Evidence of meeting #36 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.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
And I was so excited. I thought we were actually moving ahead with this.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. Cannan has spoken to the motion. Everyone has it in front of them now.
Mr. Julian.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to speak against this latest chapter in railroading. Mr. Chair, what we saw last Thursday and what we're seeing today is the railroading through of legislation that has profound consequences for the softwood industry and for softwood communities across the country.
We're looking at a situation in which, on October 13, we won the victory in the Court of International Trade. As of last Friday, Mr. Chair, what we've seen is that Customs and Border Protection is now paying out 100% dollars to the companies that have not signed on to the government's botched arrangement. So we have companies that have arranged through EDC and are actually having deductions made from their moneys that they shouldn't have to have made because we won October 13 and because there are 100% dollars coming back.
We don't have to give away $1 billion. We don't have to impose these handcuffs on our softwood industry. We have to go very carefully in considering Bill C-24 clause by clause.
We've had only one day of witnesses, Mr. Chair. Again, we've had the refusal on behalf of this committee to hear witnesses, even though we've had witnesses from across the country indicating very clearly that they want to be heard by this committee. It is incumbent upon us to be very careful and to be very responsible when we are moving to consider the clause-by-clause amendments.
Mr. Chair, what we have here before us is something that would put us out of sequence. The Atlantic exemption is something the NDP fought for. I was very happy to see the comments by Monsieur LeBlanc in today's newspaper, talking about the fact that the NDP's work last Thursday helped contribute to pushing the government to repair at least that portion of Bill C-24.
The normal process of clause-by-clause amendment, as you well know, Mr. Chair, is sequential. It is done that way, sequentially, so that, assuming the drafting has been done right, we can work through the bill clause by clause, moving from one clause to the next one that is related. By doing this, we are throwing that sequence out. We are throwing out the sequence that has been established by the bill. I believe it is going to lead to further confusion, Mr. Chair, as we continue on into the evening and the early morning hours tomorrow and as folks get tired.
Definitively, this is not the way to approach legislation, especially legislation that has such a profound consequence on the lives of Canadians in softwood communities across the country. If we're going out of sequence, what we're essentially doing is throwing a monkey wrench into our own functioning as a committee. We then come back to what is out of sequence, and I can predict right now, Mr. Chair, that we're going to have difficulties. People are going to be unaware of where we are. There's not going to be the consideration that needs to be taken.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Time's up, Mr. Julian. That's three minutes and ten seconds. Thank you.
Mr. Cannan, do you want to go ahead now?
Conservative
Bloc
Serge Cardin Bloc Sherbrooke, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to ensure that officials will be providing important clarifications with respect to all of the amendments listed here, because some points deal with exactly the same clauses. Changes have been made by officials from time to time, as well as by the government and the various parties.
As well, I did not think that you were going to ask us to vote on all of these as a package. With many of these clauses, we need to be able to make a choice. It is important that officials provide clarification regarding certain amendments, so that we can see the differences between them and can then make an enlightened decision. I hope that in such cases, we will be given more than three minutes.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Monsieur Cardin, in fact, what the motion says is that we will still deal with these amendments one at a time. We'll still have the debate on each of these amendments, and we'll vote on them separately. It's just that we will do them in this order rather than going through the amendments in the order they're presented. It's just an order change; that's all it is. The debate will still take place on each amendment, and we'll vote separately on each amendment, I assure you.
Is there any other debate? No? Then let's go to the recorded division on this motion.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 10; nays 1)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Mr. Cannan, I jumped the gun before, but you can go ahead.
Mr. Menzies, okay.
(On clause 10--Charge imposed)
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As I started to say, Mr. Casey was going to put forward this amendment. Unfortunately, he's not able to be here today and he asked if I would present it on his behalf. I hope, with the indulgence of the committee, I'm allowed to do that.
It's very specifically just a clarification of the wording.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, what is Mr. Menzies referring to?
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
It's amendment 5 to clause 10, the first one on the motion we just passed.
The current version of the bill fails to reflect—
Conservative
November 7th, 2006 / 9:25 a.m.
Conservative
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
We're going to amendments on clause 5, not on clause 10.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
On amendment 5, which is an amendment to clause 10.... You have the sheet there and these are the amendments. The motion said we will deal with those amendments in the order listed, starting with amendment 5.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
The amendment numbers are on the bottom of the page.
It's actually the page number. You're correct, Mr. LeBlanc.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Chair, the amendment number I have is amendment 9. There's some real confusion. If Mr. Menzies is referring to amendment 5, I have amendment 9, and I'm not sure what the other parties have. The amendments should be based on the clauses and the amendments would move to clause 5, not to amendment 5, which is numbered differently.
It's because...
You have a different numbering system, Ted.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
I understand what you're saying, Mr. Julian. Technically, on page 5 it is amendment CPC-1.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Chair, that's not the motion we adopted. The motion we adopted is based on clauses, which means we are moving to clause 5.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
I understand what you're saying, Mr. Julian.
Could we make a quick correction to the motion to refer to it as the amendment on page numbers, and then...the page numbers as mentioned?
Monsieur Cardin.
Bloc
Serge Cardin Bloc Sherbrooke, QC
Mr. Chairman, here we have the list of clauses to be covered. Normally, if we were following the list of amendments, we would now be at page 3, clause 5, and therefore, BQ-1. It's important that we be told which clause we're looking at, the page number, and who has moved the amendment in each case.
We will come to the motion that has been tabled once we are on clause 10. That is the first one of the series. We will cover them all, but for the time being, it would be advisable not to cause too much confusion. We are now on clause 5, which is on page 3 of the amendment booklet. This is the first BQ amendment. When we arrive at clause 10, CPC-1, which is on page 5, we will consider all similar amendments together.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Monsieur Cardin, Mr. Julian's point was that technically the amendment on page 5--and page 5 is what's referred to in the motion--is actually amendment CPC-1, so for easier reference, perhaps we could just modify the motion to say “the amendments on page” and then “5”, “6”, “9”, “10”, and so on. It makes it easier to deal with them that way, because we've been referring to them all the way through so far based on their page numbers. That was the intent of the motion, clearly.
For clarification, the number at the bottom of the page is a page number. The amendment, technically, is CPC-1. We have been referring to the page number of the amendment as we have been working through them, so can we just understand that's what we're referring to in the motion--the amendment on page 5, page 6, page 9, and so on?
Mr. Cannan is next.
