Agriculture Committee on Nov. 16th, 2010

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

No, but in all good faith here, if we have a motion, for instance, on bringing farmers here to talk about something and we're already dealing with it in our committee, then maybe the person who's moving the motion could say, okay, we're dealing with it, and could pull it. That could be the—

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

That's not an issue, Chair. I think the issue is the opposite, where a motion is dealing with business that's not on the schedule. We just had a steering committee meeting. We just had debate in this committee. We just voted on a schedule, and now we're going to have a motion that launches the committee in a new direction. It's not on the schedule. So what do we do—

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

That'll have to be after Christmas, and then maybe the steering committee will have to deal with it, I guess.

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

I know, but you see the predicament we're in. That's what I mean by saying that a lot of these motions are not necessarily useful to the work of the committee. They're just thrown before the committee and they delay and obstruct the work of the committee.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Let's see how we roll here. Maybe we could go along here...and some of the motions are relevant right now; maybe some of them are, I don't know. But we have to respect committee members here. If they have a motion, we somehow have to talk about it.

Mr. Atamanenko.

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

I think we should put on the record exactly what happened in regard to my bill. Pierre was saying, well, it's because of the motions that debate was shut down. We had an agreement to have as many meetings on my bill as possible, plus going over and finishing our report on young farmers. I agreed to that. Subsequently, at a steering committee meeting, there was concern on the part of my colleagues from both of the other opposition parties that we needed to have the department here. I agreed to that, to have one meeting with the department during this whole time. As a result, these guys shut the democratic debate down on my bill. It's as simple as that. It was shut down as simply as that.

Furthermore, in regard to motions, we ran out of time, not because of the motions, but because I've been very conciliatory over the last year in not insisting that my legislation take precedence. I've been trying to work behind the scenes with everybody to ensure that we have a chance to travel and a chance to look at the young farmers report. And when it came time to prolong debate and have a bit of an extension so we could at least hear the witnesses who were turned away at the door, these guys shut it down. I find that unacceptable as far as the democratic process is concerned, and that should be down on the record.

I don't think it's really amusing, Brian, to be honest with you.

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

What's not amusing is that it's not factual, Alex. I know you're an honest man, but the sorry part is that you don't understand what they did to you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

We're going to have a speaking order.

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

I understand perfectly what happened.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Mr. Easter, you're next on the speakers' list.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to confirm and agree with what Alex said on his bill. He was used and abused, in my view—

[An hon. member]

By the opposition.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

No, by the government members. There's no question about it.

Mr. Chair, on the motions, I heard what Mr. Lemieux had to say, but there is a difficulty, and that is when we are doing a study that's taking an extended period of time, things happen in the agriculture sector meantime. Things come up that are of an emergency nature. That's why it's important to be able to put motions forward. When these were put forward, they were timely in trying to give the government some direction. So it is important that we be able to use motions, because things do come up.

Just on the list of motions, there are a number that are in my name that I'd like to take off. The first one on the big sheet, the hog industry one, I believe we're going to deal with via the steering committee report, so that one can be taken off. The one on the livestock sector of Canada can also be taken off, because—

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Mr. Easter, could you tell us what page that is on?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It is on page 1. I'm going through in order. There are about four of mine that I think can come off.

The hog industry one is dealt with in the steering committee report. The livestock sector is partially dealt with, and that's at the top of page 2.

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

A point of order, Chair.

Could you just confirm with Mr. Easter that when he says “taken off” he means that he's withdrawing his motion?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

If you want the word “withdraw”, that's fine.

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

I just wanted to understand. Are we putting it on ice, or does it mean we're withdrawing it?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Good stuff is happening here.

Step up to the plate.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

The Weatherill report I'll leave on.

Going to page 4, the advanced payment program, that's in the steering committee report, so I'll withdraw it. I'll withdraw the one on management of imported food safety as well.

Four motions are withdrawn.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Does anybody else want to remove any of their motions?

Okay, go ahead, Mr. Bellavance.

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

I've already told the committee that I do not intend to withdraw my motion on the SRMs. Obviously, there were changes. The government has made announcements. I just said that I did not intend to discuss it at the moment. I do not want to put it on the table; so let's set it aside.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Let's move on.

We'll go to Mr. Storseth.

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

I don't want to ruin the moment, but I'd like to correct the record for Mr. Atamanenko. The fact of the matter is that our side had an agreement. We were willing to go forward with more witnesses. From my understanding, you then decided to flip over to whatever Mr. Easter was proposing, and our side stuck to our principal position.

The real question here is what the Liberal Party's position is. They're the ones who gutted your bill. You knew our position the entire time. They are the ones here at committee who said we needed to see witnesses, and in the House they voted for it but made sure they didn't have enough members to show up to do anything. Nobody in the country knows the Liberal Party of Canada's position on your bill because they've been on both sides of the issue.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Mark Eyking]

Mr. Storseth, I really think we should move on to the motions. You are kind of poisoning the well here if we keep talking about what happened in the past. I'm talking about the future here.

Is there agreement that we move to...?