Natural Resources Committee on March 1st, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

City of Montreal, that was from Madame Brunelle--no. But we have witnesses requested by Madame Brunelle who have been contacted. Two confirmed, at least. So you've had three witnesses at least who have been contacted: two are going to come and on one we're awaiting a response.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I am not satisfied with that. We agreed to submit the names of witnesses who were to be contacted. I don't know who decided not to contact them, but that is not an appropriate course of action.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

If we requested all the witnesses in two meetings, then the problem you're talking about is going to be a very real problem. We could have had ten witnesses in each hour session, and that is unmanageable. So that's why your lists were submitted and prioritized. I believe certainly that's the way witnesses from all parties were approached.

Mr. Anderson and then Monsieur Coderre.

We are out of time here.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

I just think the point needs to be remade. We've all submitted our witness lists. They were done in order of priority. That is how people are being called. We're not calling 30 people at a time and then saying that everybody has an invite. We take the top two or three and ask them. If they don't accept, then we work our way down the list. We're probably each going to get two or three of our witnesses, at the most, unless we're going to extend hearings here. So I think people need to allow the clerk to do the job here and let's just see what we get.

If your witnesses haven't been called, it's because the ones above them may have said yes. That's how the committee has worked in the past.

You can't have ten, because then we'd have 50 witnesses here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

There is only one witness from the government side confirmed. What is happening here is fair. And it's being done in the order agreed to.

Monsieur Coderre.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

I will be brief. This type of issue can takes six meetings. We are here to get answers and to ensure that the responses and the points of view we hear are representative. I agree that, when we submit a list of witnesses to be heard, those are priority lists. Having said that, we must reconsider the position of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for obvious reasons, if we want to get to the bottom of the matter. I don't think we are going to be repetitive in our questioning. Just one hour with them is really not enough. We will have to take an hour, but I think that perhaps we will have to think about bringing them back again afterwards, so that we could hold a third session, if not a fourth.

As I understand the motion at the moment, we will have two meetings, but the two meetings will remain open for others. Clearly, we will not discuss the tangled web of representatives at the municipal level, as the City of Montreal is not a member of the Quebec Union of Municipalities. Nor is the FQM. Simply calling in someone like Denis Lapointe, who represents the Environmental Committee at the Quebec Union of Municipalities and who is even chair of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative... I think that what we want are the views of Quebec municipalities. If need be, we as the official opposition are prepared to increase... Let's start that way, but it is clear that we will need more time for the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Merci, Monsieur Coderre.

I want to make a correction. Two witnesses recommended by the government have accepted, so there are two.

Thank you all very much. Good discussion.

The meeting is adjourned.