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.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Are we voting on that motion or the subamendment?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
You're voting on the subamendment put forward by Mr. Arnold.
Tina, could you do a recorded vote, please? I don't see any thumbs-up or thumbs-down.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you.
We now go back to the amendment to the subamendment—no; it's the motion as amended, or is it the amendment as amended?
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
I think we're voting on the motion now, Mr. Chair, if I'm not mistaken.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
But that was a subamendment to the amendment of Mr. Bachrach, wasn't it?
Tina, can you steer me in the right direction here? Where are we now?
The Clerk
We are now on the amendment of Mr. Kelloway, which has now been amended by the subamendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Okay.
The amended amendment by Mr. Kelloway should read as follows: “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.”
Is there any discussion on that?
Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
I would like to make an amendment that would change it from one hour with the minister to two.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you.
I don't see any hands up for discussion on that. It's as clear as anything. That is the clearest amendment we've had all day.
Go ahead, Mr. Small.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
It's very important to have the minister for two hours, considering that the main part of the fishing season is upon us. There are regulations that need to be dealt with. A lot of things in that mandate letter need to be discussed. We need to hear from the minister and she needs to hear from us. This is on behalf of our fishing industry.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Small.
I see no other hands up.
Tina, could you do a recorded vote again, please?
It's getting confusing. That's why I'm asking for a recorded vote.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Tina.
The amended amendment now reads as follows: “That the committee invite the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard 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.”
The addition of the two hours is in there. That's what we're voting on.
I don't see any hands up, so can I take it that everybody is thumbs-up on this?
(Amendment as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we move to the original motion as amended.
Does anybody want the amended motion read out, or do we all understand what we're voting on? I think we should all know what it is now.
I see only thumbs-up on the motion as amended. I don't see any thumbs-down.
(Motion as amended agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you, everybody, for your patience on that one. I think we're all a little rusty trying to get out of the starting gate.
The next one with his hand up is Mr. Hardie.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As noted at the last meeting, I would like to move the following:
That the committee commit to a short study focusing on the risks flood control/mitigation systems along the lower Fraser River pose to wild salmon runs and the opportunity to address those risks as we recover from the floods and rebuild the flood control infrastructure.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you.
I see some hands up to speak to that.
Go ahead, Madame Desbiens.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Mr. Chair, with your permission, I'd like to table another motion.
January 18th, 2022 / 12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Not right now; I am taking everybody in order of hands up. We're doing them one at a time as we accept them. We're dealing now with Mr. Hardie's motion as it was just presented.
Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
I think this is a good study. Just for clarification, though, what do we mean by “short study”? Usually we give at least a number of meetings, do we not?
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
In this case I would suggest that it would depend on whether or not we add some scope. There have been some discussions about including more than just the lower Fraser valley, but we'll let others bring that up. I am thinking about one or two meetings at the very most, again clarifying that DFO has to be consulted when flood control measures are put in place. DFO doesn't actually do the work and doesn't pay for the work, but they do need to be consulted. That's the part we need to zero in on: What have they heard, and what have they given back in terms of input?
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
I think this is an important motion. I have had briefings and actual conversations with the good folks at DFO and with people I know on the flooding situation in B.C. Our hearts go out to those individuals.
I have been thinking about this. I think the committee members deserve to be briefed on the situation, and that's why I'll be proposing that we add an amendment. I'm thinking that if we amend the motion to include that we ask for one meeting on the subject and that we include the department officials to appear at that meeting to provide a briefing to the committee, that would be one part.
The next part would be a question for the clerk, I suppose. With regard to the larger piece on infrastructure and making sure that we're within the mandate of the committee, can the clerk provide any insight that this aspect doesn't fall to, say, the infrastructure committee?
The Clerk
With regard to ensuring that this falls under the committee's mandate, I would suggest perhaps consulting with the analysts. They are our subject matter experts.
I think Michael is available.
Liberal
Liberal