Transport Committee on April 25th, 2007

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I will check the blues. I'm sure it was Wednesday, because I had expected it to be Monday, but someone said it would be Wednesday.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

No.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Chair, your recollection is correct. It was proposed for Wednesday, but the agreement of the committee was for a future date.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Could I seek unanimous support to bring it back this coming Monday?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm advised that you can give notice of motion and bring it back in 48 hours.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you for recognizing me, Mr. Chair.

Isn't it true, Mr. Chair, that he can seek unanimous support to bring it back right now and ask for a standing vote as to who would and who would not bring it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes, he can bring it back. Actually, you don't need a notice of motion, because it is still an open motion. It can be open for debate at the next meeting or right now.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Chair, we do have the fifth report of the subcommittee before us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm sorry, we do have to deal with this. Mr. Fast has put it on the floor. He doesn't have to move it.

If I may, Mr. Fast has the right to bring it forward in a motion to bring it back onto the floor today. Subject to the will of the committee, we move forward or--

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Chair, I'll submit to the request of my colleagues and ask that it be brought back today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Fast has moved to bring back the motion on the remailer issue we discussed at the last meeting. I'm assuming I have to call for a vote on this—or debate.

Monsieur Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

I'm going to repeat what I told my colleagues. I don't have any problem discussing this motion again. However, I would have like to hear again from the remailers and from Ms. Green of Canada Post.

I told you, and I didn't speak because I was complying with the standards you set for me that I not ask Ms. Green questions on labour relations with her employees. Similarly, I did not ask questions on the legal proceedings involving the representatives of the remailers and Ms. Green. I would have liked us to have the opportunity to hear them at least one more time. Moreover, the remailers wrote us a letter asking us to invite them back. I would also have appreciated hearing from Ms. Green again. Then we'll be able to vote on this motion. That's not a problem for me. I just refrained from asking any questions in order to respect your wish that I not speak. Do you remember that you told me not to ask any questions on the legal proceedings or on labour relations with employees. I would have liked to hear from these people again, that's all. As for the rest, if you want to do it without hearing witnesses, that's your choice.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Well, Mr. Chair, Monsieur Laframboise has said very eloquently the concerns he raised at that time. Monsieur Bélanger from the Liberal Party raised similar concerns, and so did I. It was premature.

That's why I don't think it's appropriate to throw it out with a minute left in our committee meeting, prior to the bells going off and prior to us going to the House to vote. From all three parties on this side of the table, we raised concerns about it being premature. Some of us may end up supporting the motion, some of us may not, but I think it is fair to say all of us agree that it was premature to present it at that time. To throw it out now is premature and I think inappropriate.

There's got to be a debate. We've raised concerns, and Monsieur Laframboise has said very eloquently that there are some questions he would like to ask about the effect of this motion. So I would just ask Mr. Fast to hold tight and allow the committee to do some work around his motion, if he really wants it to be adopted in the end. If he doesn't want to see it adopted, that's another thing. But if he wants to see it considered and adopted the way we all requested at the last meeting, he should allow the committee to have a bit of a process on it. And Monsieur Bélanger is not even here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Bell.

[Don Bell, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

The last time, there were different feelings within our side, the Liberal side, on it.

We wanted to have an opportunity, Mr. Fast, on this side to have a discussion among us as Liberals, because Mr. Bélanger had a particular point of view and there was a split point of view within our side.

I would say that from my position, I am, to quote CN, perceptually inclined to the issue you raised. But I would like the benefit, number one, of having it in front of me again, and I would like the benefit of having a discussion with my colleagues before we get into it. It may be appropriate, as Mr. Laframboise has said, to bring back those people.

I also appreciate and am cognizant of the point you made, and, again, I'm perceptually inclined to believe there is some urgency because of the actions being taken by Canada Post. I understand this. Therefore, I don't want to see it dragged out any longer than necessary, but I don't think today is the time to deal with it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Let me put it this way: I'm totally opposed to bringing Moya Greene back, or the union, quite frankly. What we're doing is asking that the status quo be maintained, at least for now—that's what it is—because of the urgency of it.

I don't want you to prejudge it. Your leader has already gone on record saying he supports the remailers; that's without talking to Moya Greene or hearing further testimony from CUPW. That's pretty straightforward. You guys know where you're going to go on this.

[Don Bell, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Maybe you could bring me a copy of what my leader said.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

It's right here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We have before us a motion to bring this back to the floor. It still remains an outstanding motion, but the vote I'm going to ask for is, all those in favour of sustaining or bringing the motion back to the floor, please say yea.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

I have a question, Mr. Chair.

Voting against this would allow Mr. Fast to present it at a future time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Absolutely.

All those in favour of the motion?

A recorded vote has been requested.

Monsieur Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

I only have one question. Are we bringing the motion forward without having any witnesses appear again? The witnesses won't be coming back? Is that what you're saying?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm saying that as a member, Mr. Fast has the right to bring it back any time he chooses.

All we're voting on now is whether his motion to bring it forward today will be sustained. It's still on the books.