Evidence of meeting #6 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.
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Exactly. Thank you again, Mr. Calkins.
Now we'll go to the vote on the amended amendment.
(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Mr. Johns, I see you have your hand up to speak to the amended motion of Mr. Williamson.
5:40 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Yes.
Mr. Chair, I move that we strike out “that the committee suspend future meetings of its current study until the Minister appears, as requested, with the department officials requested.”
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
5:40 p.m.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Thank you, Chair.
Thanks, Mr. Johns, for proposing that. However, as used as I am to the NDP throwing a lifeline to the Liberals these days, any notion that we should remove this clause is simply going to put the committee in the unfortunate position of having no leverage to ask the minister to come.
As the committee members all know, ministers will come only if they so choose. They're not compelled in any way, shape or form. This clause is there as an effort to compel the minister with a consequence if she does not appear before the committee, which is the suspension of this study.
Now, I don't know, maybe I'm being facetious and maybe the minister will come in good faith before the committee prior to November 20, but I would not wager that it's improbable that the minister would find other places to be—perhaps looking for Waldo, who is also missing—and not appearing at the committee before November 20.
If we strike this clause, then we will simply continue on with where we are right now, with no knowledge from her or from her department officials as to what their position is, what their knowledge is or what their experience is before this committee as we continue on our journey, which would basically undermine the entire notion of the minister and department officials coming here in the first place.
I don't know why, Gord, as a member of an official opposition party, you wouldn't want to hear from the minister and from the department officials. I wouldn't presume to impugn your motivations, but it would seem to me that this would only serve to weaken the motion, and I don't know why that would happen.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Johns, use your “raise hand” button. You're not on the list, and I can see you're anxious to speak, Gord. Hit “participants” and you'll get a whole list of names there, and then on the bottom right corner it says “raise hand”.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Gord, I would urge you to reconsider this, not because I think you don't have a desire to hear from the minister and not because I think you don't want this committee to function, but I do believe my colleague Mr. Calkins is correct that there is a very good chance the minister might not show if there's no leverage.
This will be three long weeks now before the minister will appear—all of this week, possibly the recess week and then the week after that. There will be multiple opportunities for the minister, and should she not appear, there will be no consequence, except I can tell you what one consequence would be—I'll be back at the next meeting with another motion.
Unfortunately, that will again disrupt our witnesses, because I, like most people in Atlantic Canada, want to hear from Minister Jordan, and she has not been doing her job. She has appointed a special envoy to continue dialogue with first nations and to begin discussions with traditional fishers. But she has been invisible out east. She has been invisible in Parliament, and now she's invisible for this committee.
Three weeks is a long time, and I hope you'll consider that we do need leverage. I ask you with all sincerity and goodwill to consider keeping the leverage we have in this motion.
Thank you.
5:45 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
First, I'm going to respond to a couple of things here, having heard the Conservatives trying to frame me as giving a lifeline to the Liberals here.
First of all, it is not this committee's job to replace the process that's going on. That is a nation-to-nation process, and this committee cannot undermine that process. I cannot underscore that more.
Second, having the minister come and testify should not mean suspending the work of this committee. We have a motion with an amended date of November 20 directing the minister and the department to come to testify to this committee. I know that the Conservatives like to take these partisan shots that I'm giving lifelines and not wanting the minister to be here. That couldn't be further from the truth.
It's actually peculiar that they would put this motion forward in the middle of very important testimony—testimony that they clearly didn't want to hear—that stands up for the rights of indigenous people in this country. They say they stand up for these rights, but when they were in government they spent millions of dollars—in the tens of millions of dollars—fighting against the rights of the very people of my riding to a fishery that were supported in the courts of this country.
I find it shameful—
5:45 p.m.
NDP
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
It's all right, Mr. Chair. I simply thought we were moving away from the subject and I wanted to return to it.
5:45 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Mr. Chair, my motion stands, or the amendment stands.
I appreciate the Conservatives putting forward a motion to invite the minister and the department, which we wholeheartedly support. We do not believe that this committee has a right or a role to undermine a very important process that is happening right now with the minister and that nation.
I want to see the minister here before this committee. This motion, when it's passed, is calling on the minister to testify before this committee. It doesn't change anything. It really doesn't. Therefore, I'm standing with the motion that I put forward, or the amendment.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
I'm going to support MP Johns' motion for the reason that the Atlantic is watching. People are watching this. People care about this. For the Conservatives to threaten to filibuster witnesses at every single meeting when the Mi'kmaq nation is watching and when the fishermen are watching....
There's a lot at stake here, and we're trying to get it right, so for you to make those threats.... My family is down there fishing. These are my people, my community members. They're also fishermen who are scared. For you to sit there and say that you're going to threaten to filibuster every time we bring witnesses until the minister comes in is shameful.
5:50 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Mr. Chair, I wonder if Mr. Johns' amendment is in order given that it distorts the motion. I am asking for your opinion.
November 2nd, 2020 / 5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC
Mr. Speaker, I just want to reiterate that despite the accusations from our Conservative friends, I can assure the committee members.... This is my second go-round on the fisheries and oceans committee, and we've been fortunate enough to avoid some of this political hackery in the past, having done work together on a number of great motions. In fact, traditionally this is one of the most productive committees of Parliament in terms of addressing issues right across the country.
I just want to give the members of this committee the assurance that you do not require leverage. The minister is happy to appear. She is seized with this issue.
I'll be happy to support Gord's amendment. I share his frustration that the wonderful testimony that was happening today was obstructed by the Conservatives. I am hoping that this will not happen in the future, because this is an important study, and important not just to Atlantic Canada but to all of Canada.
This leverage is simply unnecessary, so I would emphasize that members of the committee should support Gord's amendment.