Evidence of meeting #41 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was electricity.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
One moment, I'll stop the clock.
Yes, Mr. Ehsassi. What is your point of order?
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Madam Chair, as the member is fully aware, questions have to be not be repetitive, first of all. Second, they have to be relevant to the study before this committee.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Is genocide not relevant? First lobbying rules were not relevant; now it's genocide that's not relevant.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Mr. Poilievre, I am trying to hear the point of order. Can you please hold on one moment?
Mr. Ehsassi, you have the floor.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
All of the members are fully aware that the topic of the study before us today is economic recovery, yet the member continues to ask repetitive questions that have nothing to do with the economic recovery that Canadians are looking forward to. I would please ask the member to refrain from continuing to ask questions that really do not fall within the ambit of today's study.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
The name of the motion for the study says “supporting industries in their transition to greener and more sustainable practices,” and it talks about innovation initiatives. That's exactly the kind of thing that Brookfield Assets is invested in. It's exactly the reason Mr. Carney is here to address the committee.
MP Poilievre is clearly asking questions related to Brookfield Asset Management, which has investments in this exact area and which is the topic of this study. Where Brookfield Asset Management is invested is quite clearly relevant. In addition, it seems to me that an accepted practice in committee is that witnesses don't necessarily determine the topic or the question they want to answer. Since you have said yourself that the time belongs to the member of Parliament, I think the member of Parliament should be allowed to use his time accordingly and the witness should be compelled to answer his questions.
Thanks, Chair.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Thank you very much for your point.
I see MP Masse. Is it on the same point of order?
Go ahead.
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Yes. I'll be very quick, Madam Chair.
Our most recent trade agreement with the United States, which has been upheld by the Deputy Prime Minister as being a template for future agreements, includes labour and environmental provisions. That's with the United States.
As awkward as they are, I think some of these questions are relevant. It would be nice to give the witnesses a little bit of extra space to be able to answer, but it's my opinion that these questions are relevant. The parliamentary secretary's objections to these are neither warranted nor fair, because as has been upheld by his own Deputy Prime Minister, labour and environmental rights are important parts of trade agreements— unless they don't believe that.
That's the reality of what we actually passed and what is in front of us.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Thank you very much.
I think we have Mr. Erskine-Smith on the same point of order.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I'll be brief, Madam Chair.
My recollection is that the witness did acknowledge human rights concerns and violations. He recognized that they did not want to see supply chains that were affected by those human rights concerns.
The specific question in relation to whether this meets the international definition of genocide.... We have weighed in by way of debate in our own House of Commons. I don't see how that particular question is relevant for this witness in the course of this hearing. If he chooses to answer, it so be it. If he has a view of it, so be it.
We all, as members of Parliament and having recently debated it, have a view of it. I don't entirely see the relevance for the purpose of this hearing.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Thank you very much.
I would like to be able to rule on this.
MP Ehsassi.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
I think if anyone does look at the record, Madam Chair, first of all, the questions that the member has asked are repetitive.
Secondly, to echo the sentiments by Mr. Erskine-Smith, if we're getting into questions of the Ethics Commissioner and human rights, surely we can all agree that this is not relevant to the issue that is before this committee.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Hold on for one moment, please.
I would like to rule on the point of order because we also have other witnesses here. We still have time to ask questions. I want to make sure that all the members have their chance to ask questions.
With respect to the specific question that was posed by MP Poilievre, I believe the witness has already answered it, as indicated by Mr. Erskine-Smith. I will ask that we remain on topic. You still have a few minutes left in your intervention.
The question on whether the situation is genocide is not relevant to the study at hand. However, I will ask MP Poilievre to continue—
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
It is relevant because the investments that Mr. Carney is bragging about in China do support the regime that is carrying out the genocide.
If we're going to have a just recovery and build back better and create solidarity, which Mr. Carney has spoken about today, then we have to know what his position is on this subject.
It is relevant and running from it is not—
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Mr. Poilievre, I have ruled. We are not studying whether this is genocide or not. We are study economic recovery.
I'm going to ask you, for the sake of the other MPs here on committee who want to have their time as well, to continue with your questions of the witness and please make sure they are relevant to the study.
Thank you.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Thank you very much.
They can bubble-wrap the witness all they want, but these are serious questions to which Canadians deserve answers.
I'll move on to another one because Mr. Carney refused to answer the last one.
Do you support the Prime Minister's decision to veto the northern gateway pipeline, Mr. Carney?