Evidence of meeting #8 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cattle.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
The whips just basically got together as well, Mr. Easter, as you probably know, and they have set out the names of who's on the subcommittee. I don't even know all the names yet. I know the members from our side, that's all.
On the motion, Mr. Easter, go ahead.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
There was one further question added to that motion, and the date was changed. I believe the original motion said we expected an answer from the minister by March 9. This motion gives him until March 23 to answer.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
That's an amendment. Would that be accepted as a friendly amendment, or what's...?
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
No, no, I'm not arguing with it, Mr. Easter. It's just a difference in the motion.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
It's just basically a change of the date from March 9 to March 23. It's number 6, right on the bottom....
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
There are two amendments.
What are you doing there, Wayne? Are you slipping one in? There are two amendments, right?
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
The fact of the matter is we get a lot of dragging of their feet on the other side, but there seems to be another question that we need answered from the minister. When did the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food meet in person with the full board of directors of the Canadian Wheat Board, and if he has not, why not?
Clearly the minister spends a lot of time attacking the Canadian Wheat Board, and he is responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board under legislation, as is his parliamentary secretary. I would expect he would sit down with that full board in person and meet with them.
So has he or hasn't he?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I guess just for clarification and for procedure, there is a change in motion. There was proper notice of motion given here, so we can deal with it one of two ways. We can either just accept those as amendments or basically table or get rid of the previous motion that Mr. Easter had and just accept this one.
It's whatever you want to do.
Conservative
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
I don't want to be technical here, but it's not Mr. Easter's motion to table. It's the committee's. It's in committee discussion--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Exactly. I'm just asking....
We either have to stay with the motion we're on, and, if Mr. Easter wants to add these, treat them as amendments, or we just basically, with his permission...for him to withdraw the bill and we move on to this one. Tell me what you want to do.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
I don't want to get technical. You do whatever you want here. I just want to ask Mr. Easter one question.
Has he submitted a letter, as such, to the minister that he hasn't got a response to? Is that why he's moving it through committee?
I mean, it is a member of Parliament's privilege to write a letter and ask. So this is a simple question.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
We have submitted a number of things via letter to the minister. Some of these--not all--would be in those letters. As well, I believe we still have questions on the order paper in these matters. And we raised some questions with the minister when he was here.
Conservative
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
This is related to some of the minister's comments on the contingency fund. We do have a right to put it as a motion here, and we did.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Absolutely, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to clarify whether or not Mr. Easter had made a motion as such. He says he hasn't. It's clear that this is political, but at the end of the day, it's his right to bring it forward.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Okay, I'm going to assume, because there's no other direction, that we're dealing with the motion that we were discussing at the end of last meeting and we still are.
Mr. Lemieux, you're up next.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Thanks, Chair.
I think we're all concerned about the Wheat Board, maybe from different perspectives.
We, on this side, are very concerned about the significant losses that the Wheat Board incurred. Mr. Easter is just worried about questioning the minister about why the minister is concerned about the significant losses that the Wheat Board incurred.
I think Mr. Storseth's question is a valid one. Has Wayne Easter contacted the minister?
We are talking about tying up committee here on a motion, tying up the clerks, tying up committee. We're debating it. We all have access to the minister. We can all write a letter to the minister.
If Mr. Easter felt he had written this exact letter with these exact questions to the minister and had been stonewalled, hadn't received a reply, sure, we can table it at committee. Personally, I find it a little heavy-handed if he has not actually put these questions in writing and offered to the minister the opportunity to reply to him. We all have access to that mechanism.
As I say, we're tying up committee time here, committee business. We're working, we're studying other matters right now. We're cutting our witnesses short to discuss this. We're adding an extra paragraph because he had yet another question to ask the minister. So I'm coming from that angle, Chair.
It's a motion. We have to deal with it. I do want to raise the concern that he's implicating the whole committee in actually what are questions that he would like to ask the minister, and we just don't act that way.
