International Trade Committee on May 17th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Good morning, everyone. Let's get started with the meeting this morning.

We do have witnesses, of course, on our machinery of government study. We will get to them in just a little while.

We have some committee business to deal with. The first is the notice of motion of non-confidence by Peter Julian. The second is bulk water removals and the report. I'll just explain that when we get to it, but it won't take long, I hope. The third one is the press release on travel. I'm hoping we can deal with all these issues very quickly and get on to our witnesses, because we certainly would like maximum time with our two witnesses here today.

Perhaps we could start. In terms of the notice of motion of non-confidence, Peter Julian is on the agenda. I don't know whether Mr. Julian wants to deal with this today or not.

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

Mr. Chair, as you know, putting forward a motion and giving that 48 hours' notice then allows the motion to be tabled at any time with the committee. I'm not putting forward the motion at this time. I may later in the meeting or at the next meeting, or at the meeting after that. But for the moment, the fact that I've provided the 48 hours' notice is sufficient to bring it back at the committee at a later time of my choosing. I'm not bringing it forward at this moment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay.

I didn't recognize the member with the comments there.

Let's go on to the second item, which is the report on bulk water removals. Of course, the Bloc motion was passed by this committee. The only issue with that—and this is something I requested at the time—is that we decide on a particular length of time that would be allowed to bring forth dissenting opinions, or any opinions, any reports, to be amended to the main report.

At the time the committee decided that we would have to decide, with each report, how much time would be allowed. I suggested at the time that we just establish 48 hours, or whatever it is, so we don't have to deal with it. We forgot to deal with that when we dealt with the motion at the last meeting.

So I just want to go to the committee to ask how much time we will allow, or have allowed, for dissenting opinions to be attached to that report.

Yes, Monsieur Cardin.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I thought the appropriate time for indicating one's intention of tabling a dissenting report was when the motion passes.

Normally, this motion should have been tabled in the House. I imagine that could have been done yesterday and that it could still be done today. Tomorrow is Friday.

I don't know whether the discussion with respect to a potential dissenting report is intended to delay the tabling of the motion in the House, but the appropriate time to inform the Committee of one's intention of tabling a dissenting report is normally when the motion is passed.

I would also like to hear the Clerk's opinion in that regard.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Monsieur Cardin, first of all, my hands as chair are tied. They were tied by the committee when the committee decided that with each report we would determine how much time we would allow for a dissenting opinion to be attached. I have no choice but to respect that. I would like the committee to change that opinion at some time, but I don't want to deal with that now. It's up to you if you want to.

So all we need from the committee today is to say how long will be allowed for members to attach a dissenting report. So perhaps we could just deal with that quickly. If the committee decides 48 hours is the right length of time, which is very common, then I can have it tabled in the House tomorrow.

Yes, Mr. Julian.

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

Mr. Chair, these are motions that are adopted by committee. It would be absurd to start to have a motion that is then followed by a dissenting motion, and then followed by another dissenting motion. It just becomes absolutely bizarre. What we have is the opportunity to provide a dissident report when the committee provides a full report, as we did with the international trade committee report that we completed a few weeks ago. There, it's a very complex matter.

It's obvious that each party might agree or disagree with certain of the recommendations, and it's important to be on the record, and we've clearly indicated that the parties have the right to be on the record for these reports. But for a motion, we're already on record. We voted on the motion. We had a recorded vote, so every single member of the Canadian public would know which member supported that motion and which member did not support the motion. But it's absolutely absurd to get into the point where we have a two-paragraph motion, followed by another two-paragraph motion from the Conservatives because they disagree with the motion that was adopted. It's just an absurd practice.

