International Trade Committee on May 15th, 2007

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Chair, this makes me smile, considering how similar our requests are. As chair, you have to assume that members at this table receive their documents, and take the time to read them and consult them before making decisions. In this case, you did not assume that we had done our homework. The same goes for the motion. We assume that there are still doubts that water could become an exportable commodity. So I smile when I see that I am asking much the same thing in this motion, to protect water. The government side claims that it already is protected, but, better safe than sorry, as they say. So I would specifically state that water is not a commodity covered by NAFTA.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Merci, monsieur Cardin.

That's exactly my point. The committee asked for these legal opinions. We received them for the sake not so much of committee members but of anybody reading the information that led to this decision being made by the committee.

The motion has been made and seconded that we include these legal opinions that we asked for. The motion is on the floor. Is there any further discussion?

We'll go to the question. Those who support the motion, please raise your hands.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

I request a recorded division, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I'm sorry. I have recognized Monsieur André.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

I request a recorded division, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You want a recorded division? Sure.

We'll go to a recorded division on the motion. The clerk will read it off.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

To clarify, Mr. Chair, this recommendation for the legal opinion was brought forward from the last committee by the Liberals; is that correct?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

That is correct. It was requested and was agreed to by all members.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

It is unanimous.

Gentlemen, let's move ahead, then. Now we go to the question on Monsieur Cardin's motion as amended.

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

I request a recorded division.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay, we'll go to a recorded division. It has been requested.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Now, was there another order of business that someone had requested? We want to get on to the witnesses.

Mr. Bains, we'll hear your motion.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thank you very much. I'd like to move my motion. It's a motion that we've discussed in the past. It's a very straightforward motion written to deal with witnesses being brought forth and to develop a process that would be deemed acceptable by all members. This was in light of some of the confusion or potential problems that existed in the past.

I believe this motion is relatively straightforward. Everyone has been given a copy of the motion. Basically it outlines a way to include all the potential witnesses in the subcommittee. The motion is there for the members to read, and if any discussion or issues need to be raised, I'd be more than glad to address them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I'll give the members a minute to read the motion. Then we'll go to discussion on the motion.

Is there any discussion on the motion before we go to the question? Mr. Julian.

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

Mr. Chair, this makes very good sense. I'm glad that Mr. Bains is proposing this. We've had it for the last couple of weeks. It simply is a type of procedure that allows all four parties to have input into choosing witnesses coming before us and allows us to provide for balanced appearances--from the business community, but also from labour, from civil society, from individuals.

This is extremely important. Because trade has such an impact on people from coast to coast to coast, Canadians, I think, are intensely interested in the direction of trade policy: where we should be going, where we have gone. It hasn't been to the advantage of most Canadian families, which is why we've seen this income crisis, with 80% of Canadian families actually having their income fall over the last 18 years. This is a good way of ensuring that all views are heard around the table and that all parties can contribute to selecting the witnesses who are brought before us.

I fully support this motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Allison.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Yes, I figured that my friend from the NDP would.

I would like to add an amendment to this, that the witnesses be balanced both for and against.

Unfortunately, Mr. Julian is a very persuasive member of Parliament. He seems to be wagging this committee more than he should. He only has one vote out of thirteen, but he seems to have an awful lot of power in this committee.

I believe we should be having for and against, not just three opposition members versus one government member. I think I'd like to see that those invited to appear as witnesses be divided as for, against, and balanced.

The amendment would be after the second line, to read: “That the committee or the subcommittee on procedure and agenda decide on who will be invited to appear, and that the number of witnesses be balanced both for and against”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Monsieur André.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the importance you give to both official languages. I do not know if you have noticed, but the Liberal motion has a major error in the French. It reads “Avis de motion par le Partie libéral”, but the word “parti” has no “e”. If both languages are official, the French has at least to be correctly spelled.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

There is on the clerk's version now. So could you all correct that “e” as noted?

Is there any other discussion before we go to the question and then to our witnesses?

Mr. Cannan.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Just to clarify, the subcommittee has always been coming back to the committee as a whole to make decisions. In this case, is that going to be the procedure? Or are we just going to abolish the subcommittee? It hasn't functioned very well in the past.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You gentlemen have heard the question from Mr. Cannan.

Monsieur Cardin.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

I am waiting for the answer too, but I can speak next, if someone wants to clue Mr. Cannan in.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

It's up to the committee to clarify. I certainly can't do that. I'm not certain what the committee wants.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

So, let me move to another question. No one can oppose the suggestion to try to invite witnesses who take different positions, some in favour of a proposal and others against. Ideally, all points of view should be expressed, and sometimes, we should hear not just from two opposing positions but from a range of positions. Given that proposals made by the government often do not find universal acceptance, we should not hold it against the government if it cannot maintain the balance between pro and con. What counts is the intent, and I do not want us to feel locked into an exact balance between two possibly divergent positions. We must also be ready to welcome witnesses who want to meet us.