International Trade Committee on Nov. 22nd, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

We have some clarity there. That would require a separate motion or suggestion after we vote on the amendment. To try to move it along--because I think we have some kind of consensus here--the motion would now read....

Clerk, do you want to read it again, as it was?

We could just follow carefully, just to see what would happen. The essence of this would be, then, that we're going to have a study of the Canada-Korea bilateral agreement currently being negotiated, and when that study is completed we would report that to the House. That is the intent of Mr. Pallister's motion.

To identify and address the other concerns that were raised, we would subsequently have a motion or a notion of the committee that we're going to put out a press release and announce it. I should say that it is already on the website of the committee, because we passed this on Tuesday. It might be redundant, but for clarity I'm happy to put a press release out.

Again, for clarity, would you like to read the motion, and then I think we can move on.

[The Clerk]

I just cleaned up some of the wording at the end a little bit. It would read:

That the Standing Committee on International Trade conduct extensive hearings on the implications of the Canada-Korea bilateral agreement currently being negotiated, specifically hearing testimony from a wide variety of sectors and diverse regions of Canada, and that the committee investigate alternative ways to build and strengthen Canada’s trade relationship with Korea, and that once completed the committee report this to the House.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Chair, there's a subamendment too, that the committee will issue a press release and also write to the minister responsible that we are doing this study.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I think there's an understanding that that's fine and acceptable. I wonder if we could do that in a separate motion.

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I'm going to call the question.

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

Mr. Chair, you have a speakers list on whatever amendment Mr. Pallister has put forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

All right, go ahead. Do you want to speak again, is that what it is?

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

Yes, very much so.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Carry on.

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

Mr. Chair, it's very simple. We can see what's going on here. What the Conservatives are trying to do is stop reports that normally come from international trade through to the House. Last year we had a report, a motion was brought forward--supported by members of the Bloc, members of the Liberal Party, Mr. Bains, Mr. Maloney, Mr. Temelkovski--to the House of Commons to inform members of the House of Commons that we had concerns about the non-imposition of special measures against the cheap imports that were causing massive job losses in the textile and clothing industry.

Now, that is a tool the committee uses from time to time to ensure that members of the House are aware of what this committee is doing. And yes, members of the House take a keen interest in our issues, particularly the Canada-Korea trade agreement, because of the potential for lost jobs.

By moving away from that precedent that is used by almost all committees--and Mr. Pallister well knows that committees report—

[Brian Pallister, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

It's not a point of order. Let him finish, and let's get on with it.

[Brian Pallister, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Well, it's not used by most committees. That's a false statement, and he knows it. He should know it, if he doesn't.

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

It is used by most committees. It is a motion. When motions are adopted by a committee, they can be brought forward to the House of Commons.

Now, our study, if we start it now, won't be complete until February. We're looking at having sessions through the month of December, then we have a January break, then we come back in February.

The minister has indicated that he wants to complete negotiations this year, 2007. He indicated that earlier in the year. So we have a situation where the government is pushing ahead and essentially saying that opposition members can't notify members of the House of Commons that we're conducting a study. And yes, it does have an impact on—

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Mr. Julian, with respect, we already have notified the House. It's on the website. We passed this motion on Tuesday.

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

Notifying members of the House of Commons is done in the House of Commons, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

You're now being redundant.

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

As you're well aware, it's not done through press releases or through economic statements that take place outside of the House of Commons. It's done in the House of Commons. That's a tradition that took place under the Liberal government, and I hope that would continue under the Conservative government.

If we have systematic objection every single time by the Conservatives, every time a motion is brought forward that they're reporting it to the House, that is a major change in procedure for the international trade committee. It has implications.

The clerk indicated that the process for concurrence motions is fairly complicated and fairly long. It doesn't automatically move for a three-hour debate. What it does is provide some possibility for debate, given order of precedence, at some future time. All it does is to instantly inform all members of Parliament that we are conducting a study, and if the government does try to push something through, it allows us, as committee members, to put our motion in an order of precedence that may or may not result in a debate further on.

I would caution about adopting this amendment. It changes the whole focus of the committee, and I don't think that's in the interests of any member of the opposition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Is there any further debate?

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

I'm on the list--just a short comment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Can we not just get to this?

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

Yes, we can.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

I think we know the points on both sides.