Evidence of meeting #141 for International Trade in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was canola.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Kyle Peterson Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Procedurally I think we vote on the amendment first, and if it passes, then we vote on the amended motion. There is not an opportunity to vote on it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
In all fairness, Mr. Dhaliwal, for translation, you said the whole thing, right? It sounds as though a lot was changed, but there is not a lot of change, and “c.” is out. If that makes it clearer, that “c.” is out, and then we vote on the main motion.
I think, Mr. Dhaliwal, in all fairness to you, you were just trying to be helpful in explaining this. But do you want to make the amendment that “c.” and the date are taken out?
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Surrey—Newton, BC
Sure. I would say that “c.” should be taken out, and where it says—
Liberal
Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC
Mr. Chair, before discussing the point of order, I had asked that the amendment be read again so that I could comment on it. If I may, I would now like to speak to the text of that amendment. There was a point of order on the amendment but I had not heard the wording. As a result I did not get an opportunity to comment on it. If you give me a few moments, before we vote on the amendment, there are two things I'd like to say.
First, I thank you for the clarification because that is indeed what I thought I had heard. I think it is deplorable that we want to withdraw the invitation to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, for a very simple reason: the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food herself, during a Radio-Canada interview on the program Les coulisses du pouvoir said that it was Ms. Freeland, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who “does the follow-up that is needed regarding diplomatic relations with China.”
Today, you are proposing that the committee not invite the Minister of Foreign Affairs, that is to say the person who is responsible for our diplomatic relations with China, and directs them, since Canada does not have an ambassador there at this time. With all due respect to my colleague, I understand that we want to accelerate things, but in the current situation we cannot voluntarily deprive ourselves of an essential actor. I am not the one who says so; the Minister of Agriculture, a minister of this government, says so. I think the committee would be very remiss if it were to withdraw Ms. Freeland's name from the list of witnesses to be invited to address the canola issue. If we do not invite the person who holds discussions with China, people will wonder who is responsible for the file. Her presence is thus absolutely necessary if we want to obtain answers for our producers.
The previous minister of Agriculture was not involved in international discussions. The Minister of International Trade Diversification is, in part, but he is not sitting at the table. If we deprive ourselves of the only person who is able to give us the straight goods on negotiations with China, the committee will be making a serious error. Moreover, that minister is the person responsible for all of the international agreements signed by Canada.
Mr. Dhaliwal, you said earlier that the Prime Minister deems all agricultural files to be a priority. I remember that during his trip to India, the Prime Minister agreed with his Indian counterpart on settling the issue of legume fumigation by the end of 2018. We are now in March 2019, and there is still no solution. I'd like to understand why, and I want to have a chance to put questions to the person who seems to be the only one responsible for negotiations in the current government. Her presence here is indispensable, and our work would be futile, to say the least, if the government's main spokesperson did not appear.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, sir.
We've heard all sides here. Mr. Dhaliwal, if you want to say a quick few words, go ahead, and then we'll go right to a vote on the amendment.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Surrey—Newton, BC
Mr. Chair, the ultimate responsibility for this file goes to the Minister of International Trade Diversification. I think we should not delay this issue. As Mr. Hoback said, this is a time-sensitive issue. Let's get those two ministers, the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of International Trade Diversification, and the officials, who are very key to this issue, and get this resolved.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Okay.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Let's go to the main motion.
Does everybody understand the main motion?
Go ahead, Mr. Hoback.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
On a point of order, Chair, Mr. Masse talked about a separate motion for the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Even though that was dropped from the original in the amendment, we still want to have a standing vote on the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I believe.
Liberal
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I agree with your procedure. I just want assurances from you that we can record the second motion. It's a substantial motion. It's dealing with the topic of the day, so it's all within the orders of the standing order.
You're going to vote it down anyway, so what do you care?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
The clerk has noted that the amendment has been voted on, so now you have to vote on the motion as amended.
Yes, Mr. Barlow.
Foothills, CPC
Just really quickly on the amended motion, you are saying that the date would be the week of April 1. I have a concern with that and I'm just going to voice it. I am more than willing—I think all of us have spoken that we're more than willing—to come back on the break week for this. I can't emphasize enough the timing of this in terms of waiting another two or three weeks. I appreciate that you are going to have the ministers here, but we can't be waiting on the decision. We need an explanation. Do we have the CFIA people on the ground? The prices of every other commodity are being dragged down by this decision on canola.
I appreciate Mr. Dhaliwal saying that the Prime Minister is standing up for agriculture, but as my colleague said, he made a promise to address the fumigation issue with India. That was more than a year ago, and we still don't have that. Our exports on pulses to India have gone down from $4.2 billion to $158 million. That was a significant loss in the last year and a half. Now we're losing another significant market for another product. Our producers cannot handle this. They need these markets or they will not survive.
In terms of waiting two weeks, when we have a break week right there, I am willing to come back. My colleagues are willing to come back. The minister should deal with this. Having the Minister of International Trade Diversification say he is satisfied to leave this in the hands of officials.... We need to understand what our ministers are doing. Are they meeting with their colleagues and their counterparts in China or are they just hoping that their officials will resolve this? That isn't good enough. I would prefer that they were here, and if we can't do it next week, then the week after.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
Mr. Chair, I know that we were looking at bringing in the officials from the grading groups and that sort of thing and the officials of the ministers to look at the issues, but I think it would be imperative, as my colleague and I mentioned earlier, to have someone particularly from JRI. They are the ones who have been suspended in trade here. I wonder if the government would allow that person to come and give us just four, five or six minutes, or whatever the others have, with regard to speaking on the issue.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
This issue is very important, but as the chair, I had calls over the weekend that we have this meeting at two o'clock because MPs had to leave at three o'clock. I listened to their wishes, and that's why everybody moved their schedule to be here earlier.
I would appreciate not repeating this. I think we have to bring this to a vote. If something else comes up afterwards, so be it. An amendment has already been put forward, so I'll bring it to a vote right now.
Yes, Monsieur Berthold.
Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC
I had asked for the floor. I will be very brief.
I was given this little hourglass by the Canola Council of Canada. I simply want to illustrate the urgency of the situation, as pointed out by my colleague Mr. Barlow. Allow me to read what it says on this little hourglass that contains canola.
It says, “By the time this canola runs out, the Canadian canola industry will generate more than $6,000 for our economy.”
You see? It's over. It's gone. We must act quickly. We must have the ministers here sooner than April 1. As was just demonstrated, time is running out.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
I could talk to the ministers to see if they could come earlier and we could see what happens, but right now we have a commitment.
I'll bring this to a vote right now.
Do you want a recorded vote?
Okay.
(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Are all in favour that we close this meeting?
Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC
In conclusion, Mr. Chair, I want to remind you that you said, just before the vote, that you would make representations to ministers to have them appear sooner. Thank you for that. This is urgent, and it seems to me that it is in the interest of the committee that the ministers appear as quickly as possible.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Mark Eyking
Thank you, sir.
I thank all the visiting MPs. This is a very important issue.
Go ahead, Mr. Masse.
