Environment Committee on Oct. 31st, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Many chairs and members do, however, believe that the chair has this authority, and a number of chairs have acted on that belief.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

You mean the authority to conclude the meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

That's right, to conclude the meeting, but I have ruled that we are carrying on. We are now close to a compromise, and I trust that is more important than the point of order in helping this committee to function well, so I am going to carry on with the negotiations. I believe we have the wording now.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I think we are all on the same page. We want this thing to be out of committee and back to the House before the Christmas break, so we're now discussing a way of expressing that, because we know that the session comes to an end in mid-December. We want it out of committee and reported back to the House before the Christmas break.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I would hate to see us tie our hands by a set deadline, but if Mr. Warawa can agree to that deadline, then--

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

He's agreed to the principle. We're just trying to find a way of expressing it that doesn't inadvertently tie us up so we finish on the last day and can't get it back to the House. That's the only concern.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

We're soon going to need to get this wording down clearly. We have had several versions.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I have clear wording, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Could we please listen to the wording that Mr. Rodriguez is proposing and then go from there?

Mr. Rodriguez, you have the floor.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I propose we simply take the motion and replace “November 21” with “December 5” and “November 23” with “December 7”, which brings us almost to the Christmas break. I think that's a very good compromise.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Christmas break starts on December 15. I would prefer that those dates be set two days from now at our Thursday meeting so that we'll have a good opportunity to provide a work plan. It may be that the dates you're proposing work fine, but then again we may need a little more time. In the spirit of ending on December 12 or 14, the last week before the committee does its work and forwards it to the House, we could do our clause-by-clause study on December 12 or December 14. I think that's what I would prefer at this point, but I would prefer first that we deal with this on Thursday. However, if you want your motion changed today and dealt with today, and if you want to put in specific dates, I don't think it's necessary for us to do it on Thursday; you could just end the motion with the idea that we begin the bill no later than Thursday, November 2, which I think was the original proposal from Mr. Godfrey.

Would you not be comfortable with that?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Not really, no, but we're getting there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Bigras, do you have some constructive additions?

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I think we agree on one thing: the bill needs to be reported back to the House before the Christmas period. We all agree on that. We still need to set the dates. My fear, with respect to December 12 and 15, is that the work of the House will have already been adjourned. Thus, there is a risk that, unless I am mistaken, we would not be able to get back to our work until the end of January, hence almost in February.

I suggest instead that we do a clause-by-clause study of the bill no later than December 5 and report on December 7. This would ensure that the bill is reported back in time, in the form in which the committee has submitted it. I feel that the December 14 date is very risky.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Just so you understand, you know it has to be reported back to the House by February. That doesn't mean it's dealt...we will have fulfilled that commitment.

I believe Mr. Warawa is just consulting. We'll let him answer your comments, Mr. Bigras.

While we're waiting, Mr. Vellacott, disorder is the only reason--the only way--that I can stop the meeting. Basically, our clerk's boss has said that the time is a working document. The time is not written in stone; it's by agreement of the committee, and we did have agreement by majority to carry on.

I could read you this entire paragraph on the rules for disorder. The chief clerk is watching this proceeding right now, as many other viewers are, and I don't believe there is the level of disorder, as described here in this paragraph, that would give me the authority to stop this meeting.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

What are you citing from?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I'm citing from chapter 20, page 858, of House of Commons Procedures and Practice, by Marleau and Montpetit, the heading being “Disorder and Misconduct”.

Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

On Mr. Rodriguez' proposal, could you clarify that for me, please?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

With the input from Mr. Bigras?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Correct.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

It is team work, Mr. Chairman. All that is involved in the motion is replacing the November 21 date for the clause-by-clause study of the bill with the December 5 date, and to replace the following date, November 23, with December 7. That would take us almost to the end of the time remaining to us. We have a satisfactory extension of the number of hours. I think this is a good compromise on our part. If necessary, we can add more hours.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Rodriguez, Mr. Warawa says he agrees with that.

Does anyone else have any comments or additions? I almost hate to ask.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Do you need unanimous consent for that?

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Just consent to withdraw the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

We need consent to withdraw the original amendment. Do we have anyone objecting?