Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 15th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Madam Bell, I think that's exactly what Mr. Anderson was saying: he doesn't want the committee to have the discretion on particular reports to deny minority reports. If you have a motion that governs the committee activities, then every member would know they will have a right to attach a minority report, which is generally allowed but on occasion is not. I think that's the point here.

[Catherine Bell, NDP, Vancouver Island North, BC]

I missed something there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

It protects all members of the committee and will allow a minority report to be within the guidelines the committee chooses to set.

[Alan Tonks, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Anderson has indicated that if there's a consensus, let's abide by the practice of this committee, which is once we've received a report we discuss whether a minority report is wished. I can't remember the committee ever turning that down. For my part, I would never do that. Maybe if there is anybody who feels differently about that.... I think we should go with the practice of the committee and deal with it at the time we submit a report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Anderson.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

We're more than willing to support that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have heard that there will be an unwritten agreement to accept minority reports under the terms set by the committee. Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

It is agreed.

That wasn't a motion.

Is there any other business that we should deal with today?

Mr. Trost.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

This is a bit of a question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

My apologies, Mr. Trost. Actually, we reverted to the order of business that we had been dealing with before, and Madam DeBellefeuille was on the speaking list.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just wanted to make the members of the committee aware that today, at 10 o'clock, the National Energy Board is tabling its report on energy futures, on different technologies and on Canada's energy needs for 2005 to 2030. I would find it most interesting if we could, during next Tuesday's meeting, welcome officials from the National Energy Board so that they could answer our questions and we could have a discussion with them. This would be very topical, and in my opinion, it would be a wonderful opening subject. It would be good to have an exchange on the report that they are tabling right now.

I also believe that everyone would agree that it would be interesting, Mr. Chairman, to devote at least one meeting to analyze our department's estimates, as we have to make our recommendations by December, I believe. Last year, we did not have the pleasure to see and better understand our department. I think it is the duty of committee members to ask questions of departmental officials on the estimates they request and that have to be passed in December.

I have several subjects I would like to see on the agenda and I would like us to have an exchange, but for the next meeting, I would really like to invite representatives of the National Energy Board to appear. I don't know what the other committee members think of that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

If I could, I'd just have the clerk remind the committee of what legislation has been referred to this committee already. That's maybe an important reminder before we decide on the business.

Okay, Mr. Clerk.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

For the moment, Bill C-5 has been referred to the committee. This remains on the committee's agenda, and must be considered, as the committee wishes. There are also, as Ms. DeBellefeuille mentioned, the estimates. The period ends December 10 and the estimates must be tabled in the House three days before the final designated opposition day. That is not yet clear, but that is the rule. Finally, you have three days before December 10 to report to the House.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Anderson.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

We're having a discussion about the future agenda of the committee now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We seem to be, yes.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

I'm here as parliamentary secretary, and the minister would like to offer his time on Tuesday to come before the committee. He's not going to have a lot of time after that, but he's willing to come the first day of our committee meeting. So if the committee would be willing to hear from the minister for one hour, and the bureaucrats for the second hour on Tuesday, he would be glad to be here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

On what issue, Mr. Anderson?

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

We'd like to start off on the Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act, Bill C-5, which has been referred to the committee. We feel it would be in the interest of the committee to study Bill C-5 and to take a look at it over the next few weeks, or however long the committee decides it needs to spend on that issue.

There are a number of other areas and directions we'd also suggest that we'd like to go, but the priority is to get the minister here to discuss with him the issue of the Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act and then to spend some time working through that bill and hearing witnesses on that.

We have other suggestions as well in terms of some things to do with mapping, emergency response—the natural resources role in that—and some regulatory processes, those kinds of things, but I'd certainly love to hear from the other committee members.

I also understand you had a report you were working on last spring that was not finalized. There may be some interest in finalizing that as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Tonks.

[Alan Tonks, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Pursuant to the last comment, Mr. Chairman, our oil sands report was submitted to the government. We had a government response, as I recall, but the committee never had an opportunity to reflect on that report, with that response, with the minister. I'd like to say that I'm very pleased, and I'm sure the committee is as well, that the minister is going to be at the next committee meeting, as early as that.

Certainly I'm not suggesting that this will be the last time we have an opportunity to question him on that report, but members of the committee may have some initial questions on that report, the government's response. Some members were not on the committee. Perhaps the government's response on the report could be distributed, and the minister at least is aware that there may be some questions on that, if that's in keeping with the intent of the minister coming.

I'm sure the minister realizes that we're not going to have a comprehensive analysis of that response, but some members of the committee may have some questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Tonks.

Mr. Anderson was suggesting that the minister come for the Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act bill, but as you know, when a minister comes, the questioning is up to the members.

Mr. Trost.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

I'm sorry, I think I missed some of this in the translation earlier; I need a bit of clarification on priority of legislation versus reports.

I remember that when I sat on the industry committee we had a practice of one day a week for legislation, one day a week for reports.

I was wondering, through the clerk, is there anything in particular, or do we as committee dictate totally our own agenda on that?

Again, some of that may have been referenced when I was fiddling with my mike during translation earlier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

The answer is that it's up to the committee to decide. Legislation is usually given priority.