Evidence of meeting #25 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Mr. Chair, now that we're in committee business, I would like to present the following motion. I move:
That, in light of new regulations the government has implemented for owner operator and fleet separation in Quebec and Atlantic Canada, and the need to ensure that ownership and licence transfers continue to be transparent, that the committee undertake a study examining the process and structure for corporate offshore licences and quota transfers; that the committee receive witness testimony from officials from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and industry representatives; that the committee also accept written briefs from individuals or organizations who wish to submit input.
Mr. Chair, I would like to make a minor amendment to this: that the committee hold two two-hour meetings.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I don't know if we have to deal with an amendment separately. Do we consider it?
I'm being told to do the amendment first.
Please repeat it.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
The amendment reads, “That the committee hold two two-hour meetings”.
Conservative
Richard Bragdon Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Mr. Chair, I have an amendment to the motion that was circulated. I had a motion very similar to Mr. Morrissey's, but I have a couple of amendments that I would like to propose to his particular motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Mr. Morrissey has added an amendment already, so we have to deal with his amendment first. Then I'll go to you, and to anyone else who wishes to discuss it.
Everybody has heard the motion, and the amendment proposed by the mover.
Is there any discussion on the proposed amendment?
Mr. Williamson, go ahead.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
I'm wondering about the rationale for limiting it to two two-hour meetings. That seems like a pretty meaty motion to study or review the legislation, the changes, the impact on inshore fisheries and, of course, the corporate angle, which you also mentioned.
I'm curious about the limited space, which allows for a really small handful of witnesses.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
I've got a few more ideas, if you want to follow our lead.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
The two two-hour meetings are enough to study it, but I will respect the wishes of the committee.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
I'm not sure how to proceed, plus we have more motions coming from my colleague, Mr. Bragdon.
Mr. Morrissey, would you agree to table that for now, so we can figure out what we're studying here first, and then we can look at how we're going to close it off?
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Chair, it's your call, but I'd prefer that my motion be dealt with.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
The motion and the amendment have been presented, so we can't do anything further until we deal with the actual amendment, as proposed by the mover.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
I'm sorry, Mr. Morrissey. I wasn't suggesting you table your motion—far from it—just the amendment to that on the time, and we'll come back to it. I'm not suggesting you withdraw it, but we'll perhaps talk about the study and other amendments to it that might impact the length of time we want to give it. That's all.
Liberal
Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC
I just wanted clarification. I'm sorry. I didn't catch the actual wording of the amendment. Is it two meetings for two hours, or is it “at least” or “no fewer than” two meetings for two hours?
Liberal
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Thanks.
I agree with Mr. Williamson that we can just wait to hear what Mr. Bragdon has to say, because if it's going to be around Mr. Morrissey's motion and potentially expanding it or whatever, let's hear that if we can. It's probably going to give us some scope on how many meetings we have. I don't see any issue with holding off voting on how many meetings we have until we've heard from Mr. Bragdon.