Evidence of meeting #2 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
I have sent the subamendment back to the clerk, Mr. Chair.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you.
As soon as members receive the subamendment, please let me know. Just wave or something.
I see a thumbs-up from Madame Desbiens.
11:25 a.m.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Mr. Chair, I just wanted to let you know that I did indeed receive the sub-amendment.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Chair, can I ask for a recess of a couple of minutes so we can clarify all of that? We've already voted on the subamendment. Can I ask for a five-minute recess, please?
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
We're back.
For clarification, because everybody seemed to be hung up on what exactly Mr. Arnold's subamendment to the motion was originally, I've done everything I could to try to find out. According to ParlVU, which is recording all of this and the text of what was said, this is exactly what Mr. Arnold said: “Mr. Kelloway mentioned the (C) estimates. I'm questioning whether those have been actually tabled yet. We might be presumptuous in narrowing the scope to just the (C) estimates. Would it be possible to have this added to his amendment, that we'd have the minister appear on the estimates, the mandate letter and on matters related to her department?”
That's what we voted on. If Mr. Arnold is proposing something else, it would be a new subamendment, but the first subamendment was voted on and passed on division, as I said.
Mr. Arnold, are you proposing a new subamendment?
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
The only thing I would add to it at this time—and there may be others who will propose further subamendments—is “and other matters relevant to her department” at the end of the motion.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Okay. That's the text of a new subamendment: “and other matters relevant to her department”.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I think what Mr. Arnold just said really covers what his original subamendment said. What I took to be the only substantive addition was “and matters related to her department”.
If Mr. Arnold intended for the supplementary estimates (C) to be added, that certainly negates the opportunity to do this in the first week of February, because they probably won't be tabled, and there was nothing in Mr. Arnold's original subamendment that spoke about the length of time the minister would spend at committee. The only substantive addition was the matters related to her ministry.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Yes. The subamendment would be.... I've read out what was passed on division. The new subamendment would be “and matters related to her department”. That's the new subamendment.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Okay.
Are there any other subamendments before we go back to the amendment as amended? I think it was Mr. Kelloway who made the amendment originally, but now it has been amended. We'll go back to that.
Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
I cannot support the amendment, friendly or otherwise, as it delays the minister's appearance to sometime after the estimates are tabled, and these are two separate issues. When the estimates are tabled, we can deal with the ministerial appearance then.
I believe we need to start the committee's work in this session with an appearance by the minister. That should be our first meeting and we shouldn't be delaying it.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Perkins.
All I will say to that as chair is that it will depend on the minister's availability to appear, and we don't know her availability right now.
Mr. Zimmer, you have your hand up.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
I agree with my colleague Mr. Perkins. For clarity, I am against this amendment and support the original motion. Thank you.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I don't see any more hands up for the amendment as put forward by Mr. Kelloway and amended by Mr. Arnold.
Before we vote, could I ask the clerk to read out the amendment proposed by Mr. Kelloway, with the amendment to the amendment?
11:35 a.m.
The Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is the amendment by Mr. Kelloway as amended by the subamendment from Mr. Arnold: “That the committee invite the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard for two hours to appear in consideration of the supplementary (C) estimates and the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard's mandate letter at their earliest convenience, and other matter related to her department.”
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I think we have all heard the text of the amendment.
Is there any discussion?
Mr. Bachrach, go ahead.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
On the matter of timing, it seems to me that the change has been from “the first week of February” to “at their earliest convenience.” Is that correct?
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Okay.
I would support more definitive wording around the timing. What Mr. Perkins said about having her appear closer to the beginning of the committee's work makes sense.
I'm not sure where that leaves us with the amendment. If it's voted down, we will also lose other content in the amendment that seemed to have broader agreement within the group.