Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 24th, 2006

[John McKay]

I've exhausted it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We do want to thank you, Mr. McKay, for coming and for coming prepared. Our intentions are that this report will be brought back to the House by the due date, and we'll have the opportunity to hear, as has been mentioned today, other people who will come forward to talk about the importance of changes and reform to the way we hand out our humanitarian aid.

I think, then, we have committee business on the agenda. But I tell you, we're going to close at 5:30.

Madam McDonough.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I know we don't have time today to deal with my motion that is next up, but what I wanted to do was make the suggestion, for the consideration of the committee, that we invite Senator Doug Roche before the committee to address the subject matter of that motion that is before the committee.

I think people are all familiar with Doug Roche. He was formerly a Progressive Conservative member of Parliament; he was Canada's ambassador to the UN for disarmament; and he was then a senator. More recently, many committee members have met with him in the context of his position as chair of the Middle Powers Initiative, which has been very much seized with the issues of nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation, and nuclear abolition. I also think we all feel very sobered by the increased threat that people feel with what is happening today in North Korea.

Some have had the opportunity to meet with Doug Roche as recently as when he was here during the first week of Parliament being in session, when he chaired the Middle Powers Initiative meetings. I think every member of Parliament received his letter that was sent to us from his perspective as chair of the world council of the Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament. It's really in his capacity as the Canadian chair of the PNND that I brought this forward, very much in the cross-partisan, multi-partisan spirit that was really being encouraged by Doug Roche as chair of the world council.

I'm wondering whether we might invite him to address us on this issue, given the severity and its obvious currency at the moment, and for obvious reasons given what's happening in North Korea.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Again, we talked about this before. One of the concerns I have is that we keep focus. We have our steering committee meetings and we decide where we're going. The motion is absolutely in order, but if we're going to now start allocating regular committee time to bring in Mr. Roche—he's a great spokesman, and everyone here knows his involvement on nuclear disarmament—then we're talking about diverting from what we've laid out as the direction in which the committee is going.

In good faith, I think we want to continue with the democratic development. We have a busy fall. We want to finish Bill C-293 whenever it gets done. So if you're suggesting this for a committee day, then I would say to our committee that we should stay focused on the direction that we've laid out in the steering committee and in this committee.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I appreciate what you're saying. Believe me, I'm not trying in any way to derail the committee decisions that have already been made about work we're going to do.

Look, if committee members are prepared, in the spirit of parliamentarians around the world who are endorsing this statement in droves, to go ahead and deal with it without hearing from Doug Roche, then so much the better. I think it would reflect our own multi-party concern with this growing crisis, and I think that's terrific. I'm just saying that if members aren't prepared to deal with it in—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Maybe we can talk about this at another committee business session, when we have some time. We're aware of the motion, and I think we're certainly going to accept that, but when we start looking at extra meetings....

Madame Barbot.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

As concerns Ms. McDonough's notice of motion, I would like to draw to your attention to some serious mistakes in the French translation. We don't mind correcting a few occasional mistakes, but we should not have to do so constantly.

In particular, in the sixth paragraph, where the English version says that it was “ratified”, the French version says that it was “signed” which is not the same thing at all. Furthermore, it is mentioned that Israel and the United States did not sign when, in fact, they did. These are really serious mistakes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Because we aren't going to be voting on this today anyway, maybe what we'll do is send that to the clerk. We can then make sure the translation is a little more in line with the intent.

Thank you for bringing that up, Madame Barbot.

We are adjourned.