Agriculture Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

You have the motion in front of you, and he's adding some words to the first line.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

It would read: “That the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, as our top priority, conduct a study”, and then the rest would remain as is.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

The first time you read it, Mr. Richards, and correct me if I'm wrong, you indicated that it was the top priority in the competitive part. Are you indicating that it be the top priority for the committee to study in general?

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, I'll call the question.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

On a point of order, can we get a recorded vote, please?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Storseth has asked for a recorded vote on the amendment by Mr. Richards.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to amend the motion to say that the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food, after the meeting on supplementary estimates (B) 2008-09, conduct a study of the Competition Act and make recommendations on potential changes in light of the global economy....

Basically, what I'm doing is moving it up in the order of structure, so that it's actually something that we address more quickly rather than later. I'm not saying give it priority, as I understand that listeriosis has priority—and that shouldn't change—but that we move it up in the priority list from where it sits right now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I'm not clear and I don't think the clerk is either. Could you read that amendment again.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Now I have to read it again.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Point of order.

We cannot have an amendment every time we want to change the order of priority that the steering committee decided on. At the meeting of the steering committee, certain decisions were made and we are open to discussing them. That is what we usually do; we discuss them within the standing committee.

Why don't we take a moment later on to discuss the order of priority that we already set at the meeting of the steering committee, with you there, Mr. Chairman? At that time, we can decide together what our priority will be. We can make changes, but if an amendment is going to be made to each motion stating that that motion should be the first topic we discuss, I am telling you right now that I will vote against that, if we do not have a proper discussion. Let's do this intelligently please. Otherwise this will go on forever.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Bellavance may have a point there in the fact that the subcommittee report has some recommendations, and that amendment probably could come in while you're back to the report. At this time we are dealing with this motion. Anybody has a right to make an amendment, but I think Mr. Bellavance has a point on that.

If I'm going to take questions, I have Mr. Atamanenko first and then Mr. Lemieux.

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

I think if we can deal with these motions quickly, that means we approve them, then when we come back and our subcommittee gives a report on the order then--as was pointed out, I think--we can see maybe that we should bump it up one or two, or take fewer meetings on some of the other topics and then see how it fits in. Then we can make that collective decision.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Mr. Chair, can I interject?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I have you next on the speakers list.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, to André's point, this is exactly the point. We had an agreement--maybe it wasn't in committee maybe it was a handshake agreement--with the opposition critic on our having representation from this side in the subcommittee. We weren't given that. We have the chair, but he is neutral. He said he is going to be neutral.

To get back to the point, if the only way we're going to be able to have representation is to amend something constantly, then you're going to have to live with that. I think that's more to the point to what's going on. Mr. Atamanenko has given us his word that he's willing to fight in subcommittee to move this up a little bit. I think that's reasonable and at your discretion. I think our side feels that this is an important issue, and it should be moved up in the precedence of where we study this.

I don't know about Mr. Hoback, but I'm willing to take Mr. Atamanenko on his word on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I should just remind all members, in terms of the amendment that's coming forth here--and it's the second one to change the order in there--that you still have the chance to propose an amendment dealing with that very issue once we're back to the report. It's 12:45 p.m. and I would suggest that we deal with the motions. You still have the opportunity to do what Mr. Hoback's amendment was trying to do.

Mr. Lemieux.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to respond to Mr. Bellavance's comments.

I would like to point out that we do have a subcommittee. The members of that subcommittee do important work. They discuss and propose recommendations. However, it should be pointed out that the subcommittee only makes recommendations; it is the main committee that has the authority to discuss them, debate them and change anything on the report. We can take our time to do this. This is the first time the committee has seen the results. Yes, we would like to have a subcommittee. I already mentioned that its work is important.

Perhaps I misunderstood what Mr. Bellavance was saying. I think he said that we could not change everything in the subcommittee's report. What I am saying is that we can change anything and we can also have a debate.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I said exactly that.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Yes? Then I apologize.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

What I was saying is that we don't have to move an amendment every time someone wants to change the order. I suggested that we deal with the motions and that we then discuss the first report.

If we want to make any changes to the meetings, or change the order in which we will have meetings or deal with the issues, then we can discuss that together. I agree with you that the steering committee sends its recommendations to the main committee to be discussed again.

I simply wanted to point out what would be faster, but the opposite is happening.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Ladies and gentlemen, if we want to deal with these motions and deal with the report--and I need to point out that until the report is passed as is or amended or whatever the case may be, our future business is in jeopardy of actually going ahead and being productive. I don't mean that in a facetious way. I mean that unless we get something decided here today--and we're quickly running out of time--we're not going to be able to even have witnesses at Tuesday's meeting. As chair, I think I need to point that out.

We do have an amendment on the floor by Mr. Hoback.

Are you leaving it there or withdrawing it?

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Chair, I'm going to withdraw it after listening to Alex.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you. Mr. Hoback, having heard that, I appreciate--

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Let me finish what I'm going to say, please.