Evidence of meeting #131 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I don't know.
Ms. Collins, have you been having conversations with the transport committee?
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
My understanding is that they have not agreed to conduct a study on the contamination in Fort Chipewyan. We've heard from them that they have requested documents, which I think is important. It makes sense for the transport committee to request documents around something to do with the transportation docket. I think it's also really in line with our mandate, especially since we recently passed a bill on environmental racism, that we study what happened when it comes to the information shared or not shared with the nations impacted by this and that we look at the health and environmental impacts.
Liberal
Liberal
Adam van Koeverden Liberal Milton, ON
I apologize. I couldn't agree more with Ms. Collins. I should have asked, has the committee received word? That's what is the underpinning of this question. If the committee has received word from the other committee on—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I'll tell you what I know. It's not maybe as clear as one would like. I know that the transport committee has been discussing it. My sense is that it's looking pretty good that they will do a study, but no motion has been passed. I'm told that—
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
It hasn't been tabled either. I think they're working it out. They're working it out in the corridors of power, as it were.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Maybe you can clarify again, Mr. Chair, that our motion, which we duly passed in committee business, as we normally should with these motions—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
It was quite clear and duly passed, and the transport committee has not passed a motion.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
Yes, we are engaging in the study. We've committed to it. My deep commitment to these three nations who are impacted is to make sure that the Liberals don't avoid accountability, that they don't use any tools in this House to avoid an investigation into what happened in Fort Chipewyan.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I understand we have your amendment in front of us in black and white.
I assume you're done, Ms. Collins.
Mr. Leslie.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would say, broadly speaking, I think we agree with the proposed amendment from our NDP colleague. It is to me very disappointing that the parliamentary secretary of environment has no idea what the transportation committee is doing on such an important issue that relates directly to the environment, but I appreciate a bit of an update from you there, Mr. Chair, in terms of what seems to me to be the transportation committee fluffing this off. I think we did pass a motion. When this committee passed a motion, that's, in my view anyway, the main reason that we would support this NDP amendment to this new motion on a prestudy for Bill C-73.
As I was saying a little earlier regarding the prestudy broadly, I think we should follow the proper order of procedures of how this place has worked. My hope is that by perhaps outlining as per the proposed changes from my NDP colleague that by the time November 27 rolls around, hopefully sooner, the government will acknowledge the will of Parliament, the will of their Liberal, now non-partisan Speaker, who has ruled that we have, as members, had our parliamentary privilege breached when we collectively—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I don't know how relevant that is to this amendment, Mr. Leslie, to be honest with you.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
That's understandable, but let me get there, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
We as members have privileges in this place, in this committee, in this House, and we decided that we wanted to see documents. The reason that we have not seen a speech from the minister on Bill C-73, I assume my Liberal government colleagues would complain, is that dastardly Conservatives and all opposition members are asking, just like veterans, for more than they can give. In this case it's legal documents that may show potential criminal activity, as outlined by the Auditor General, to the tune of nearly $390 million.
They may take that position, but my hope is that by the time this proposed new amended motion rolls around, the House may be moving. We may have heard from Minister Guilbeault, the tabling sponsor of the legislation, to better understand the full context.
My concerns remain very much the same, that due to the obstinance of this Liberal government we will not have the documents turned over to the law clerk and then, therefore, on to the RCMP for their consideration as to whether or not criminal activities may have occurred.
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
My understanding is that while the amendment talks about the contaminated transport dock study that will come after one session of the net-zero accelerator session, this doesn't seem like it is on topic. I would implore—
NDP
Laurel Collins NDP Victoria, BC
We could vote on this really quickly, and then he could filibuster the main motion for as long as he wants.
Liberal
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
The gist of my comments, Mr. Chair, is that while I agree with the general intent of my NDP colleague's amendment to this motion, we can and must prepare ourselves for the high likelihood that the Liberals will continue to hide the documents, and therefore the House will not progress, and we'll not have the main speech from the minister—