International Trade Committee on Feb. 4th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

We're debating an amendment at this point. You've made your case and others will make theirs.

Mr. Julian.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to also urge Mr. Maloney to withdraw his amendment. Marleau and Montpetit says very clearly that committees have the right and the responsibility to report to the House. This issue is one of pressing importance. We're talking about 200 lost jobs each and every day. If this issue isn't one that the committee would choose to report to the House, I can't imagine one that would be. Every single day, there are 200 lost jobs in the forestry manufacturing industries. Essentially, we're talking about 1,000 jobs every five days. Since we started talking about this last Wednesday, the breadwinner in 1,000 more Canadian families has lost a job. So there is a crisis. There's no doubt.

For Parliament to have potentially one three-hour debate on trade issues linked to the loss of 200 manufacturing and forestry jobs a day is not excessive at all. In fact, it's normal.

I would like to come back, Mr. Chair, to this point that the Conservatives have been making, that they do not believe committees should be reporting to the House, except when they tend to agree with the issue that's being discussed. This is something that this trade committee has done on a regular basis. It's important. It has an impact on Canadians' lives and Canadian jobs. To potentially have a three-hour debate provoked from a motion that seems to have agreement from all four corners of the committee chamber here, all four parties involved, I think would be a real mistake.

I'd like to urge the mover of the amendment to withdraw the amendment as well, because it simply takes away that opportunity to have in Parliament a debate that desperately needs to be held, and that the official opposition and the Bloc and the NDP have been unable to obtain from the government by any other means.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Mr. Miller.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

I move that we call the question, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

We've had that consideration. There is no moving of questions. If there are no further speakers, I will call the motion.

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

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I believe there are still names on the speakers list.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

No, there are not.

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

I know that I'm on the speakers list.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

You just spoke.

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

Then you spoke, and then it comes back to the opposition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Well, I'm sorry, I've looked over the list. There were no names on the list. I have repeatedly said that I am dealing strictly with the clerk. The clerk keeps the list. I looked over it, and there are no names on the list.

We have called the question. Those in favour of the amendment—that is, to delete and report the adoption of the motion to the House at the earliest opportunity—please raise their hand.

(Amendment agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

We'll resume debate on the main motion.

Mr. Cannan.

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

So we have an amended motion. I'd like to make one small amendment to that amended motion to reflect our obligations on an international basis. After the line that says “support these sectors”, I'd like to add “while remaining consistent to our international obligations”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Okay, “while remaining consistent with our international obligations”.

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

Or “to our international obligations”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

“Consistent with our international obligations” is grammatically correct.

Do people understand the question? It is:

That the Committee recommend that the government introduce, as soon as possible, an improved aid package for the forestry and manufacturing sectors, including trade measures to support these sectors, while remaining consistent with our international commitments

So I take it that would mean with current trade agreements.

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

That's correct.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

The motion reads:

That the Committee recommend that the government introduce, as soon as possible, an improved aid package for the forestry and manufacturing sectors, including trade measures to support these sectors, while remaining consistent with our international commitments, to consider recommendations of the Canadian

and so on.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I have a question on a point of order, just so we don't tie ourselves in a knot here.

Under the procedural rules, I just want to be clear. Was Mr. Cannan's proposed amendment accepted as a friendly amendment?

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

No, he didn't ask that it be. He just moved an amendment and I have put the motion.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

So we are now voting on that amendment, then?

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Okay. I thought you were voting on the question. My mistake.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

No, I'm voting on Mr. Cannan's amendment.

Is there no debate? Excuse me.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

He asked the question and you said no.