Evidence of meeting #29 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 project.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Bruce Fanjoy Liberal Carleton, ON
Thank you.
We seem to be on another fishing expedition, Mr. Leslie. You'll be pleased about that.
I'm wondering what is gained by producing all the expenses in great detail of the net-zero advisory board. These are subject to the usual checks and balances, including auditing. It seems like an unnecessary waste of time for this committee. If there's a desire to have the witnesses attend and speak to their experience, that's one thing, but I think the focus should be there and not on all this extraneous data that is readily available anyway.
No one here is asking for the Conservative Party to provide detailed expenses on travel and hospitality for their recent leadership review in Calgary. It does cost money for people to do work. We understand that. Let's keep the focus on what can be productive and what is simply a fishing expedition.
Conservative
Branden Leslie Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Despite all that, I think it's entirely reasonable. We did hear from the minister today that she expects that next week, I believe, she'll be meeting, for what sounded like maybe the first time, with the board, which has been significantly reduced in size. I think it's entirely reasonable—for a board from which apparently the co-chairs allege that they had to resign because their opinions were being ignored and not listened to by this government as it continually rolled back its own environmental policies aimed at achieving its own environmental targets—that we ask for a reasonable set of information.
I appreciate the friendly idea from our colleague across the way to expand that to 45 days and allow it to be in line with an Order Paper question to provide the details. It's most important that they appear for one hour. I think having the two people who were in the media discussing their departure from this advisory board is a great opportunity to understand why that happened and for the government to be able to better understand how the body can be a functioning body that provides reasonable advice to the minister.
As environmentalists on this committee, I would have to assume that you couldn't find a reason to disagree with having a functioning net-zero advisory body.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
It brings me a lot of joy to hear my colleague from Manitoba say that he's an environmentalist on this committee.
Thank you for admitting your passion for the environment and for this committee.
I may be going back to fishing. I'm looking at my colleague from Newfoundland, who I hope one day will invite us to her beautiful province to actually go fishing, rather than on fishing expeditions in this committee. Maybe I digress.
I have a question about the intention. I'm going to the third paragraph. I think that's what my colleague from Carleton was alluding to earlier with the use of the word “fishing”—no offence to Alberta. There are fewer lakes. I'm on an island, so I can literally go fishing in Rivière des Prairies. I digress again.
Conservative
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
That's another question. You might not want to eat it.
My question is about the intent of getting the documentation around expenditures for travel, for hospitality, for venue, for catering and for administrative expenses. What are you trying to get with that? Second, maybe it's a dumb question, but isn't that information already public, or should it be public?
I'd like a response as to what you are trying to get from that third paragraph, if I may.
Bloc
Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Chair, I would agree to align the number of days with the access to information request time frames. That's an amendment that my colleague wants to propose later. I see that it's okay with you. I have no issue with transparency. I think we're here to ensure that. It's a matter of facilitating access to the documentation. Some people call it a fishing expedition; I call it transparency and accountability, so we can do our work properly.
However, I would propose an amendment. In the first paragraph, after “to appear for one hour”, I would specify the date—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
Excuse me, I have no objection to your moving your amendment, but an amendment has already been moved. It should instead—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
No, it wasn't moved. We're still on that amendment, so we can't bring forward another amendment to the 45 days. That's what we suggested as an amendment, and I don't have any conclusion to that.
There is already an amendment to propose a period of 45 days, but we haven't voted on that amendment. Before you move your amendment—
Bloc
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
On a point of clarification, if it's a friendly amendment, do we still go through the process of voting on it?
Liberal
Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS
Okay, then I propose the amendment of changing, in both paragraph 2 and paragraph 3, the number of days from 30 to 45.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
We have on the floor now an official amendment.
Is there any further debate on that amendment?
All those in favour? All those opposed?
(Amendment agreed to)
Mr. Bonin, you have the floor.
Bloc
Patrick Bonin Bloc Repentigny, QC
I propose the following amendment. In the first paragraph, after “Simon Donner and Catherine Abreu, to appear for one hour”, I would add “on March 26”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
Mr. Bonin, the clerk informs me that the House is not sitting on Friday, March 27.
Bloc
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Angelo Iacono
If we're sure that the committee will meet on March 26, we can proceed. However, we have heard that March 26 might be treated like a Friday. I'm not sure of that yet.
Mr. St‑Pierre, you have the floor.
Liberal
Eric St-Pierre Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
I have a comment on my colleague's amendment. It's my opinion. There have been other motions, for example the one from the Bloc Québécois on the industrial carbon tax. There's some urgency to move on that. I have a bit of a concern about the schedule. Today is our last workday of the week. We'll then spend a week in our ridings. After that, we'll come back and have two committee meetings. Then, we'll return around mid‑April. I thought there was some urgency with respect to the industrial carbon tax. This may be a question for my colleague about the urgency of having these witnesses appear on March 26. Is it realistic? Can you tell us why it's important for it to be on March 26?
I'm asking given all the other motions that have been put forward and all the other things we need to work on. I'd like to hear your point of view on this.
