Okay, that's heard and noted.
From the Bloc, Mr. André.
Evidence of meeting #15 for International Trade in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
Evidence of meeting #15 for International Trade in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Guy André Bloc Berthier—Maskinongé, QC
A number of Quebec industries and associations could be asked to appear, such as the Fédération des travailleurs et des travailleuses du papier et de la forêt, which is part of the CSN, the Conseil du libre-échange pour le bois d'oeuvre, and the Conseil de l'industrie forestière du Québec. However, I want you to know that Mr. Chevrette will not be available on the 31; he would be available on the 21st. And finally, there is the Steelworkers' Union.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
We have a good start. I understand there may be a few more coming from the Liberals and some representatives from communities as noted by the NDP.
Mr. Julian, go ahead.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Because we did mention a couple of the provinces--Quebec and British Columbia--I would suggest Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario. Each of those provinces has also taken a position on this agreement.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
As we can, sure. That's noted too. That was recommended I think by the Liberals.
There was a question earlier as to where we intend to go with this committee. Are we going to produce a report that is put together by the clerk? What's the reason for this meeting?
Monsieur Paquette.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Chairman, a number of businesses, governments and associations have asked the government to go back to the bargaining table to renegotiate certain aspects of the July 1st agreement. Ultimately, what we want is for the government to understand that and sit back down with the U.S. authorities to arrive at an agreement that businesses operating in this sector consider acceptable. I fully agree with the idea of submitting a report to the government as soon as possible. I believe that the government will follow our recommendations, and that it will understand that some people are not happy and want the government to return to the bargaining table. At that point, we can prepare a report, but our main goal is for the government to hear the views of people who have objections to the July 1st agreement.
If the government refuses to budge, it won't be our fault. We will at least have taken our responsibilities as members of the International Trade Committee.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Merci, Monsieur Paquette.
Does that mean, Mr. Paquette, that you agree that we follow the normal procedure of the committee, and after the witnesses have been heard, we have the clerk put together a report, which will be discussed by the committee and presented to the government in the normal fashion? Is that what you expect? We have to know where we're going with this.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
I agree with the idea of presenting a report in early September regarding the July 1st agreement. We obviously are not going to wait for the House to resume in order to make our report public. That is the difference. If the House were sitting, we would table it and debate it. But we cannot do that.
At the beginning of September, before the House resumes, I would like to see this Committee's position and recommendations made public. We can then table our report once the House has resumed its work. I don't really know how we should proceed, but…
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Helena Guergis Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think what I'm hearing is that you're not prepared to allow the researchers to do their work and prepare their report on behalf of the committee. Is that exactly what I'm hearing? I trust the work of the researchers. They've done an excellent job in the past, and I think we should allow them to do their job, because that is their job.
I think what I'm hearing from you is that you are going to produce your own motion again and introduce it as a report. That's not what I'm hearing? Are you going to allow the researchers--
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Yes, but I would like that report to be available and for the Committee to be able to discuss it in early September. We will set a date on the 21st. I don't want to wait until the House resumes on September 18th to discuss this report. It may be too late by then: the government may well introduce legislation without considering the views of industry, which would then put us in a very difficult position, politically. I really hope it does not come to that.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Just for clarity, if I could, because it really isn't clear to me, and maybe I'm missing something, are you, Mr. Paquette, prepared--no matter when this report is tabled or is presented to the government--to have the researchers put the report together based on the information presented by the witnesses? Is that agreed?
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Chairman, ideally that would mean that after our meetings on July 31st and August 21st, if we feel we have enough information -- and I hope we will -- another meeting could be held in early September, perhaps after Labour Day, to discuss the report drafted by our research staff and, possibly, adopt it in committee.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Rahim Jaffer Conservative Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Since we're in the spirit of proposing more meetings here, I wanted to ask...this is obviously quite significant: the witness list, as it's developing, and the amount of time that's going to be committed to these two meetings. Personally, if we're going to go straight into hearing witnesses, I would first of all like to hear a briefing from the department on the technicalities of this agreement. I mean, I've only had so much information as well, even being on the government side. We haven't had a lot of time to go through this.
So I would like to propose that we get a technical briefing before the witnesses come in--because we are proposing some pretty important witnesses here--and have the staff from the department also give us their rundown on whether or not our witness list is complete, or maybe some suggestions that we may have left out. I think this should happen before any meeting on July 31.
I would say, since we're all here and working, that Tuesday, July 18, we should meet and get the department here, because we might need a long time to go through this agreement. So I want to propose this, and I know the opposition won't oppose, because they want to work and they are taking this very seriously.
So let's get a technical briefing next week on July 18 to prepare for the witness list, because we may need to add more people to this list and get their information. That way we're prepared for July 31.
So I propose that we--
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Okay. If we can get that motion down, that we have a briefing from departmental officials on July 18--here in Ottawa, I assume; we can't have it in Edmonton.
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
No, I'm afraid not.
So that's the motion. We will now have a discussion on the motion.