Evidence of meeting #43 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was alto.
A video is available from Parliament.
Committee Researcher
The report will still be written in order to be ready, but parties can submit recommendations at any moment during the consideration process. If a party wants to wait, other parties can submit them as normal.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
We have agreed to a deadline. We're going to stick to the deadline of June. If they want to miss the deadline and not submit recommendations, I think that's up to them. I don't see any reason why we need to delay this to the fall.
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi, QC
I just want to say that it shouldn't be a deadline. If the parties want to submit their recommendations by June 26, they are welcome to do so. However, there should be no deadline for submitting them. That means that, if they are submitted later, even into September, there will be no problem and the recommendations will be included in the first version of the report.
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi, QC
I propose September 30 as a deadline for submitting recommendations.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Coteau
The motion is that the deadline would shift from June 26 to September 30.
Is there any debate?
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Chair, I want to point out a few interesting facts from the Liberals. I was concerned that the motions to allow us to table items would now be retroactive, and that the Liberals would know in advance when they had to table them in order to do so. However, I get the feeling that, in this case, it's more or less the opposite.
In terms of principle, the Bloc Québécois has already submitted its recommendations, so I'm going to vote against the motion.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
We've heard all the witness testimony. We're not going to be talking to other witnesses through the summer, as part of this study.
I'm sorry, Ms. Chatel. You were the one who, this winter, said that this was so important and that we had to finish this before we rose this spring because of the BRM discussions as part of the FTP meetings. Now you're saying that we should put this off until later in the fall. I don't understand your change in attitude on this.
We've listened to the witnesses. We have the testimony. We are fine submitting our recommendations at the originally agreed-upon deadline. Then, hopefully, we will have a report prepared with recommendations when we return in the fall, and we can move on to more pressing issues that I think all of us have discussed here today.
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac—Kitigan Zibi, QC
I agree with my colleague. There was, in fact, some urgency, and that's why the committee decided to send a letter. I would also like to thank all the committee members, because we did very good work, given the urgency, since discussions were supposed to take place this summer.
It's just that we Liberals would prefer to have a longer timeline and be able to present our recommendations in the fall. We don't want there to be a set deadline. We want to wait until the end of September to finalize the recommendations to be made.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Coteau
We have a motion on the floor to move the deadline from June 26 to September 30. I'm going to call the vote. This is a recorded vote.
(Motion agreed to)
The date has been changed to September 30.
Is there any more business?
Go ahead, Mr. Lemire.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Chair, the last time the motion on Alto was discussed, since we wanted to respect the witnesses, the debate was simply adjourned. It might be a good time to resume debate on the motion. That would be my suggestion. We've had conversations that indicate that this is absolutely relevant, because producers need to know what's going on and to be able to have a say before the final route is chosen. The Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food would be a good place to resume debate on the motion. That would be my suggestion.
I know that some of my colleagues wanted to speak, but the debate was adjourned by the Liberal majority. It would be a good opportunity to listen to my colleagues, since we have a bit of time ahead of us.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Coteau
Are you asking the committee to vote on the same motion we voted on at, I think, the last meeting? Was it Mr. Barlow's motion?
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
No, I would like us to resume the debate that was adjourned, quite simply.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Coteau
I'm sorry. We're scheduled for one hour. That was our agreement here today, unless we want to go into a full meeting. We were scheduled for the minister to be here. Do you want to go into a debate now about a motion?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Coteau
I'm saying we can, but....
What would you like to do? Let's hear the motion.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Yes, exactly. I can turn it back to my colleague Mr. Barlow.