Evidence of meeting #71 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
I have a question. I'm not sure of the procedure here. I don't know whether, as a federal committee, we can actually investigate a provincial government. I think we can call them forward to question them.
Second, why the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture would be calling for an investigation into the Canadian Wheat Board is amazing to me, because he and his minister do have the authority to ask the Wheat Board questions. They have the authority now, under access to information. Is it that the minister and his parliamentary secretary just never talk to the Wheat Board, or what? They are responsible for the Wheat Board and they're asking for an investigation. That sounds ludicrous to me, but if that's what they want to do, I have no problem.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
We're just getting the wording. Once we have the wording, then we'll have a debate.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Mr. Easter seemed to be debating; that's why I'm questioning it.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
We'll try the wording as we believe it's deemed to be requested.
Procedural Clerk
Mr. Chair, the amendment, as far as I understand it, would be as follows:
That the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food write a letter to the Honourable Sheila Fraser, Auditor General of Canada, indicating the Agriculture Committee's support for a thorough investigation into the government's conduct and spending by the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Canadian Wheat Board throughout the recent Canadian Wheat Board barley marketing plebiscite.
Liberal
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Actually, I'd like to add a subamendment. It was pointed out to me that the Auditor General may not have the authority to investigate the provincial governments, so I think we should include a letter of invitation to the provincial auditors general to investigate the provincial governments in Saskatchewan and Manitoba to determine their conduct and spending as well. If the federal Auditor General doesn't have the authority, we would invite the provincial auditors general to do that.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
I'm not an expert on this issue, but I think we're getting far too broad here in terms of what we want to do. If we want to have other investigations on this, I think that could be done at another time.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
I have a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
I think that the point of order, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, is that you're debating the motion. I think your job is to chair.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
Mr. Miller, that's not a point of order. I'm going to be calling the question very shortly on the amendment, and that's what we're dealing with right now--the amendment. Until we've dealt with that, we're not dealing with anything else.
Go ahead, Mr. Gaudet.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
It's simple, Mr. Chairman. After listening to the motion introduced by the Parliamentary Secretary, I find it hard to see how he can ask the provinces to investigate. When Option Canada went to Quebec, they didn't want to investigate their own organization. They want the province to do it. Quebec investigated, and now they want Saskatchewan to investigate. However, they don't want Canada to investigate Option Canada. That poses a problem for me.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
Mr. Anderson has agreed to pull everything away from the provinces and simply deal with the Canadian Wheat Board. That's the only thing that is changed in the amendment.
I think Mr. Miller wanted in first. Do you still want in?
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Yes. I didn't realize I was first, but yes, I do.
I was certainly ready to support it with the provinces in, simply because I do believe the Auditor General would have informed us one way or the other, and whether we have the power or not, we wouldn't have got ourselves in trouble, in my opinion. Regardless of that, Mr. Anderson has changed it, and I'm willing to support that.
I think the main gist of this motion and Alex's original one is that if we're going to do an investigation, then we do an investigation of all parties, including the Canadian Wheat Board. I've heard Mr. Easter say he has no problem with that, and I'm glad to hear that.
In terms of the provinces, I'd like to see at some point that the Governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan are included in some kind of check, because anything that has an involvement with the federal government and the agriculture ministry comes essentially down to this committee, because we deal with that. I think we--
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
I want us to get back. We're getting away from the amendment. The amendment is sticking with the Canadian Wheat Board.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Okay, well, I certainly support that. I think the Canadian Wheat Board shouldn't have anything to fear here if everything is above board, Mr. Chairman, and we go from there. I'm in support of the amendment.
NDP
Alex Atamanenko NDP British Columbia Southern Interior, BC
My purpose in making the amendment is because of the concern David expressed in regard to the National Farmers Union. It's not my intent to call for an investigation into all other parties involved; it's my intent in the motion to have an investigation of the government's conduct, and specifically into those points that were in that letter. Hopefully they will come out in this investigation. That's the intent of my motion.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
Okay, but we're dealing with the amendment.
Go ahead, Mr. Easter.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Mr. Chair, I would agree with Mr. Atamanenko that really what the motion does, to a certain extent, is change the intent, but if we're going ahead with that amendment, then I will be making a subamendment that we add to that the Prime Minister's Office, etc.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
You can do that a little later. You can do that.... Would you rather do it now or do it afterwards?