International Trade Committee on July 13th, 2006

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

I think she was the one who lost on that deal.

You're right. Let's get back to the motion. My honourable colleague proposed some changes, and I would still argue that they're friendly changes. This does not change the outcome of the motion by removing the adjective “profound”. It's very misleading, very prejudicial. Let's take it out, plain and simple.

Changing the last sentence only makes sense. If we invite witnesses who come here and show support, whenever those witnesses come...our motion has already negated their testimony to us because it says we only want to hear from those who object. Do we not want to hear from those who actually agree? I would argue very solidly that a lot of people actually do agree with this. Those would be the people in the communities who don't know what their future is.

We have an agreement. We have a good agreement. We have an agreement that will put this industry back on its feet, that will put $4 billion back into their pockets. They can expand. They can make business plans for the future. Let's accept this motion with these amendments and move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Members have heard the proposal. Mr. Menzies has spoken directly to the proposed amendments.

Now we go to Mr. Eyking.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Well, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, some of the committee members here, colleagues, are repeating what they have already said.

I think it's in order that we bring the amendment to a vote and then move on to the motion. We're hearing opinions we heard 10 or 15 minutes ago. I'd like to call the vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Is there any other discussion? You're okay?

Okay, then, we will go to a vote on the amendments.

Those in favour of the amendments? You know what they are, removing “profound” in the first line, adding “and support” after “objections”--this is in the final line of the motion--and ending the last sentence after “agreement”.

(Amendments negatived)

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We will now go to the vote on the motion as amended.

(Motion as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Now can we get to the witness list?

How do you want to handle this? I would suggest that if each party has a list of witnesses ready, or will very soon, as you're saying, Mr. LeBlanc, we have, at the meeting on July 31.... We may find that we can handle all the witnesses who are suggested at the meeting on July 31. We have the minister from 10 till noon. I think that's been agreed to. I would suggest that we have panels of four witnesses at a time, from both sides of the issue, not picking only witnesses who oppose or agree, and that we have hearings of an hour to an hour and a half for each group. Does that sound reasonable to the members? Can we go about it that way?

All right. Now can we get to the actual lists? How shall we handle that? Can it be left to the chair? I certainly will have balanced groupings of witnesses, and I can send those out to the members and see, or do you want to decide right here? It might not be a bad idea to decide right here who the witnesses will be at that meeting. We could certainly do that.

Mr. LeBlanc, in your case, where you may not have witnesses nailed down, we could leave some room to add those to a spot later.

Mr. LeBlanc.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Chairman, I presume we're thinking, most of us, of the same group of people. If Mr. Julian is ready, or mes collègues du Bloc and the government...if people want to make suggestions that the clerk can note, I would assume we would be in agreement with most of those. If we then want to add or suggest somebody else.... We can largely determine at least a wish list, if you wish, because many people may not be available on either of those dates. But we could certainly give the clerk some suggestions right away. I'd be interested to hear from my colleagues if they have some suggestions right now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

In terms of the witness list, Mr. Menzies, go ahead and speak on the witness list.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We have some suggested witnesses, and we think this will certainly bring a balance, as I've maintained throughout this whole process. We've heard from those who are supportive and those who are critical of it.

So in the spirit of cooperation that this party is so renowned for, I would like to start our wish list with Frank McKenna, because he was involved in the first negotiation. He may be busy doing other things--maybe he's running a leadership race or something, I don't know. I'm just not sure where he is--

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Menzies, stick to the subject, please.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

I'm just thinking that he would be a good witness to bring in.

Gordon Ritchie is another one who has been deeply involved in the softwood industry throughout the years. We'd like to suggest him.

A representative from Canfor, and when we get into the companies--

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Menzies, sorry to interrupt you, but are these prioritized so that we can know that if we give this list to the clerk--

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

That's why I mentioned the Liberal--sorry, Frank McKenna, at the top.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay. It is prioritized. Frank McKenna is at the top--just for clarity.

Go ahead, Mr. Menzies.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

So the order I'm reading this list off in would be the order of my priority.

Some individual from Canfor--and the same with all of these companies. Certainly we'd like the kingpin, if that's possible, but we realize it's summertime and some of us like to take holidays. We'd like to have Weyerhaeuser, the Canadian Lumber Remanufacturers Alliance, the Maritime Lumber Bureau, J.D. Irving, Ltd., Abitibi, the Québec Forest Industry Council--I believe that's the one you referred to, Mr. Paquette--

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Yes.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Then there is Buchanan, Norman Spector, Rich Coleman, and Pierre-Marc Johnson. We certainly have more--

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

If we go to two days of meetings, yes.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

--if our colleagues don't come up with some other names.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Menzies.

Are other parties prepared to do that?

Mr. Julian.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Well, with that list we've pretty well run out of folks who support this agreement in this country. So let's hear from the associations across the country that are opposing this. They include the Québec Forest Industry Council, as Mr. Menzies mentioned; the B.C. Lumber Trade Council; the Ontario Lumber Manufacturers Association; the Independent Lumber Remanufacturers Association; Baker Hostetler's Eliot Feldman, who's one of the legal experts on this whole issue; the Free Trade Lumber Council; the Ontario Forest Industry Association; the Alberta Softwood Lumber Trade Council, which opposed this agreement; the National Association of Home Builders; United Steelworkers of Canada; International Forest Products; and I would also suggest Stephen Atkinson, who did the report yesterday that showed that 20% of the industry would be decimated as a result of this document. That's a start.

But I must say, Mr. Chair, I think you'll find in the next few weeks that you'll be getting letters from communities as well, because certainly this is an issue that has concerned many people in British Columbia. I would not be surprised if you find that you're getting letters from individuals and municipalities stating they're concerned and they want their opportunity to express their concerns about this 80-page document, which is radically different from the two-page document that was presented to us on April 27.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

To go to the official opposition--we'll go to the Bloc too--have you any names that you want to put forth right now, or do you want to hold off for the next couple of days to get a list in that we can work from? We need some time to organize this.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I appreciate that, and that's why I think, Mr. Chairman, that you and the clerk can take these as suggestions. I certainly agree with most of the names that my colleagues on both sides of the table have suggested.

I think the clerk should also look at some provincial government officials or ministers, if we could. For example, the British Columbia provincial government may have somebody they would like to send, and the Ontario government, the Quebec government, and the Saskatchewan government as well. I think we need to think about how we could ask interested provincial governments if they have taken positions publicly. The researchers and the clerk are in a position to know if some of them might be available to share the positions of their government.