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.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I'm sorry. It was the same thing. I agree with Mr. Bachrach.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Okay.
Not seeing any other discussion, can I take it that we accept this subamendment as proposed by Mr. Bachrach?
We might need a recorded division, because I see thumbs-up and thumbs-down indications.
Tina, could you do a recorded division, please?
11:50 a.m.
The Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is on the subamendment from Mr. Bachrach.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
The subamendment is carried. Now we go back to the motion as amended.
Is there any discussion?
Go ahead, Mr. Cormier.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Can we read that again, please? I'm sorry, but it's something that's hard for me to follow in English. I think it's the same for Caroline.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Okay. I can read it all in English for you, if you want.
It reads, "That the committee invite the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard for one hour, and senior officials for two hours, to appear in consideration of the supplementary estimates (C) and the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard's mandate letter and other matters related to her department by the end of February.”
Is there any discussion?
Serge, you still have your hand up, but I think that was for the last one.
Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
This is just for clarification, perhaps. There seem to be contradictory elements. If the supplementary estimates (C) are not tabled before the end of February, what happens?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Well, to me, the minister would appear without their being tabled, if that's the case. As somebody said earlier in the meeting, we can't control when the supplementary estimates (C) will be tabled, but if it's in the motion when the minister comes, at least we can discuss them and all other relevant matters. We're not necessarily tied down to supplementary estimates (C) such that she won't appear if they are not in place. I'm in favour, like everyone else, of the minister appearing as soon as possible, but if the supplementary estimates (C) are not part of that, it won't be a part of it.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
The supplementary estimates (C) can be asked about under all the other wording that's in the motion without it actually being in the motion.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
The problem is that since it's in the motion, it's a contradictory element and can be used to prevent her from appearing.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I don't see it that way, Mr. Perkins. It says “other” related matters. If the supplementary estimates (C) haven't been tabled, I don't think that should keep the minister away. I'd be very disappointed if they were to lean on that crutch, we'll say.
Go ahead, Mr. Arnold.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Mel Arnold Conservative North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have to agree with Mr. Perkins. It would very much clarify that we can question the minister on other matters relevant to her department if we removed the reference to the supplementary estimates (C). I propose that we remove the words “supplementary estimates (C) and” from the motion.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Mr. Chair, let me say that the idea of having the minister appear for only one hour is a concern. Indeed, for us, this means that we will have a scant eight minutes to ask questions. Considering the circumstances, could we have the minister appear for two hours?
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
We can only deal with Mr. Arnold's subamendment, unless you're making a subamendment that it be two hours.
I'm sorry. We can't subamend a subamendment. It's getting confusing.
Is there any other talk to the subamendment by Mr. Arnold?
Go ahead, Mr. Kelloway.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Having the supplementary (C)s is an important thing for the minister to talk about. You've eloquently put it very well that we have the parameters of “by the end of February”. We have the supplementary (C)s in there. I don't see the contradictory element unless we're looking at it through the lens of “Aha—if they're not tabled, the minister can't come”.
We want to set this committee in the proper kind of flow, in the sense that if the minister does want to come and speak on the supplementary estimates (C) and all the elements in the mandate letter and other elements as brought up by the committee, I don't think it's contradictory; it's in addition. Having the minister there for the hour and the officials there for two hours provides a much-needed, wholesome and direct discussion with important people on the fisheries file.
I wanted to make those points. Thank you.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
I'd like to ask Mr. Kelloway why he thinks one hour is sufficient for discussion.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Actually, you can't ask Mr. Kelloway anything right now, because we're talking about a subamendment. If you want to speak to the subamendment, you can. If not, we'll vote on it, and then if you have something to bring forward on the motion, you can.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
There is no other discussion on the subamendment.
I'll read it out as changed.
It reads, “That the committee invite the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard for one hour, and senior officials for two hours, to appear in consideration of the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard's mandate letter and other matters related to her department by the end of February.”
Seeing no discussion, can I get a sense of whether we want to do thumbs-up or a recorded division?