International Trade Committee on June 19th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I understand. They're two entirely different motions.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Do you want to start with the suggested amendment, then?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Go ahead.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Okay. The first one would be to amend the preamble such that the section that says “based on the testimony heard” would be replaced with “based on some of the testimony heard”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Do you consider that to be a friendly amendment?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Monsieur Paquette, would you accept that as a friendly amendment?

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I am presenting my motion simply because we do not have enough time to do a complete report. The parliamentary secretary's proposal, as well as the other one, would have been valid had we had time to draft a real report or if we are to come back to this in the fall. I have no problem with the process, but since the House will most probably rise on Thursday, we will not have the opportunity to carry out the entire exercise we have been charged with.

This is why I would prefer that these issues be dealt with separately. There is a motion. It is a contribution from the Committee to the government's reflection with regard to the framework agreement. We would have preferred to have produced an in-depth report flowing from a process such as that suggested by the parliamentary secretary, but we clearly will not have sufficient time for that. These are therefore two completely different processes.

I remain prepared to put my motion to a vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We're actually looking for comments on the amendment to your motion, Monsieur Paquette.

Are there any other comments or debate on the amendment put forth by Ms. Guergis?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I have a comment on the amendment. I think adding “some of the testimony heard“ is important.

As we've heard today, and as we've heard on other days that we've been here, not all the testimony has aligned. We haven't had everybody on the same side of the equation. Instead, we've had some people, such as today, outright against the softwood lumber framework agreement. We have had some who have been absolutely for it. And we've had some witnesses who have expressed a variety of opinions. There are things they're in favour of, either slightly in favour or slightly against, and some concerns here and there.

I go back to the question that I was asking Mr. Falconer about being too categorical. We're being very categorical by saying “based on the testimony heard”. To me, that leaves the impression that all the witnesses were in alignment and that based on what we've heard here....

So I think the word “some” is important, because it gives justice to the different types of opinions we've heard on the software lumber agreement.

I actually think it's a good motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Lemieux.

Are there other comments on the amendment to the motion?

Monsieur Paquette, do you have anything?

Let's go, then, to a vote on the amendment.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I have a few other amendments. Should we do them all at once, or do you just want to do them—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

No, we have to deal with them one at a time, Ms. Guergis.

We will proceed.

(Amendment negatived)

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Now, we're back to the main motion.

Yes, Ms. Guergis.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I wanted to propose another amendment.

The last paragraph is: “That this motion be tabled in the House as the Committee's report within the next 24 hours”. I'd like it to be replaced with: “That this motion be tabled in the House as the Committee's interim report, until such a time as a full and balanced report can be prepared”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have all heard the amendment put forth by Ms. Guergis. Is there debate on that amendment?

Mr. Reid.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Yes, there's been a lot of commentary in this committee to the effect that the committee hasn't had time to prepare a full report. I can see the value of trying to make that clear in the substance of the report itself. Normally I'm on another committee—the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs—and we are struggling similarly with trying to get something wrapped up quickly. I think one doesn't want to present these things as being something other than what they are. I could be wrong, but I think there's a general consensus that this is something that's being done because of a lack of time to draw up something that's more complete.

For example, I think by definition it could not have included the testimony that was heard today, given the fact that the motion was written before the testimony of the various witnesses today. So it's not possible that the report could have incorporated those comments. Indeed, as a practical matter, we know that the committee Hansards take some time, so it seems to me a fairly logical to include something of this nature when one is dealing with a report that is temporary. That way, the House will know what it is dealing with, and we ought to be full and frank in what we propose in these committees.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Reid.

Is there any other debate or comments on the amendment?

Mr. Lemieux.

We are running out of time here. It is now 5:32 p.m., and I know I have an appointment to meet and others do. So we have to see a very quick end in sight, if we're going to carry through with this at all.

So Mr. Lemieux, go ahead.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I was going to say that I agree that we do not want the House to think that this is the report coming from the committee, but rather, that this is something other than a report coming from this committee. If we feel we're being constrained by time, that should be made clear, because it's an important point to be brought out when we're reviewing this amendment put forward by Mr. Paquette. Actually, I agree with what you said.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Ms. Guergis, you have said you have other amendments you want to put forth.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I have suggestions, yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We're going to have to deal with these at the Wednesday meeting, because as I said, I have to go.

Yes, Mr. Maloney.

[John Maloney, Liberal, Welland, ON]

I know that you have to leave at 5:30, but we have two vice-chairs who can take your place. We can proceed today and get it done.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

There are others who have to leave as well. We're beyond the scheduled time.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

I move that the--