Evidence of meeting #134 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was use.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, CPC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd love to get some indication from somebody across the way that they're going to support this invitation. Then we can move on as a committee.
No, I'm not seeing anything still, so I'll continue.
This is of huge interest in my constituency. For those of you who don't know this, I serve the largest constituency by population in the country, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin.
The Leduc-Nisku industrial area is one of the largest in North America. It has been hit significantly. My constituents have been hit significantly by decisions made by this government to create an environment where it's almost impossible to build pipelines in this country.
I can guarantee that my constituents want us to hear from the Minister of Environment in regard to the supplementary estimates. They want us to have the opportunity as parliamentarians from all sides to ask questions.
It's not only the pipeline policy of this government that is having a negative effect; compounding it in their minds are the massive deficits that are being run up right now—over $60 billion in deficits, with no end in sight.
Do you know what they come back to? Time and time again they come back to the previous Trudeau era of the 1970s and early 1980s. What were the things that led to the devastating cuts that wound up happening in the mid- to late 1990s under the Chrétien government? It was the $35 billion in transfers that were cut from health care, social services and education. What was it that caused those cuts in the first place? Some might say it was 14 out of 15 years of deficits run by the original Trudeau government in the 1970s and 1980s. Some might say that it had something to do with the national energy program of 1982 which devastated the oil industry in Canada. That economic collapse led to rising interest rates that caused the debt to balloon out of control.
Some might say that they're very concerned, taking a look at the fiscal environment we have right now, where it seems like we're doing exactly the same thing. It seems like this Trudeau government is doing the same thing that the previous Trudeau government did.
You have a circumstance where you have a government with a spending problem that is completely out of control. It's quite clear that they don't know how to deal with that spending problem, because if they did, they would have fulfilled their promise to balance the budget. It's quite clear that they're unable to do that.
One would assume that they want to do it. Every day in the House of Commons, the finance minister stands up and talks about how fantastic the economy is. There's no reason that the government couldn't and shouldn't be able to balance the budget based on revenues that they have coming in. They have increased spending by tens of billions of dollars, each and every year. There is no end in sight to that.
Here we are, sitting in the environment committee, studying $85 million in supplementary estimates. It's a committee where ministers of the environment have come for years to explain their supplementary estimates and answer questions from committee members.
You have a government where the Prime Minister has said, “As Minister, you will be held accountable for our commitment to bring a different style of leadership to government.” This is a quote from the Prime Minister. I'm not making this up. It goes on to say, “This will include: close collaboration with your colleagues; meaningful engagement with Opposition Members of Parliament, [and] Parliamentary Committees”. That's the mandate letter from the Prime Minister to the Minister of Environment. So here we are today.
The hope is when I come to the end of my time here that at least one Liberal member will put up their hand and say, “No, I don't think it's okay to adjourn the debate”, and when the vote comes, they will say, “Yes, I think it's appropriate for the environment committee to invite the Minister of Environment to come before the committee on supplementary estimates.”
It is my hope that one member of Parliament from the Liberal side will have the courage to stand behind what his own Prime Minister has promised and simply vote to invite the minister to come before the committee. If it really doesn't work within the minister's schedule, she can say no.
We may not agree on everything, Wayne, but I think most of us on our side and, I assume, on the NDP side agree that there's a principle that when you make a promise, you should stick with that promise. There were clear commitments made during the campaign, and it is important in a democracy that the minister come before the committee to defend her ask for more money. I think Canadians expect us to do our job as a committee.
Mr. Chair, could I ask who else is on the speaking list?
5:20 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
Next I have Mr. Bossio, then Mr. Warawa, then Mr. Godin, and then Mr. Stetski.
5:20 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
We have six minutes left on the clock of allocated time for the committee meeting.
5:20 p.m.
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, CPC
I want to make sure that we have time to vote.
With that, I will cede the floor to Mr. Bossio.
5:20 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
Thank you for your comments on your motion.
Mr. Bossio.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
With all due respect to my colleagues on the other side, the minister has actually been at this committee six times since becoming the minister. She has been here for all of the main estimate presentations. She has made herself available to this committee in the past, and I'm sure she will do so again in the future.
I'll leave it there. Thank you.
5:25 p.m.
Langley—Aldergrove, CPC
I'm new to the committee. I have a responsibility to ask the minister about estimates. Under our guide, our policy, committees considering estimates may invite witnesses to appear. These typically include the minister. It's reasonable to call the minister.
A week ago, when we expected the minister to come, the minister, instead of being here, was at a party, in the same building, on the same floor, in a different room. I think the minister has a responsibility to be here. It's her responsibility.
Our policy says that this process typically includes the minister. I'm hoping, as Mike has said, that the members will say that this is what is typically expected and typically done, and that the minister will be asked to come. We can't demand that the minister come, but it is for us to say that we will meet for that one hour, whenever the minister is willing to come.
Without that agreement, the message from this committee, which is dominated by Liberal members—that's the reality—is that the minister isn't going to come. The minister's not going to respect tradition. She's not going to respect what is typically expected of her. It provides a bad message, so I support the motion.
5:25 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
Okay.
Monsieur Godin, the microphone is yours.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I will be very brief because I see there is very little time left.
I simply want to say that it's an important exercise as far as expenses are concerned. As parliamentarians, we must be able to ask questions. During the 2015 campaign, the government committed to staying within budget, but it does not. It showed it once again with last week's Economic Statement.
For the sake of thoroughness, we would like to question the minister regarding unplanned overspending. These were exceptional expenses for which, unfortunately, the minister gave us no answer. We've even accepted to modify our schedule to be available to her. We know that she's busy, but we want to do our work in a very professional, conscientious, and rigorous manner.
It is disappointing to see what's happening here today. Even though, as Liberals across the table mentioned, the minister has appeared before us on six occasions, this topic should have been a priority given its importance. Unfortunately, Liberals do not give us the opportunity to ask questions.
That is the comment that I want to make, Mr. Chair.
5:25 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
Thank you, Mr. Godin.
Mr. Stetski.
5:25 p.m.
Kootenay—Columbia, NDP
Yes, just quickly, I do think it's important that the minister come when we're talking about substantial amounts of money. I also know that she's very capable of answering questions. On both of those fronts, it would be good to have her here.
5:25 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
All right.
With that, I have no more speakers on my list. We have a motion before us, so I'll call the question.
5:25 p.m.
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, CPC
I'd like a recorded vote.
(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)
5:25 p.m.
Mr. John Aldag (Cloverdale—Langley City, Lib.)
With that, we're now at the end of the meeting.
I would like to thank the Parks Canada officials for coming and providing us insight into the supplementary estimates (A) that were for Parks Canada.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you.
The meeting is adjourned.