Evidence of meeting #19 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
I probably will be making some amendments, Chair, but what we've seen is a tactic by the opposition, led by the NDP, on Bill C-377, a poorly written bill. They have tried to cut off any critique, any opportunity to improve the bill and then have witnesses come back and critique the amended bill.
As I said right from the beginning, Madam Gélinas' commented on how important it is to have ingredients in the bill for it to be successful. So the tactic now is to limit the amount of time we have to five minutes.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Chair, can I add a point of order? It's about relevance, Mr. Chair.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Mr. McGuinty, as the parliamentary secretary--the other people will be shorter, I know--Mr. Warawa is trying to point out to us why five minutes is not enough to speak to the amendments. I'm going to let him go on to make that point. Again, remember, it's a very broad-based bill, and I know you've heard some of these arguments before, but I would ask him to be as brief as he can, and as relevant as he can.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I guess the question I put to him again--through you, Mr. Chair--is how long does the Minister of the Environment want to continue punishing the NDP for support--
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
--in another committee on another motion? Let's just talk about the elephant in the room.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Can you talk about this privately? Why don't the two of you get together?
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I want it on the record. I want the Canadian public to know that the chief of staff to the minister was in this room earlier giving instructions to these Conservative members--
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Chair, I believe there was a point of order being raised by Mr. Watson, as Mr. McGuinty was out of order.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Unfortunately, we have a clock ticking here, and it's been constant interruptions from Mr. McGuinty and--
4:50 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
It appears they are in a hurry to get nowhere with a bad bill, and that's probably why Madame Gélinas said that she expected the federal government would have conducted economic, social, and environmental risk analyses in support of its decision to sign Kyoto in 1998. We found that little economic analysis had been completed, and the government was unable to provide evidence of detailed social, environmental, and risk analyses.
No wonder they didn't get it done. No wonder Bill C-377 will never accomplish what they're saying it will accomplish, because it's an empty bill. They only want us to talk for five minutes and then cut us off. They want to change the rules, as we've just seen, and have a recorded vote showing they are voting against the Standing Orders. They're voting against Marleau and Montpetit, and it has to be done in five minutes.
Chair, it's not democratic. It's not right. It's caused a huge problem within this committee, and each of us on this committee, as Mr. Cullen rightly pointed out, is sent here to represent our community. In my community the environment is very important. I've been very disappointed with the tactics of the opposition in changing the rules. Now their latest tactic is to limit debate. It's not right.
4:55 p.m.
An hon. member
It's a good bill.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
It is not a good bill. Only the Liberals would think Bill C-377 is a good bill. The bill is not good, and we've heard from all the witnesses. So the only way to deal with Bill C-377 is to send it back, rewrite it, bring it back in its new written form, and have it re-critiqued, have the witnesses called back, and then maybe we can decide intellectually whether or not Bill C-377 is good.
But what we see to this point is not good. To limit our discussion to five minutes is unbelievably poor. I'm very disappointed in a motion like that, Mr. Cullen.
