Evidence of meeting #4 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 afghanistan.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
The question here is that if you're going to put “and the minister”, depending on the minister's schedule, he will come within what...? We have two more sitting weeks here, and he may not be able to come until February or March, depending on his schedule.
The crisis that is taking place in Pakistan is now. We would like to hear what is happening now. Therefore I would say let's make it very clear. The invitation can go to the minister and to the department officials allowing that.
On this business of taking political heat, what is it? I thought this was a very clear amendment that we needed to talk about Pakistan, not taking political heat here.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
In all honesty, I think the reason we tried to include “or” is so they can get here soon. If the minister says “Yes, I want to come, but I can't before Christmas and I'll come in January or February”....
Liberal
Raymond Chan Liberal Richmond, BC
Mr. Chair, with all respect, it is the desire of this committee, if we pass a resolution, to request the minister to come. And if the minister couldn't come, we would accept that the senior minister would come, the senior officials would come.
If the minister takes a few months to come to this committee, it shows his disregard for the interests of the committee and the authority of this committee. It doesn't mean that we would prefer the senior officials. It is the minister we want to come to the committee.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
But we also want, by a motion that's already passed, to have a preliminary report tabled in the House of Commons by December 14, and all our dates are basically filled. If the minister can't come, I simply want.... If we want to have him for one hour, I hope he's not going to say, “That one day, I can't come”.
Mr. Wilfert is next, and then Mr. Obhrai.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
No, sorry, it's Mr. Goldring, then Ms. Barbot and then Mr. Wilfert.
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
I would pose the question then: Is it being realistic to have the minister appear on a number of motions that we have, for the minister to be appearing on each and every one? The motion is written with “and” on its own, that's inclusive; that includes both. There's no doubt about that. The only way to have any type of an option to it for appearance, so that other than the minister could appear to give us the information earlier, would be by including that word “or”.
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
Mr. Chairman, I don't understand why we're having this entire discussion. We want to ask the minister and senior officials to come. So let's adopt the motion and we'll see what happens, instead of talking about “if”, “when” and “or”. If they can come, they'll come. If not, we'll see. There's no notion of urgency in the motion as introduced. So there is not really any reason to have a whole debate on it.
November 27th, 2007 / 1:05 p.m.
Conservative
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
I would like to tell Madame Barbot that as a member of Parliament and of this committee, you have every right to have a discussion of this motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
When we're discussing a motion and we're discussing an amendment to a motion, we have debate on that motion. We don't cut down the debate on the motion.
Mr. Wilfert.
Liberal
Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Chairman, my intent in the motion is to get an update on the current crisis in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. If we invite the minister, which is what I want to do, and the minister says “Sorry, I can't come this day because...”, that's fine. I'm not going to have a cardiac over it. Then we bring somebody else in. But at some point, I want the minister here. There are certainly more contentious issues I'd like to see him on. Obviously, we haven't had him. So I think it's respectful to the committee to invite the minister, first of all, since he is the minister. If he can't come, I'm not going to jump up and down and say “Well gee, we picked that one time when he couldn't show up”. Move the motion as is. If he can't come, I understand. Fine, there'll be other times when I expect he would be here. Fine. But let's not lose sight of what we want. We want to discuss the issue.
Conservative
Bloc
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
I would like to thank the parliamentary secretary for allowing us to speak as well. In fact we are discussing an amendment moved by the government; let's get that clear. However, I'm not even sure that Mr. Wilfert agrees on the amendment. So, Mr. Chairman, I believe with all due respect that there should be an agreement by the mover of the motion and I—
Conservative
Bloc
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
It won't be a friendly amendment, because Mr. Wilfert will not agree to it, but we still debate the amendment.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
At first we thought he was going to agree. Now he's changed his mind.
Liberal
Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
I haven't changed anything. I simply want to get the thing dealt with.
Bloc