear anything from this committee, and we haven't had a report. How many recommendations have any of the members here actually made to the CRTC? We've had since June 13 to make recommendations. Why is it now so important that we have to delay this even further than it has been delayed?

I don't think anybody on this committee has put any recommendations toward the CRTC. I don't think any senators have put any forward.

We've received input from the different companies, consumers' groups, and individuals, and if anybody here wants to look at what's out there, they can go to the website, which is strategis.gc.ca, and see what has been put there.

In the committee last week we heard from all the relevant witnesses ourselves. We've had a snapshot of what's been going on, and there's no need to delay this any further. We have a policy direction that was given by the expert panel. The policy direction follows the recommendation of the telecom panel review report, and it was selected by and empowered by the previous government. What we've done...this government has taken the recommendations objectively and moved forward with a major recommendation of a proposed policy directive.

I pose as a question, would the Liberal members be opposing this now if it had been delivered last year? I really don't understand the objections of the opposition and to delay this even further. We've had since April, we've had since June to put up the recommendations, and up until last week nothing has been put forward by the opposition. Now they want to delay it for another four or five months before we start moving this forward.

If you look into--

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Carrie, I do have Monsieur Crête and I have Monsieur Arthur.

We don't have Monsieur Crête?

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I'm ready to vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

Sorry, Mr. Carrie.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I've heard some opposition worries about the legal right to direct the CRTC by the minister. We've done some research that we hope takes into account the objections of the opposition.

What we did was ask where the Minister of Industry is given the authority to deliver a policy direction in the Telecommunications Act, and how it was actually applied in this case. The answer we got was that section 8 of the Telecommunications Act empowers the Governor in Council to issue the CRTC direction on broad policy matters with respect to the Canadian telecommunications policy objectives. The process is outlined in section 10 of the act.

On the whole idea of the forty sitting days and whether the forty sitting days are mandated as the maximum or minimum time designated for the House to consider the direction, subsection 10(6) of the act specifies that after the fortieth sitting day of Parliament, the Governor in Council may make the order, either as proposed or with any modifications.

If you want to look at the actual text of the policy direction as proposed by the telecom panel review, what we actually submitted was very similar; it is almost exactly what the experts have put forward.

With regard to the last time the CRTC actually got any direction, they've stated that it hasn't been since 1993--thirteen years ago--that they got any direction at all from the government. What this minister wants to do is help the CRTC--give them some guidance, give them some direction. Back in 1993, there was no VoIP, there were no BlackBerrys, there was no digital at all. These technologies weren't there. We've heard that it needs to be modernized.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Since this is the first time in 13 years of parliamentary life that I've seen a government filibuster, could the clerk tell us whether we are going to continue, that is to say whether this subject will automatically be first on the agenda of Thursday's meeting?

[Le greffier]

That will not be the case if the committee has not decided so. There's no Order Paper for committees.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

So it is moved that we continue debate on this question as a priority on Thursday.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Let me address that. First of all, I have two more members on this list here.

As the chair, I just want to remind members that I first brought telecom forward for this committee to study. The opposition said no to that; the opposition said the minister should act on the telecom panel. That's what I heard at the time, in the spring. Then we studied manufacturing, which was our second choice, but it was agreed.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

A motion has been introduced that we continue debate on Thursday. We must vote on that motion. So I ask that we continue this debate on a priority basis on Thursday.

[The Hon. Jean Lapierre]

It would be the first subject on the agenda of Thursday's meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

We have witnesses invited for 3:30.

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

That's life! It's the government's fault.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Yes. They're the ones who don't want to vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

The other thing is that as the chair, I was mandated to finish the manufacturing study.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I move that we continue the debate on a priority basis on Thursday. I formally move that this matter be the first item on the agenda of Thursday's meeting. If someone has to second my motion, someone will.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I'm advised that procedurally, Mr. Crête, you can move this motion, but as a motion it is debatable. That's what the clerk advises, which means we can debate this now.

Is there anyone who wants to speak to...? Let's read the motion.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

My motion speaks for itself: we're here to vote to continue the debate on Thursday.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Crête proposes....