Evidence of meeting #1 for International Trade in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Mr. Sheehan, do you want to speak to your motion?
I also see that Mr. Masse's hand is up. Monsieur Savard-Tremblay will go after him.
Mr. Sheehan, go ahead first, please, to speak to your motion.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Sheehan Liberal Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Thank you very much.
I'll take Randy's friendly amendment and I'll read it in. I move:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee study the ongoing trade challenges faced by Canadian workers and industry in the United States in the light of the harmful Build Back Better and EV provisions and that the committee reports its finding to the House.
As far as how long it should go, that's not in the notice of motion, but I would suggest that we need at least six meetings on this, and probably more. However, I would seek the committee's input on how many meetings we would hold. There should be at least six. We can add more as we need them, when we draw up the witness list, etc., as per usual.
Many of the people around this table I have worked with on similar motions, whether it was the section 232 tariffs, the manufacturing study or the steel study that we did.
I've read it into the record and I welcome discussion on that.
Thank you.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much, Mr. Sheehan.
You're amending your motion to indicate, instead of “Buy America”, “Build Back Better”, as suggested by Mr. Hoback.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON
I have a couple of points. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Sheehan, for proposing this study. I think most of us would agree—I haven't heard from everyone, however—that this is a very pressing issue to study, so I laud you for proposing it.
I agree with you that the quantum of the meetings makes a lot of sense.
What I would say in respect of what Mr. Hoback raised earlier is that while I appreciate that we've just passed a routine motion talking about the subcommittee on procedure, I think this matter is quite timely. Therefore, for the purposes of getting started with committee business, I propose that we vote on this particular motion now, so that the committee can start its scheduling, preparing witnesses, etc., as opposed to waiting for the subcommittee on procedure to convene.
I think the language could be a bit more elegant, so I'm going to take a stab at it, because I am a lawyer, Madam Chair, and this is what lawyers do. I would say it should read to the effect, “the ongoing trade challenges faced by Canadian workers in industry as regards the United States' Build Back Better legislation, buy America policy, and EV tax credit provisions and that the committee reports its findings to the House”. I think that would encompass everything that Mr. Hoback mentioned and be a bit tighter in terms of the grammar.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
I have to go to Mr. Masse next, then Monsieur Savard-Tremblay and then we'll go to Mr. Hoback.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair. I agree with all of that.
I would also add a component, “and the committee study and report on Canadian EV incentives”. We have our current incentive program—I've written the minister on this—that is actually going to the United States. There are about eight vehicles that they have as well, too. I think that would strengthen the case for the minister and also for information going out to the public that balances what's taking place between both the countries.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
I’m going to digress a bit, but I would like to make it clear in passing that I do, of course, support this study, which concerns us all.
How would you like us to proceed, as I also have a proposal for a study topic? Do you want me to present it now and then we can decide on the order of priority?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
That was the question, and I got direction from the committee on whether they wanted to discuss committee business. We started with Mr. Sheehan's motion for discussion. Once we have settled Mr. Sheehan's motion—when the committee has given direction on it—then you can introduce any other subjects or thoughts.
It's a general committee business opportunity to talk about the kinds of things you would like to see the committee deal with.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
The order of priority therefore doesn’t necessarily reflect the order in which motions are adopted.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Well, this is the first motion that was sent to the clerk. We are discussing what we will do with it. Once we have disposed of it, in whichever way we choose to do, then we will go on to whatever items the committee members introduce.
We'll get back to you, Mr. Savard-Tremblay, once we've completed the discussion on this.
Mr. Hoback.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Thank you, Chair.
I'm trying to think of process and procedures in this. Again, I don't think anybody has a problem with this study; it's whether this is the first or second study that we do, with what my colleague from the Bloc is trying to make. That's why we have a subcommittee, though. I don't think we can short-step that subcommittee at this point in time.
I think what would be a good use of our time is—I know what Terry has proposed and how you've amended it—to have them bring forward one item to the subcommittee, instead of amending it on the fly, because there's been no talk about travelling to the U.S. and having meetings in the U.S. I would think that would be part of committee travel that we should be considering.
Again, I think it needs to be fleshed out a little bit more.
Today they announced negotiations on the U.K. deal, so we've got ASEAN, we have the U.K. We have other things coming up. We still have softwood lumber sitting in the background, which looks like it needs some work. There are lots of things that have priority. While the Liberals view EV as a huge priority, and I agree with them, there are other sectors that are saying they're a priority too and asking where we have been.
I think that's where it has to come back to the subcommittee, and then we can figure out what to propose for a calendar to the committee of the whole. Otherwise, we will go around this table six times, with 10 different ideas on what we should do first. I think that's the power of the subcommittee. Let's try to get it done on a calendar at the subcommittee, and then bring it back. If you want to have a subcommittee meeting quickly this week, I'd be more than happy to accommodate that, for sure.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have two things. On the amended words from Mr. Virani, I would like to suggest that before the word “legislation”, we should include “proposed legislation” or “the legislation currently under consideration”.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I have a point of order.
I'm sorry, Chandra.
This is the problem I see, Chair. We're going to start debating one debate and we have other people in other areas talking about different things. It's just not going to function properly if we do that.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Yes, I believe it does.
If you want to meet tomorrow morning at eight o'clock on the subcommittee—
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
To be fair to everybody here, I'm sure the Bloc and NDP have some ideas they'd like for studies, so let's get them all in the basket. If we need a day or two to get them to the clerk and then you have everything to look at, then we can sit down to figure that out.
