International Trade Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2020

[Steve Verheul]

Well, I wouldn't say that entirely. I think that as we move forward we have been required to deal with some of the elements that we have to fulfill with respect to the implementation of new agreements. Particularly when it comes to the new agreement with the U.S. and Mexico, we do have additional duties that we have to perform, which will take additional people to perform them.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Just because our time is limited, could you table with the committee where you think you'll have cost savings and where you think you'll have additional expenditures between the forecast that you had in February versus what you project for the remainder of this fiscal year?

[Steve Verheul]

Well, I can. I wouldn't have any difficulty doing that, but I will caution you that this is generally done at a departmental level rather than at a branch-by-branch level. I'm responsible for a branch rather than the department. What you would probably want to see is how things look at a departmental level rather than at some of the smaller branches. Certainly, that information is—

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

The trade committee is always interested in the work of your branch so I would accept that. Of course, if you can table information concerning the wider departmental budget, that would be welcome as well.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

All right. Thank you all very much. I think the departmental officials had several requests from different members for various reports. If you could do your best to supply that information to all the committee members we would very much appreciate that.

The committee can now proceed with the adoption of the vote referred to the House. Note that it is not mandatory to do a vote, but without a report, the main estimates are being deemed reported.

For your information, one vote was referred to the committee by the House under Invest in Canada. In the main estimates, that vote was at $34,291,556. In March and June the House adopted 9/12ths of that amount through interim supply. Therefore, the amount before the committee now is $8,571,889.

Is it the will of the committee to proceed with the adoption of the main estimates?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Madam Chair, I apologize. I am just getting used to the virtual proceedings. If other members would like to have a recorded vote, that's fine, but I don't know if I could recommend that we just consider it agreed to on division at this time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I believe so.

Is there any further discussion on that? Is everyone in agreement with that?

Okay, it will be agreed to on division. I have to finish one spot here, though.

INVEST IN CANADA HUB

Vote 1—Program Expenditures..........$34,291,556

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), the committee will now dispose of the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021, minus the interim supply the House agreed to on March 13 and on June 17, 2020. Shall vote 1 under Invest in Canada Hub be carried?

I believe Mr. Blaikie said it would be carried on division.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Aboultaif, yes.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Are we still supposed to have the witnesses as we discuss this?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

As soon as we complete this vote, the witnesses will be leaving, sir.

(Vote 1 agreed to on division)

Shall I report the vote to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you to our witnesses for spending so much time with us. We were able to get in a lot of questions and answers today so that was very much appreciated. You are welcome to leave the meeting.

Thank you to all the witnesses who were here.

We'll give the witnesses a second to leave.

We have some committee business now, which consists of the discussion of Mr. Dhaliwal's motion.

We had your motion Mr. Dhaliwal. Mr. Sheehan had moved two suggested amendments.

Mr. Sheehan, do you want to move the two amendments?

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I certainly will move the two amendments once again. It is important for us to finish the discussion and make sure, as you explained so well last time, why it's so important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay, Mr. Dhaliwal.

[The Clerk]

I have three amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

The committee has all three amendments. Let's take them individually.

This wonderful system we're on here....

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Did you say something to me? I couldn't hear it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

It was suggested that Mr. Sheehan was going to move several amendments to your motion. Okay?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Sure. Go ahead, Terry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I so move, Madam Chair, and I'll let you pick up from where we left off last time.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Madam Chair, on a point of order, I just want to verify that the three amendments are actually what you said had to be changed in order to be in order, based on the recommendations from the clerk. Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Absolutely, and if anybody has trouble with them, we can vote on them individually. I believe everybody has ensured that the clerk circulated another listing.

On the first one, this simply makes it easier for me to have committee business, and that's the whole motion on there:

That the Chair may schedule all or portions of a meeting to be in camera for the reasons listed above;

That's in Mr. Dhaliwal's motion.

Is everyone in favour of that amendment?

(Amendment agreed to)

This is the second part that was suggested:

That any motion to sit in camera shall be subject to a debate where the mover, and one member from each of the other recognized parties, be given up to three minutes each to speak to the motion; and that the mover shall then be given up to one minute to respond.

This is simply so that we don't spend an hour debating whether or not we're going to go in camera. It just gives some timelines on it.

Is there any discussion? Is everyone in favour of that amendment?

(Amendment agreed to)

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

Right on.