Evidence of meeting #2 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Keith Martin Liberal Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Sorry. Yes, thank you--“in Sudan...” the committee “invite senior officials from DFAIT, CIDA, and other relevant departments, as well as the All-Party Parliamentary Group for the Prevention of Genocide, to appear before the committee to share knowledge about what Canadian initiatives should be championed to stop the genocide that is occurring and identify what Canadian public and private funds are currently invested in Sudan,” etc.
So it really involves two things. It not only involves the issue of investment, but it also involves the issue of looking at not only Darfur but the country as a whole, because a large part of the oil exploration and extraction is taking place in southern Sudan, and there are problems in the east too, which are also blowing up. It also enables us to provide solutions outside of that to be able to prevent this.
This situation is going to get so bad so quickly that I think it is our responsibility. We'd be remiss if we did not expand this to include the country and not only offer to deal with the issues of divestment but also offer other critical acute solutions that Canada can and should champion to prevent the mass slaughter that is going to happen on the horizon.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Can I ask you, Mr. Martin, to write out your motion as amended and talk to Mr. Dewar about it, or at least present it? You don't have to give it to Mr. Dewar, but if you would read it into the....
Point of order.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Point of order. I was just wondering about one of the comments made, which I raised as an issue. Can this committee call officials from other departments to come here?
November 20th, 2007 / 11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
No. Bill C-9 is foreign affairs. We can call those from the foreign affairs department but not from any other department.
11:55 a.m.
The Clerk
But it's standard to invite--
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Yes, you can invite whoever.
So we could conceivably.... You know, Mr. Dewar's motion is in order in that respect, because it says “and relevant departments”, doesn't it? So it may not include DFAIT. We'd have to sit down and talk about whether or not we would want him on other issues not specific to--
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Point of order, Mr. Chair. I think it's important to note that recently the government--in fact it was the foreign affairs minister--announced economic sanctions against Burma, or Myanmar. I was going to speak to this later, but I think it's important to bring it up now. This is where it should be. In fact, the government confirms that through the Minister of Foreign Affairs, if I may, who just recently announced economic sanctions against Myanmar.
Noon
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
That's not so much a point of order. That's more a point of debate.
We'll continue with Madame Barbot.
Noon
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
In the motion, as it is worded, we are talking about the All-Party Parliamentary Group for the Prevention of Genocide. We are not entirely sure what that is about. It would be difficult to get them to participate. Moreover, these people are not experts in the area. A group inquired about that. I therefore move that we take out the words “as well as the All-Party Parliamentary Group for the Prevention of Genocide”.
Moreover, I would like to add “NGOs and experts in civil society” after the words “[...] senior officials from DFAIT [...]”. That would allow us to have a broader vision of this issue. Also, I think there is a problem in the French version. It says “[...] à venir lui rendre compte des fonds publics [...]” whereas it should say “[...] à venir faire état des fonds publics [...]”.
Noon
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
The problem is that you're speaking to Mr. Dewar's motion, and I understand that Mr. Martin is preparing his friendly amendment, which is going to.... I mean, there are some pretty major changes here.
Noon
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
We can review that and wait for the changes. I could begin again at that point.
Noon
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
To me they're both friendly amendments, and I have no problem with them.
Noon
Liberal
Keith Martin Liberal Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
In my finest, non-doctor handwriting? This is a slow, hieroglyphic--
Noon
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
The motion is about private funds that are currently invested and set regulations for investments. I'd like to know why that would be better heard in front of this committee than in front of finance or treasury. If that's the main thrust of the motion, I would think those are clearly under the purview of finance and treasury.
Noon
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We'll have to see how it all works out. The difficulty is that we have two very distinct.... We're talking about a major study here. Madame Barbot has asked for all the NGOs, the civil society groups. We've talked about CIDA, DFAIT, finance, and about all-party parliamentary groups coming to speak about their knowledge. It's not just specific to investment. That's the problem. The motion says that they are to speak about their knowledge of Canadian public and private funds or investment in Sudan and then go from there.
We've asked for straight investment types of things. I don't know if that's really what we want.
Mr. Martin has stated how this whole thing is changing from not just Darfur but throughout all of Sudan. His comment was that it's going to make Darfur look like a backyard brawl. That is more than just Canada's role in investment. You better take a look at what this motion is saying, because if it changes from the investment to a whole study on Sudan, I'll rule it out of order.
A friendly amendment is not an amendment that becomes friendly to the person who gave it. It doesn't change or increase in a substantive measure the scope of what the motion is talking about. That would not mean that you could not resubmit a motion immediately. We would deal with it at the next meeting. But it has to work within what you're speaking about here.
We're going to go to Mr. Wilfert and Mr. Obhrai.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Chairman, this is probably a monumental task that nobody can answer, but we're starting to raise expectations in different motions here that say we'd like to see certain studies done. I don't know whether the researcher can tell us whether there is a ballpark timeline we can develop—obviously, “ballpark” meaning we're not going to have to stick to it—to give us at least some indication, once we work out what witnesses to hear, of what realistically we could expect. We only have so many committee meetings. I don't want to start raising expectations, which has happened before, whereby people expect that the something else we have put on the agenda is going to show up.
I certainly support Mr. Dewar's intent, but the question becomes what is doable, if we are going to be faced with a major Afghanistan study and are going to do a study on something else. Some of these motions may only take one committee meeting, and that's fine. But for some of the others I would like to get a more realistic understanding of what it is we're being asked to do, so that when people contact us.... I think our experience in the last committee, with regard to both democratic development and the attempt to deal with the China report from the subcommittee on human rights, was a classic example of trying to mix too many things at the same time.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
That's why I asked the committee to take a very close look at what you're changing here. This motion of Mr. Dewar's is achievable, I think, the way it's written; dealing with finances and public investment is one thing. But when we're talking about a major study and are now going to include all the NGOs, include all the civil society groups, include the parliamentary groups, when do we want to do it?
There's another motion coming up on Burma. The timelines on Burma.... The event is happening now. We've been remarkably good at doing studies after the fact, in so many cases. Burma is rather important, Afghanistan is very important, and Sudan is, unquestionably. All of these are very important works. But when we broaden this thing out to the extent that I fear that this amendment may do, all of a sudden it becomes a full-course meal, a full-course study. I accept what your concern is.
We have Mr. Obhrai, then Mr. Dewar and Madame Barbot.
12:05 p.m.
An hon. member
I had my hand up before her.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
I don't mind; she can go ahead. Let's have ladies first; go ahead.