Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 21st, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Ms. Verdon.

Continue, Mr. Goldring, very quickly, though, please.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Clause 9 says:

(c) a summary of the annual report submitted under the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act;

What is that act, and what does that really mean, to submit a report under it? Does that mean the report somehow has to be in compliance with that act? What are the specifics of that act that the report is to be relevant to?

[Christiane Verdon]

The act is administered by the Department of Finance. It's a statute of Parliament. Those agreements were negotiated after the Second World War. There is a section in that act that imposes an obligation on the Minister of Finance to submit a report. I cannot say more on that, because I'm not familiar with that legislation. It's administered by—

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Would this be another vague area, again? Is being submitted in compliance with that act more vague terminology? Is that clear exactly what that is supposed to be doing?

[Christiane Verdon]

The people in the Department of Finance would be in a much better position to comment on that. I would not like to say something that I have not verified.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Quickly, and then Mr. Van Loan.

[Stephen Wallace]

Yes, just very quickly, I think the issue here is vagueness with respect to accountability. If you have the Minister of Finance accountable to provide a report under that agreement, and in this particular provision you have the Minister of International Cooperation also adopting accountability, you have two ministers accountable to Parliament for the same thing. It's that element that will raise the question about the blurring of accountability relationships between ministers and Parliament.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Very quickly, Mr. Van Loan. You have about 35 seconds.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

I'd like to make the comment that in hearing these witnesses--I don't want to be critical of you for your answers--I'm getting more concerned. I'm hearing stuff about Finance and Foreign Affairs, and we're not hearing from them. They can't answer those. Are we getting them?

[A voice]

They're coming.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

Both Foreign Affairs and Finance?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

They're on the list.

Thank you.

Mr. Wilfert.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chairman, Parliament has spoken twice on this issue. The last time, 178 MPs supported it. You indicated the U.K. has it. Sweden has it. Sweden has poverty, and they have human rights as well. There were about six examples.

I guess I'm a bit confused here. This bill has been floating out there for quite awhile. You agree in principle. Then, at the eleventh hour, we get all these technical amendments. I would suggest--and I will have a motion in a moment, Mr. Chairman--that this is consistent with CIDA's goals and with what the minister has certainly indicated in the past.

We talk about problems of interpretation. I'm going to suggest, Mr. Chairman, if we propose a motion today to pass on Thursday, that we deal with this issue clause by clause next Tuesday. In the meantime, I presume that will force a cleanup of these technical amendments.

In fact, if it's consistent with CIDA's goals and if we see this legislation is operating in other jurisdictions, given that Parliament has spoken twice on this and that this isn't something new, I'm a bit surprised. I asked the mover of this bill whether he had any indication prior to today about these technical issues. He indicated there wasn't any comment to him.

I'm a bit concerned, Mr. Chairman, that the will of Parliament may in fact be dragged out the door by what would seem to be technical changes.

I would suggest that if it's the will of the committee to vote on this on Thursday for clause-by-clause discussion on Tuesday, then we proceed, and in the meantime, we get those drafting changes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Just one moment.

Mr. Wilfert, this isn't uncommon to bring forward these individuals. They have technical concerns. Hopefully through the blues--that's why I referenced the blues before--we'll be able to get this very quickly. It doesn't mean that they disagree with the spirit of this bill, or that anyone disagrees with the spirit of the bill.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I said they agreed in principle.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I don't see any huge changes to what's being proposed here. When we do get into clause-by-clause, certainly their recommendations are taken as recommendations. It's not that they have to be—

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

In order to get a timeline on this, I would suggest that the foreign affairs committee address Bill C-293, clause by clause, and schedule it for Tuesday, November 28. In other words, with 48 hours notice, you'll have to vote on Thursday. We would deal with it on Tuesday. In the meantime, going through the blues, certainly these technical changes can be addressed and before us for the 28th.

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

We have a question about a provision in the act that you're going to want us to deal with in clause-by-clause, which they couldn't give an answer on and which we said we'd go to Finance for. Now, if we adopted your motion, we wouldn't even have evidence on it. How can we deal with it in clause-by-clause when nobody can even tell us what it means?

[A voice]

Why weren't they in?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, York—Simcoe, ON]

I don't know why they're not here, but we should have them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I think we will have them. We've agreed to have them. At the present time, we've already agreed. They were called. As soon as they were called, they said they would be here.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

If I may, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate Mr. Van Loan's comments only in the sense that he was one of the members who objected to even having an extra session on this. So now he's suggesting we have another session on this, after objecting the first time to having this session.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Wilfert, and thank you, committee.

Thank you to our guests for appearing here today. We appreciate you—

I'm not recognizing you, Mr. Wilfert.

Thank you for being here today.

[Proceedings continue in camera]