International Trade Committee on May 7th, 2021

Evidence of meeting #29 for International Trade in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was technology.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Canada’s Exports of Environmental and Clean Technology Goods and Services

Committee Business

MPs speaking

Judy Sgro

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay

Also speaking

Tim McMillan President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers

Trent Mell President and Chief Executive Officer, First Cobalt Corp.

Matt Wayland Executive Assistant to the International Vice-President and Canadian Director of Government Relations, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Jocelyn Doucet President and Chief Executive Officer, Pyrowave

Ross Galbraith International Representative, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Clerk of the Committee Ms. Christine Lafrance

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

Terry Sheehan Liberal Sault Ste. Marie, ON

Thank you very much.

I think that we should continue on our path, because we only have a couple more meetings for this particular study. We've all submitted the names of some leading people in the clean, green-tech industry who have cleared their schedules and made themselves available. We've heard the testimony to act now. We must move expeditiously, so I think that behooves us to do that.

In speaking earlier in a committee business meeting, I asked the clerk about the order of precedence, and you said that there's really no order of precedence, just what we determine is important. I'm not saying that the other one is not important, but I think that we could finish this meeting expeditiously and then move forward.

Those are my comments.

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you.

Mr. Blaikie, please go ahead.

2:50 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Thank you very much.

I want to take the opportunity to express my support for the motion. It seems to me that we have about two weeks before the break week, so we might be able to move one of the sessions that we have dedicated to this study to a later date in order to be able to deal with a relatively straightforward piece of private member's business, so that it could be reported back to the House in time to perhaps be taken up in the five weeks after the constituency week in May.

It is a piece of legislation. Committees do normally prioritize legislative work. I think we can shuffle around one of the meetings in this study to be able to accommodate that, and have the bill reported back in a timely way to the House, so that it has a chance of being considered again before the House rises in June.

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much.

Monsieur Savard-Tremblay, the floor is yours.

2:50 p.m.

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

I didn't understand what you said, Madam Chair. The interpreter did not say that.

Do I have the floor?

2:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Your hand was up. Did you want to speak to the motion again before we move on with it?

2:50 p.m.

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

I confess that I don't understand the argument that witnesses have prepared. It would be far more improper if a witness is not ready because we move a meeting ahead. We may ask witnesses to use the notes they have already prepared at a later date, but they are still ready to appear.

I don't understand that argument. We're not talking about cancelling the study here, we're talking about possibly deferring it one meeting. Honestly, if we ever reach a consensus, I would be inclined to suggest that we hold an additional meeting. The difference between considering the bill in early June and doing it as soon as possible is that, if we wait until early June, the session could end before the bill goes back to the House.

It is in everyone's interest to get it back to the House quickly. This is an important bill, and it deserves to be discussed. We have had farmers appear on several occasions, and we have talked about our reality on this. Out of respect for those who don't agree with the bill, we can debate and discuss it. That is what the committee is for.

The current topic under study will not lead to a bill. It is not urgent. We have absolutely no need to complete the study by the end of the parliamentary session. We are not there. We will complete it anyway. I don't feel that this study will particularly suffer from being deferred for one more meeting.

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much, Mr. Savard-Tremblay.

Are there any further comments or discussions?

Seeing no hands up, Madam Clerk, I gather that we require a vote on this.

2:55 p.m.

The Clerk

A recorded vote?

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

I don't know if that's required. I don't think it's required.

2:55 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Why don't we do a recorded vote, Madam Chair?

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Okay, that's fine.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Mr. Savard-Tremblay, I will also have a discussion with the clerk to see if it's possible to move it up a meeting—if it's possible. I will meet with the clerk to see if we can still find some way to accommodate your concerns.

Thank you all very much.

It's Friday, so have a wonderful weekend.

I'll see you on Monday.

The meeting is adjourned.