Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 29th, 2006

[Bill Casey, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Then Mr. Goldring's amendment doesn't change much, from what you've said; it just lists some of the options. You've suggested that the focus should be on poverty reduction, and I think with the chair's addition to focus on poverty reduction, the main issue of your bill is still there. The focus will be on poverty reduction.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

I'm just concerned that because this is a relatively small bill, and largely a guidance bill, you tend to miss the point if you start cluttering it up with other things, and I think Mr. Goldring's concerns are in fact incorporated by reference to what is the official statement of the Government of Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Madam McDonough, I'm just going to make one more point, and it may be off the line.

Mr. McKay, your amendment does not apply to funds delivered to the IDRC. Again, to put that in the purpose when we've just finished talking about “consistent with Canadian values, Canadian foreign policy and international human rights standards”, and then go into the ODA, and now it's not.... It doesn't have to be consistent—

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

It may well be better in clause 4, as an addition to clause 4.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right. Can we then effectively remove that part?

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

If you take that out so that for the purposes of this particular amendment it will not exist, then I will--upon prompting from you, Mr. Chair--put it back in clause 4.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Okay, you write it down, and we'll try to have it marked here under clause 4.

We're going to have another IDRC one in here.

Madam McDonough, please go ahead.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I agree with that and I think we're finally making some progress.

I'm hoping the same spirit of cooperation and collaboration that's brought us to this point can prevail here, and there's been an agreement to respond on the IDRC matter. I would propose, in the attempt to move forward, that the amendment I'd proposed accept a friendly amendment from Mr. Goldring that would insert “democracy promotion” after “sustainable development”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Can you say that one more time, Madam McDonough?

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Yes. The amendment deletes the obligation--we've dealt with that--but inserts, after the words “sustainable development” in clause 2, “democracy promotion”.

We retain “central focus on poverty reduction”. I think some of us are more than satisfied that the iteration there now already includes the notion of democracy development, but if we're going to bog down the entire exercise because there's that kind of inflexibility, I think all of us need to show some flexibility. Let's move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, I think we just want to get the purpose of the bill so that the whole picture is seen here. So you'd be willing to put in...anything about the environment?

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

It's already proposed that “sustainable development” go in there, and that we add to it “democracy promotion”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Go ahead, Mr. Obhrai.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

On a point of clarification, with this motion that you have just put forward, you are not accepting Mr. McKay's friendly amendment, right?

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Yes, absolutely. On the friendly amendment, he's already—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

It's not the second part. The second part--he's already removed that.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

He has already said he'd deal with it in clause 4.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

The only concern I have about Ms. McDonough's issue is that consequential amendments may flow from it, and they may then get into the powers this bill is intending to exercise. Frankly, I haven't thought my way through each and every clause. Given my initial position, for one thing, it loses focus, and for another, it's already stated by point of reference. I'm not convinced what it actually accomplishes.

Maybe I could ask the clerk if any consequential amendments might flow from that. Maybe that's an unfair question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Go ahead, if you want to speak to that.

[Michael MacPherson, Procedural Clerk]

As a legislative clerk, I can only speak to the procedural admissibility of amendments. I'm not a lawyer, nor am I a legal drafter; to think up on the spot all the consequential amendments that may or may not be needed in a bill based on the hypothetical is not within my job description, basically.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

As I understand it, clause 2 would then be worded in the following way: we would replace lines 9 and 10 on page 1 with “reduction and in a manner that is consistent with Canadian values, Canadian foreign policy, sustainable development, democracy promotion, and that promotes Canadian ODA abroad”.

How does that work? Oh, yes, then the line that's in the bill would follow that. And then at the end of it, we would delete lines 12 to 17, and add “Canadian official development assistance abroad shall be defined exclusively with regards to these values”.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Then you add back in—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We add nothing back in.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

You're deleting lines 12 to 17, and then we're adding back in “Canadian official development assistance abroad shall be defined exclusively”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

That's correct. So do we accept that, then, as a friendly amendment?