Environment Committee on May 31st, 2007

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I support the principle of the motion. I do not believe that the last committee meeting allowed us to fully study the issue of government expenses concerning climate change. That was perhaps because there were two items on the agenda: the plan to fight against climate change and expenditures. We obviously did not get to the bottom of things as far as expenditures are concerned at the last meeting. I'm not criticizing the minister, because the questions posed by Mr. McGuinty were very detailed and no doubt the senior officials will have to testify in order to allow us to study the issue of climate change-related expenditures more closely.

I support the principle of the motion, but the date of June 5 poses a problem for me. I know that Mr. Warawa, Mr. Cullen and Mr. Godfrey will be in Germany. As for myself, I will not be here for personal and professional reasons. I would move an amendment to the motion which would aim at these witnesses appearing on Thursday June 7, 2007 instead. In any case, we may only have one more committee meeting; we will see what happens. I think we need to get to the bottom of things and hear from the senior officials in order to get some clarification. The Bloc will support the motion if our amendment is accepted by Mr. McGuinty.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bigras.

I see that you moved a motion to amend. We will now debate the amendment.

Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I have a clarification, Chair, before I speak to the amendment. Was it a friendly amendment that was accepted, or is it an amendment I'll be speaking to?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

What we're debating is whether we go from the 5th to the 7th, and I guess Mr. Warawa was asking whether that was acceptable to Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Yes, I'm very supportive of the notion, as a friendly amendment, to move it to either the next day, the 6th, or it could be the 7th, but it certainly can't be any later than the 7th.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Technically, we have to deal with the amendment either way. The motion to amend is to go to the 7th, and what you're saying is that you're open to that or something else. That's what you're saying. We have to vote on the motion in any case, but we have a list—

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

I have a point of order.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Yes, Mr. Godfrey.

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

Just to make sure, and I hope the clerk knows the answer to this, since we're going to be voting on the entire estimates package at 10 o'clock on the 7th, as I understand it, is there any technical reason that running it up so close to the deadline with these estimates puts us in any problematic area? I would assume that if we made no changes—and the only kind of changes we could make would be to reduce—and if it just went through as is, that wouldn't be a problem. But to your knowledge, is there any potential difficulty with taking it as late as the 7th, given the fact we're going to vote on the whole thing on the evening of the 7th?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I'm going to ask the clerk to explain his answer to this question.

[The Clerk]

There is an issue. What you're referring to, I think, Mr. Godfrey, is Standing Order 81.4, paragraphs (b) and (c).

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

Precisely, but I didn't want to clutter up the conversation with all those numbers.

[The Clerk]

The leader of the opposition has requested, and from my understanding it was adopted yesterday in the House, that consideration of the main estimates for the environment committee be extended beyond May 31, at which point they otherwise would have been deemed reported back. The new deadline can be viewed, I guess, as to some extent still up in the air, because the committee on the extension would have up to ten extra sitting days to consider the main estimates. However depending when the last allotted day is, which is basically the last opposition day of the current supply period, this committee would have the opportunity to report the main estimates back up until the day immediately preceding the last allotted day.

I myself don't have confirmation when that last allotted day is; I'm not sure whether the government has set it officially yet. But for example, if it were to be on Thursday the 7th, the main estimates would be deemed reported back automatically to the House. So the last opportunity the committee would have, if in fact the last allotted day is on the 7th, would be to consider the main estimates no later than the day immediately preceding that, which would be the 6th of June.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

What you're saying is that if, for example, hypothetically we all were pretty confident that it were going to be next Thursday, our last opportunity to do it would be next Wednesday.

Mr. Godfrey, you're on a point of order?

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

Absolutely.

My understanding is that the government has indicated that the last opposition day that comes to us, which is what we're talking about, will be on Thursday the 7th. That's exactly the point I was trying to get at.

For technical reasons, we should then perhaps change the amendment to make it the afternoon of the 6th, which is not a time we normally meet, but it allows us to fulfil what you suggest. Otherwise, we don't have any authority on the 7th.

I will ask Mr. Bigras.

Technically, we can either—

Mr. Bigras, I don't know if you want to change the date, since—

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

Are you referring June 6? It would not be possible on June 7 because that is an opposition day.

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

Okay.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Mr. Godfrey, we also have to consider the fact that we already agreed that the steering committee will sit on June 6.

Excuse me. Mr. Godfrey?

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

I'm sorry, we're just sorting out a little detail here.

Does it really matter, then, whether we do it on the 6th or the 7th?

We should go with the 6th? Okay.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

As I said, we already decided that the steering committee would sit on Wednesday at 3:30 p.m. We should continue this discussion, and we can obviously change the day the steering committee meets, but we do have to keep that fact in mind.

Mr. Bigras.

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

I will read exactly what you have just said. We have just said that a meeting of the steering committee has been scheduled. I think June 6 is a bit early, unless the Liberals announce today that the opposition day will be on the environment. I don't know why having the meeting on this issue on June 7 is a problem even if there is an opposition day in the House of Commons that Thursday. Of course, if the opposition day was on the environment, I admit that could cause certain problems. However, we don't know what the subject of the opposition day will be; it could be a subject which a committee member may be called upon to speak to in the House in his or her capacity as critic, or in any other capacity. I think the meeting should be held on June 7. We will only support the motion on that condition. We could make sure that all committee members are present to fully review the issue, as per McGuinty's wish, and we would accommodate everyone's schedules. I did not say so earlier, but this is a friendly amendment to Mr. McGuinty's motion.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you, Mr. Bigras.

The clerk has just told me that the main estimates will not be studied by the committee next Thursday if that day is designated as an opposition day. If that turns out to be the case, and we arrive here on Thursday, but the main estimates are not available to us, it will be for that reason.

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

I don't see any conflict, unless I'm told that people would like to... What I take from the Liberal motion is that they simply want more details about government expenses for 2006-07. If they want more information and if that information is already public, I don't see how that could affect the work of our committee. The Liberals simply want more details. I don't see how that is contradictory.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I'm going to go back to Mr. Godfrey just for a quick explanation and then I'm going to Mr. Warawa.

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

Just to make it clear, one of the potential opposition day motions.... We know first of all that next Thursday will be an opposition day. The house leaders have agreed to that being a Liberal opposition day. Secondly, one of the motions on the order paper has to do with climate change and the G-8 meeting. I'm not saying, because it's not up to me, that this will be the motion we will put forward for opposition day.

Nevertheless, the opposition day may be on the G8 meeting and climate change. Indeed, the timing is right. It's not up to me to speak to the issue, but the fact remains that Mr. Bigras has concerns. I cannot guarantee that it will not be on the order paper for the opposition day.