Natural Resources Committee on May 7th, 2007

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

What are you answering no to?

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

No, I don't think it could be longer than an hour.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

I understand, Mr. Chair, but the meeting with the minister will only last one hour. The question I'm asking my Liberal, Conservative and NDP colleagues is the following: As parliamentarians, do you think that it is responsible of us to receive the minister for only one hour and that no time has been set aside to put questions to department officials on the department's budget?

I'd also like to know if the minister will be appearing alone or accompanied. If he is accompanied, I believe that we will able to ask him more specific questions, because his assistants will be able to answer. Mr. Chair, since I am a newly elected MP, I believe that it is important for me to do my job as a parliamentarian and take the time to study a budget which, after all, deals with large amounts. I would like you to tell me if at our next meeting, we can set aside an additional 30 or 45 minutes to ask officials questions, if we have some, after having heard from the minister on Wednesday.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Yes, sure.

Let me first say that the minister will be accompanied by the deputy minister and an assistant deputy minister in his appearance on Wednesday next, two days hence.

When we were discussing the business of this committee, when we came back from the break, we decided to do this study on electricity, and I did suggest to the committee that we had the option of having witnesses to discuss the estimates.

It was the view of the committee at that time, without any direction from the chair, that we would invite the minister to come one day and answer a variety of questions, including questions on the budget. So that's what we have in fact scheduled. I don't do it. We extend the invitation, but the clerks obviously make these arrangements through the minister's office.

I can only say that it seems to me that if you didn't get all your questions answered, we would simply make the request again to have the minister appear again, or perhaps just have those officials in his department who would like to respond--

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Departmental officials.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

—to questions on the budget appear again.

I think it was really a question of time and how much time we have in the committee. We want to get this report cleared up before we break for the summer. If there is time, I don't have any difficulty with it, and I would be happy to extend it again. But perhaps after Wednesday we could revisit this and see if in fact your questions have been answered.

Mr. St. Amand.

[Lloyd St. Amand, Liberal, Brant, ON]

If I may say so, I don't know if, when the minister was invited, he was told that his presence and the presence of his officials would be required for only an hour or if he has only an hour that day. I don't know.

But my concern—although it's laudable that you suggest, Mr. Chair, that we could have him back—is that realistically we requested that the minister appear before us some several months ago. His schedule is such that obviously it's difficult for him to find time.

I note the other witnesses for Wednesday are from the National Energy Board and the Forest Products Association of Canada. Are they local witnesses? If so, I presume they would be available any time. So my preference, obviously, subject to the will of the committee, would be to have the minister here, if possible, at 3:30 on Wednesday with his officials and to spend two hours with them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

Is it the National Energy Board that's appearing ahead of time? Yes, the National Energy Board is in Calgary. They're not in Ottawa; they're headquartered in Calgary.

But with reference to the estimates, our only constraint there was that we needed to have the minister if we were to review the estimates, and we had to do it before the end of May, otherwise they were automatically deemed to have been.... So it was a question not just of whether the minister would be able to appear but whether he would be able to appear before the end of May, and I think that somewhat restricted his availability.

The response we got back from the department is that the minister would be available for one hour, and that's all we have. So we can have one hour before the end of May, and this will be it on Wednesday.

[Lloyd St. Amand, Liberal, Brant, ON]

Let me express my disappointment that the minister will not be able to spend two hours with the committee. We've heard from various witnesses, or a panel of witnesses, who were here for the full two hours. The minister heads the department, and especially with budgetary issues, policy issues, etc., it would be ideal if he were available to us for two hours. But if his determination is that he's available for only one hour, I guess ultimately it's his call and we're stuck with that call.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

We have the option of inviting him back or asking questions in the House.

I wonder if the committee would like to go straight to questions when the minister appears, and that he not give an opening statement. That would give you more time to ask questions.

Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Chairman, perhaps we can reach a compromise? We could limit the time allotted to the first set of witnesses to 30 minutes and ask the minister to join us for an hour and a half. I recall that the last time the minister appeared to talk about supplementary estimates, his appearance was to last only one hour, but he was generous and stayed an extra 15 or 20 minutes. If he appears during the last hour, we will not have that leeway. I think it would be important to ask the minister if he can arrive at the meeting at least a half-hour earlier. That is a good compromise. That way, he will be with us for an hour and a half rather than just one hour. He can make his statement, and after that we will have an hour and 15 minutes for discussions and questions, which I find rather reasonable.

That would be a good compromise, and I am certain that the minister would be happy to discuss his budget and policies with us. We did, after all, invite him to appear in February. I believe that an extra half- hour would be a good compromise.

[The Chair, Conservative, Lee Richardson]

It's probably a little late to make those kinds of suggestions. If we had them earlier it might have been possible, but we don't handle the minister's schedule here. I'm sure he's probably down to the minute by now.

For future consideration, you could raise those with the minister when he appears. It's probably best to do that.

We are adjourned until Wednesday.