So there was in Mr. Menzies' motion absolutely no indication that it would apply to all motions. We adopted a motion. It's on the record, whether Conservatives supported it or not, and you should have tabled the report this week.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Julian, this is the ninth report of this committee to the House. It is a report to the House. This committee has tied my hands. You know what's gone on at this committee over the past few meetings. As chair, I hesitate to step out of line or to make calls that I normally, quite frankly, would make as chair. That's a result of what's happened at this committee. If we could just get on with this and decide how much time—we have witnesses waiting—I think that would be the appropriate way to handle it.

If we want to take this to the steering committee or back to this committee at some future time and say that for any report we'll allow 48 hours for people to attach dissenting opinions, then we can do that.

But I would encourage the committee to get on to the witnesses we have here today.

Mr. André.

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

Mr. Chairman, I agree with my colleague. I believe the motion carried on a majority vote. I think that your duty, as Chair, is to table that report in the House, as passed here by the Committee.

Furthermore, as regards the motion, I am pleased to see that the French translation is good. As for the English, we may want the Clerk to check it. In the fourth paragraph, the motion reads:

Whereas this situation puts the provincial and federal laws concerning the protection of water, including the prohibition of bulk water exports;

In the English version, I think we may have to add the words “at risk”. I am not moving a motion, but I did want to mention that it's important that correction be made when you table the motion in the House.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Yes.

The clerk had pointed that out to me before you mentioned it, Mr. André. That is what was intended, and we can make that change. It's just accommodating what was agreed to.

Can somebody make a motion that the committee allow 48 hours, or whatever, for dissenting opinions to be put in?

Mr. Julian.

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

Mr. Chair, I propose that we simply have this report tabled in the House as soon as possible and that we allow the vice-chair, Mr. Cardin, to present the report in the House as soon as possible. There is no allowance for any additional muddying of the waters around this motion that was adopted.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Actually, I apologize to Mr. Allison and Mr. Cannan, who were both on my list to speak before your motion, Mr. Julian.

But it's out of order, because the committee had agreed, in fact, to allow dissenting reports to be attached and had decided to determine how long would be allowed to do that in each case. How do we now just throw that aside and go on with a motion that contradicts a procedure agreed to by this committee just a few weeks ago?

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

If we adopt this motion, Mr. Chair, the committee is making a decision on it. We're saying that there's no dissenting attachment to this report in this case.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I am going to Mr. Allison and Mr. Cannan.

I apologize, gentlemen.

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

I was just thinking, Mr. Chair, that to avoid any confusion in the future, at this time I'd like to present a motion that we could—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

There is a motion. I shouldn't have, then...because I should have recognized you. I apologize.

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

My comments were the same as yours; that this is a report, and we should be allowed a dissenting opinion, which you've already put on the table.

I'll just leave it at that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Allison.

Mr. Cannan, I apologize.

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

I have similar comments, Mr. Chair.

I just want to clarify that we had agreed as a committee that whenever there was a report tabled we'd have an opportunity to prepare a dissenting report. On the last discussion, on the eighth report, we had the same.... I guess some people have short memories, but I remember quite clearly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay.

Mr. Temelkovski.

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

In terms of reports, I think we all agree that we did agree to have dissenting reports reported back to the chair within a specific period. What I think happened here is that when Mr. Cardin tabled his motion, it was not a report; it was a motion.

Maybe you and the clerk can clear up for us what the difference is between a motion and a report when it's reported to the House, so that we all know the technical aspects of a motion and a report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Temelkovski, the thing is that this is being reported to the House, because the motion that we passed asks for that, I believe. That was passed by the committee, so it is being reported to the House for exactly that reason. Again, in the future I hope we would just allow 48 hours. Everybody knows. We won't have to deal with this—

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible—Editor]—did that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Well, we didn't. That's what we tried to do, but the opposition decided that every time there was a report to the House we would determine how long. That's correct, isn't it? Yes, that is correct.

So here we are. Mr. Julian's motion is out of order because we have agreed to a procedure on this. Could somebody bring forth a motion with a certain amount of time?

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Could you explain what I asked, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Just ask again, Mr. Temelkovski. I didn't fully understand your question.