Environment Committee on April 1st, 2008

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I will keep it very brief.

It's a real honour to work with a Minister of the Environment who actually is getting something done. It was very frustrating when Mr. Dion was the Minister of the Environment. Time and time again I asked him to do something on the environment and he didn't, particularly with the SE2 project, when he refused, for western Canada, to fight a big polluter that was coming. We now have a Minister of the Environment who is actively doing something on the environment, and what a wonderful, refreshing change.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. McGuinty, just as a final comment, time allocation of course could be applied by a member of this committee when they have the floor to put that motion. So that doesn't mean we can't have time allocation; it means that in the House that's how it is handled. But this is in a committee, so time allocation could come, but of course a person needs to be speaking, needs to have the floor.

Mr. Godfrey, you have a point of order.

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

My point of order is just to make sure we're clear on the amendment process, Mr. Chair. I want to make sure I have the sequence right.

This bill was first introduced in October 2006, a year and a half ago, so its contents cannot come as a complete surprise to the government. It was then starting to be discussed before Christmas, with witnesses and all the rest of it, and as a result there was a time...and maybe the clerk can refresh our memory as to when we were invited collectively to submit amendments. I've got the amendment package here, which has some from February 11, some from February 22. I want to make certain that if this bill raised serious concerns, there was over a year to think about them. There was certainly an ample period in which to submit amendments, and indeed there's been time since then, including a two-week break, to submit amendments.

In terms of the amendment process, I just want to make sure, Chair, that this bill has not come as a complete surprise to the government, that the government is not entirely without resources in Environment Canada. Did the clerk send out a notice inviting amendments? Is my memory failing me there?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

That's correct. There was a date at which amendments were accepted and of course were accepted in both official languages. I don't remember the exact date. The clerk tells us February 22 was the deadline.

Just to clarify, subamendments can be made at any time and can be put as we're discussing a particular clause. So let's suppose we get to clause 11 today and there is an amendment, and I believe it's yours, Mr. Godfrey. That amendment would be discussed, and subamendments then could be introduced in one language and we'd get them translated, and you could have subamendments to those as you went along. You cannot go back and have amendments to clause 9, because clause 9 has already been passed, so we are looking at the last phase of this bill where subamendments have to be accepted by the chair.

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

So in the case of clause 10, for example, which we only started discussing on March 31, the government members, like all members, would have received a package of amendments shortly after February 22. Had they really had a concern with that and been thoughtful and done their homework, they had over a month in which to prepare subamendments or amendments to clause 10. Would that be a fair statement?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Subamendments can be accepted at any time when the clause is being discussed, and they don't need 48 hours' notice, they don't need--

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

So if there were real, well-informed concerns, that would have been the case. All right.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

On this point of order only, Mr. McGuinty and then Mr. Warawa.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I really want to thank my colleague Mr. Godfrey for reminding everyone that the government's had months to examine this bill, but more recently--and it speaks directly to this point of order, Mr. Chair--this proposed work schedule for this committee was agreed upon in a subcommittee.

Can you refresh the memory of Canadians who are watching and tell them, yes or no, did Minister Baird's parliamentary secretary participate fully in this meeting to set the work plan with specific times and dates and agree to it 100%? In fact, this committee reversed itself and made a decision to readmit the parliamentary secretary on this very same point of order in terms of the process that was followed, Mr. Chair.

Could you let Canadians know, did the parliamentary secretary sign off on this?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

As far as clarity in scheduling is concerned, February 22 was the date at which amendments were to be in, translated, and then sent out to all members. That was done. Everybody has a copy, everybody has the reference. Our clerk referenced everything.

It was agreed to by this committee at a steering committee meeting that the parliamentary secretary become a permanent member of that steering committee in deciding an agenda. The agenda was decided upon with a couple of additions, that we would not begin any other work until Bill C-377 was completed. That was agreed to by the steering committee and agreed to by this entire committee, and it was unanimous.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Including the parliamentary secretary.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

It was unanimous within this committee, and we're now moving forward.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

So that, now, is the historical background. Everybody knows that. Everybody was here. And I believe that settles Mr. Godfrey's point of order and we have clarity.

Mr. Warawa, do you want to add some extra clarity?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Well, I think Mr. Godfrey brought up some very good points. I want to thank him.

He's quite right. Bill C-377 has been up for a long time. We raised some concerns when it was tabled, and during the second hour of debate similar points were made. Yet where is the costing?

[An hon. member]

Where are your amendments?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

That's the first point.

I think it was Mr. Vellacott yesterday who used an analogy of trying to patch up a house that is falling apart. There's dry rot in the walls and the foundation is crumbling. You don't do that. You take it down and start again. It was the Bloc that said—

[An hon. member]

That's not the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Could you answer through the chair, please.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Chair, I'm speaking to the point of order.

There has been a lot of time for the NDP to come up with a good bill. On December 11, Mr. Layton came to this committee and said the bill needed to be costed. Mr. Bramley, on the same day, said the bill needed to be costed. And I agree. Every witness group said the bill needed an impact assessment. That's what we heard. That's what needs to happen. We need to respond to what the witnesses have said. So yes, we have had a lot of time.

But the second point that Mr. Godfrey brought up was a very good point, and that's—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

A point of order is about a point of order. We have to stay on topic. I would like to go on.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Chair, please. I am speaking to Mr. Godfrey's motion. Please do not cut me off.

The second one was subamendments. The record will show that when I introduced my amendment I introduced it as a subamendment. It was you who noted that we would deal with amendments. We agreed. You're suggesting that it be done as an amendment, not a subamendment. But the record will show that it was introduced as a subamendment. Therefore, with respect to the point you've brought up, if what I introduced was a subamendment, it is in order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

A subamendment amends an amendment. But the amendment has been approved. The rules say you can't have a subamendment to an amendment that's already been voted on. We've already voted on the amendment, so you can't introduce a subamendment to the amendment. It's approved.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

And at this point we cannot introduce an amendment on clause 10 unless it's in both official languages. Is that correct?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

The committee agreed to that in the rules we laid down at the outset.