Evidence of meeting #146 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was turnbull.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you.
There's an amendment on the floor. You've all heard it. Do we have any comments on this amendment, or should I put it straight to a vote?
I will put it straight to a vote, seeing that no one wants to comment on that.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
The amendment was defeated, so we're back to Mr. Turnbull's motion again.
Mr. Savard‑Tremblay, you have the floor.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
I just want to say that I think this is an extremely important study.
Having said that, I'm going to oppose the motion for a very simple reason. This is an extremely important topic, and we've heard what the European Union, in particular, intends to do. In my opinion, it's not enough to insert two meetings in the middle of the Bill C‑27 study.
That would be extremely negligent, when this issue should be properly discussed, analyzed and studied. Therefore, I cannot support the proposal at this time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you very much, Mr. Savard‑Tremblay.
Ms. Rempel Garner, go ahead on the motion.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
I'll go back to what my colleague Mr. Masse had suggested, and I will formally move the amendment he suggested, which is to strike all of the words after the first paragraph, starting with the words “Given that climate change could”. Then, we would keep the last paragraph, which starts with “That the committee allocate no less than two meetings to study the topic of industrial carbon pricing”. We could keep that but add the words “and consumer carbon pricing” to that paragraph.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
We have an amendment on the floor, which is essentially what Mr. Masse had proposed and what he sought unanimous consent for. The motion is to keep the first sentence, which reads, “Given that governments have an economic and social incentive to act on climate change”. Correct me if I'm wrong, MP Rempel Garner. Then, we would strike the rest and keep the last paragraph, adding “and consumer carbon pricing”.
Are there any comments on the amendment proposed by MP Rempel Garner?
Mr. Turnbull, go ahead.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Maybe I misunderstood or I didn't follow, but I think this is exactly what Mr. Masse had suggested. I would like to see it in writing, if possible, just because I think it takes out everything so substantively.... I think it takes out almost everything.
Didn't we already vote on this? One of the rules I know in terms of the Standing Orders is that once a committee has substantively dealt with an issue, you can't reintroduce it and call a vote on it.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Just one second, MP Turnbull. There is a point of order. I'll yield the floor back to you once I have dealt with the point of order.
Ms. Rempel Garner, please go ahead.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
There was no motion moved. It was a request for unanimous consent, which was denied.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Yes, thank you, MP Rempel Garner, but I'm addressing this with Mr. Turnbull right now.
Basically, it's a point of order you're raising, Mr. Turnbull, if I'm not mistaken. You're saying that we've already dealt with this issue. However, I debated it internally when I heard MP Rempel Garner present it, because it is very close to the amendment that Mr. Masse presented, on which we just voted and which was rejected, but it is not exactly the same.
I'm going to take one second with the clerk to see if she can enlighten me.
I sought and got validation from the clerk that basically there is a difference between this amendment and what Mr. Masse had suggested. He sought unanimous consent; he didn't move it as an amendment, so we're back to almost square one with the amendment by MP Rempel Garner.
Are there any speakers on that?
Mr. Turnbull, go ahead.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Could I ask for it in writing in both official languages, and then could we have a very brief suspension for just a couple of minutes to consider this, if you don't mind?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
I call the meeting back to order, colleagues.
Ms. Rempel Garner's amendment has been circulated in both official languages. We are now resuming debate on the amendment.
Is there any discussion on Ms. Rempel Garner's amendment?
Mr. Turnbull, you have the floor.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
I'd like to propose a subamendment to Ms. Rempel Garner's amendment. I think it might get us to a place where we can all agree on this motion and get a vote done.
What I propose would be very similar to what Mr. Masse proposed, but I'm just adding back part of the language on labour markets, because I feel the impact on labour markets is particularly important: “Given that governments have an economic and social incentive to act on climate change, and given it leads to impacts on labour markets, employment and wage growth, particularly in the absence of climate action, the committee allocate no less than two meetings to study the topic of industrial carbon pricing, as well as broader industrial and labour market impacts of climate change.”
Conservative
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Yes, if you want to add that back in, that's fine. That's an oversight on my part. I don't have any problem with studying it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
It's “that the committee allocate no less than two meetings to study the topic of industrial and consumer carbon pricing”. That stays as is, as proposed by Ms. Rempel Garner. Basically, you're just adding “and given it leads to impacts on labour markets, employment and wage growth, particularly in the absence of climate action”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Okay. That's the subamendment proposed by Mr. Turnbull to MP Rempel Garner's amendment.
We've heard the terms of the subamendment. Are there any comments on the subamendment proposed by MP Turnbull to MP Rempel Garner's amendment? Is it clear to everyone what has been proposed by Mr. Turnbull?
Okay. That's good. We'll put it to a vote.
Mr. Savard‑Tremblay, did you hear that? I know that, with interpretation, sometimes a few words are lost.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Everything is going well with interpretation.
However, I think there's a translation error in the written version. The expression “une tarification industrielle et consommateur du carbone” is not French.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
We're still on Mr. Turnbull's subamendment.
Seeing no further debate, we will go to the vote.
The vote is on the subamendment.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
