Evidence of meeting #36 for International Trade in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
2:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
We're now on clause 25 as amended in this breakneck, reckless, irresponsible drive right over the cliff with the softwood industry in the back seat. We're ramming through each of these clauses with about a minute's consideration.
How's that going to play out there in softwood communities across this country? I don't think it's going to play very well. When people ask why the lumber remanufacturers were given the back of the hand when they should have been supported, they will be told that clause-by-clause consideration--
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. Julian, you have a minute, but even if you had more time I would still caution you on relevance here. You're not speaking to the clause.
2:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
I am indeed speaking to the clause, because what we have here is a ministerial fiat that allows the certification to take place on amending, suspending, renewing, cancelling, or reinstating a certificate, with the improvement of the actual amendment itself. We still have a central ministry-of-international-trade-driven agenda. This is what I'm talking about. When people ask why we are adopting these amendments and why you gave sixty-second consideration to any of these very complex amendments, it will be important--
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Julian.
Would anybody else like to speak on clause 25? I want to give everybody ample opportunity. No? Then let's go to a recorded division on clause 25, as amended.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Anders Conservative Calgary West, AB
I abstain.
(Clause 25 as amended agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0)
(On clause 26--Monthly returns)
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
We have amendment CPC-4 on page 39, which is identical to amendment L-6. We have a Conservative amendment and a Liberal amendment. Who is going to move the Conservative amendment?
Mr. Menzies.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Obviously, if amendment CPC-4 in the name of Mr. Casey and moved by Mr. Menzies carries, I will withdraw amendment L-6. As Mr. Menzies indicated, they are identical.
We're seeking a reporting requirement that is directly related to the export charge and the special charge on duty refunds. This amendment would simply limit the information contained in the reporting forms to information that is directly related to these charges. The Maritime Lumber Bureau feels this is an important restriction to make sure the information is pertinent and relates only to these charges. We see it as a fairly simple administrative amendment, and I urge colleagues to support it.
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
I would like to move a subamendment, so it reads, “containing information limited to the charges payable under the section and kept confidential”. I will speak to that.
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As we go on this hell-bent, sixty-second-a-clause, rapid run through Bill C-24, never before seen in parliamentary history, we have to realize that each of these clauses has substantive import and importance to the softwood companies that are going to have to deal with each of these clauses that are being run through at unprecedented breakneck speed.
I've offered a subamendment to ensure that ministerial information or information going to the minister is kept confidential. The type of reporting is extremely onerous. Many people testified this summer that the administrative burden around Bill C-24 was absolutely appalling. Not only was it not viable for a business, but the administrative weight caused additional charges. So they have to know that the information is kept confidential--
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Julian.
Is there anyone else who would like to speak to CPC-4?
I believe we have Ms. Guergis on the subamendment.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
That's right, Ms. Guergis, you were on for the amendment.
Anyone else on the subamendment?
Let's go to the recorded division on the NDP subamendment to CPC-4.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
The NDP subamendment is defeated. We'll now go to the vote on CPC-4.
Ms. Guergis, you were on for that.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
Helena Guergis Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I do have some concerns about this. The government really has no independent way of monitoring the situation. They do need to be able to make their own assessment to ascertain whether the charges payable really are correct, and the minister does require returns from exporters respecting exports that qualify for the Atlantic exclusion. This information will also assist in the administration and enforcement of the act. This provision is consistent with other statutes.
I very much support and appreciate that the association could do this good work, but I would like to see the association actually forward this information to the government so the government has the information. As I've said, they have no independent source for finding this, so they do need to have this information. Perhaps someone could propose a subamendment that the Maritime Lumber Bureau would forward this information to the government.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Pardon? We were speaking to the amendment. Now there has been a subamendment proposed.
Mr. Cannan.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ron Cannan Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just wanted to clarify my colleague's comments and maybe ask the staff about the idea of having a subamendment that the Maritime Lumber Bureau forward the information to the government. Would that be a possibility to help clarify the concerns that have been raised?
Let me move that as a subamendment.
