Evidence of meeting #43 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was point.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
On the amendment to clause 12, shall we stand that, and clause 12?
5:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
No.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
No? Okay. So we won't.
We're now on debate on the words “registered Canadian-controlled”.
Mr. Woodworth.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
It probably goes without saying, because I've said it before, but I hope everyone appreciates that this amendment would introduce another inconsistency into this bill. I don't know if we've reached it anywhere else yet, as I haven't had time to look....
Oh, yes, in clause 10, for example, we've referred to just “entities”, so now we're creating yet another inconsistency.
Although I very much sympathize with what Mr. Scarpaleggia is trying to do, this bill is just so flawed. I wish we could send it back for proper drafting, if nothing else. But I guess we're not going to do that. I don't think I can support introducing yet another inconsistency into the language of this bill, even though I think Mr. Scarpaleggia is on the right track.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
I did raise my hand at the same time as Mr. Woodworth did.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Chair, we heard from the analyst that she could not provide guidance on this. And what we see being developed here is a “Frankenbill”.
I went back and reviewed some of the testimony we had. We were told by the experts that this bill should be set aside. Why? Well, because it was so badly flawed that it was not amendable.
Who said that, Chair? It was the vice-president of policy and environment for CAPP. He said, “In our view, Bill C-469 is not good policy for Canada.”
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Order. There are too many conversations going. Order.
Please continue.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
He went on to say, “We believe it is fundamentally flawed and we respectfully submit that it cannot be amended into good policy.”
December 15th, 2010 / 5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Actually, every witness that we heard from that did not have...would not be benefiting from Bill C-469. Every witness said the bill should be set aside.
You, Chair, clarified that when we had the Canadian Hydropower Association. You asked Mr. Jacob Irving. And they also represent Hydro-Québec.
You said:I just want one clarification as chair. In your presentation and in your responses, you definitely had reservations about the bill. Would the Canadian Hydropower Association prefer that the bill be set aside or be amended?
Mr. Jacob Irving responded, saying: There is probably opportunity for amendment, but it depends. Ideally one would like to see amendments come through that deal with all of our issues, and then that's fine. But if those amendments don't come to the fore...And that's what we're seeing already here. They're creating a bill that is not based on expert advice. They're not wanting a clause to be set aside, but they want to move forward.
So then he went on to say, “...setting the bill aside would have to be the logical choice.”
And Chair, yet we forge ahead. I think we should have listened to the advice of the witnesses and set the bill aside. It is so badly flawed. Clause by clause by clause, Mr. Chair, the bill is turning out to be a Frankenbill.
I think at the first opportunity--
5:25 p.m.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
I would like to know what we are discussing presently. Are we discussing a clause of the bill or an amendment? I cannot see the relevance of what the gentleman is saying.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
We need to be speaking to the amendment by Mr. Scarpaleggia, which is “registered Canadian-controlled”. We are getting rather broad, about the entire bill. Let's stay focused on the amendment to clause 12.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Chair, the reason I believe it is relevant—
Am I speaking to the motion or am I speaking to some point of order?
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
I made a ruling that I wanted to be.... You were getting fairly wide-ranging, in my opinion. I'm asking you to come back to the amendment.
On a point of order, we have Mr. Woodworth.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Surely, Mr. Chair, if Mr. Warawa wants to speak to the point of order before you rule against him, he should be given an opportunity.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
As you can see in the House, many times the Speaker will make a ruling, even though there are other people who still wish to get up on a point of order. I don't have to hear everyone on a point of order to make a decision. So I made a decision, and you can challenge that decision, if you so choose.