Evidence of meeting #25 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vehicles.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
That takes unanimous consent, then.
Do we have unanimous consent to move the motion? Shall I give you another minute or two to figure this out? Okay.
We will suspend.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
I'm sorry for the confusion.
I'll ask the clerk to resume so that we can get a better understanding of what was done, what is being done and where we're going. This way everything can be cleared up and we can move forward.
Mr. Clerk.
The Clerk
Ms. Anstey, just to clarify, is the motion that you moved the one for which you gave notice last week? It was regarding plastics.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
Okay. Are we ready for debate?
Mr. Grant, you were saying something about our guests. We were ready to let them go, since we're going to be moving into debating this motion. Is that unanimous?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
I'd like to thank our guests for being here today. I would say “the officials”, but they are guests.
You are now free to go.
Mr. Bexte, I see your hand was up first. Go ahead.
Conservative
David Bexte Conservative Bow River, AB
Thank you, Chair.
I would implore everybody, all the members of the committee, to support this motion. It's important that we understand if there are inconsistencies in process or inconsistencies in regulation that can lead to the perception of hypocrisy. It puts efforts by our enterprises at odds with each other. We want to avoid counterproductivity by design. Further to this, it allows us to investigate if there were gaps because of oversight in how it was connected and to pursue looking for unintended consequences.
I absolutely implore that we support this motion.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
If we can make amendments, would you allow an amendment to the motion?
Conservative
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
I'd move an amendment to the language around “at least two meetings”. I'm just very mindful that we have about 20 or so meetings left until summer, and two on this topic, out of 20 meetings, would be 10% of our meetings.
We have the study on the industrial carbon price, which we know is one of the most effective climate mitigation policies. According to the Canadian Climate Institute, it's the number one policy to reduce our emissions, and the Canadian Climate Institute is very credible. We've had this study continuously being pushed over, so I'm very mindful of the amount of time this study will take.
It will further delay the industrial carbon price study—for which, by the way, you have submitted a long list of witnesses and the Bloc has submitted a long list of witnesses, and so have we. I think there's a lot of interest in that topic. We might not all agree on the policy framework, but I think there's strong interest there. I'm just concerned that this study here will take some valuable time.
I'm sorry; I think I learned from wise MPs such as Mr. Leslie about the limited amount of time we have in committees and how things move. Yes, that's right; I did call him wise, and that's on the record. I will compliment him. He does have certain wisdom, so I'll give him that.
I'm just mindful about the two days. I'd bring an amendment to bring the two days down to just one hour. I think we can do this in one hour, a half-day. That's my amendment.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
That's correct. I'm moving an amendment to change the wording from two meeting days to one half of a meeting day.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
Is there debate on that?
Before I get there, based on how the motion was written, the clerk is saying that there's no official time frame as to when this should be coming. It will not displace anything else before the end of the session.
I'm reading the motion. It can be when we come back in September. It won't be before September. That's just to be clear on that.
We're going to debate the amendment now.
Liberal
Bruce Fanjoy Liberal Carleton, ON
I have a point of order.
Can you remind the committee who makes the decision and how the decision is made as to what order we follow in our studies? I think this is an important matter.
The Clerk
The committee has authority to plan all of its business. In the absence of any explicit decision by the committee, the chair is also empowered in his administrative role to give instruction.
As a matter of course, I prepare a calendar of the committee's program of activity that is distributed to all members. If ever there's an activity planned or proposed for a date and there is no decision by the committee or instruction from the chair, then it says “not confirmed” at the top, so it's within the committee's power to determine the schedule of its own activities.
I hope that answers your question, sir.
Liberal
Bruce Fanjoy Liberal Carleton, ON
Just for further clarification, is the default order “first in, first out”? If a study has already been agreed upon by the committee, it would take precedence over any additional studies. They would get into a queue. Is that correct?
The Clerk
I don't take a default approach when it comes to the committee's planning of activities. If the committee agrees to undertake a new activity, then I will consult with the chair at the earliest opportunity to determine a good time to schedule a new study.
