Transport Committee on May 7th, 2009

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

Mr. Gauthier, correct me if I am wrong but, in my opinion, amendment L-3 introduces the infamous connection to the shipowner.

A number of witnesses from the legal community said that there must be a connection with the shipowner. Before proposing this bill, I am sure that you considered that. I am not comfortable with this. It seems to me that the more we add to the legislation, the more complicated it becomes. I would like you to make my job easier.

You undoubtedly analyzed the fact that there must be a direct nexus with the shipowner at all times and looked at which types of contracts with the owner would be involved. Why did you not go this route? Please enlighten me.

[Mark Gauthier]

Mr. Laframboise, we certainly looked at all the different ways of structuring the maritime lien, currently found Section 139.

It was our view that, for all intents and purposes, in order to ensure that a supplier has the best possible protection, since he is providing the ship with goods and services, whether the ship is chartered or otherwise… In any case, we felt this was the best solution, to ensure that the maritime lien has enough scope that it maintains the connection to the ship and follows it subsequently, as I explained in our last presentation. This way, the scope of the lien is more effective. That is why the wording of Section 139 is the same as what you have here in the bill.

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

That's great. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank Mr. Gauthier for giving us that comparative explanation. I'm pleased, as well, that he did make it, because he's indicated to us, I think—with no facetiousness intended—that the lawyers decided to improve the bill on the basis of some of the expressions of concern expressed here. Our amendment accomplishes that objective. But for the purposes of greater clarity, it is written in the language that the justice department, through its research, ties in with the Federal Court.

What I will do, to facilitate everything in this, is ask you to make a decision to go immediately to G-4 and I'll withdraw L-3.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Okay. L-3 has been taken off the floor, which will also eliminate L-4 and L-5, and we'll go directly to G-4.

Mr. Jean.

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

Thank you. I move it, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

So a vote on G-4 will apply to G-5 as well.

(Amendments G-4 and G-5 agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

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

For the record, Mr. Chair, if I may, I really appreciate working with Mr. Volpe and seeing the unanimity of this particular committee.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

You're ruining my reputation.

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

Well, your reputation is based upon hard work and getting good results, Mr. Volpe. So I do appreciate that, and I think Canadians appreciate it as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Anyone else want to jump in? Shall we have a campfire song?

(Clause 12 as amended agreed to)

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

We still have L-6 to deal with to complete clause 12, right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

No, actually, when we voted on G-4 and G-5, I suggested that the affirmative vote eliminates L-6 as well.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Oh, wonderful.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

(Clauses 12 to 24 inclusive agreed to)

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Shall the bill as amended carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Shall the chair report the bill as amended to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Shall the committee order a reprint of the bill as amended for the use of the House at report stage?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Any further business?

With that, then, I'll just advise the committee that on Tuesday, when we return, we will be moving into our study of high-speed rail. We will have a department briefing on high-speed rail.

On Thursday we will be bringing forward witnesses on this issue. If you haven't submitted your list, I would ask that you do so. I think we can cover off the Thursday, but we need to move forward.

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I know the department has to come here and brief us on the initiation of our study, but as I recall in our discussions regarding high-speed rail, we did not close off definitively at Thursday. It was my understanding that if we required a little bit more time to hear witnesses, the committee would meet to make the decision on extension. We weren't definitively cutting off Thursday, and we weren't definitively moving beyond Thursday. So I just wanted to clarify that we were going to meet afterwards to see whether we had heard everybody we wanted to hear.