Natural Resources Committee on March 3rd, 2009

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

In a committee, I think we all want to deal with the substantive issues. We want to deal with the things of substance. We want to move ahead with the study, try to get it taken care of. I think our schedule is a substantive issue; we've got to make a decision about whether we go to six or seven meetings here, or if we try to jam all of this thing into three or four meetings. Clearly, I think we should spend a little more time on this and do it properly. But with each of these meetings that we spend discussing these trivial issues that we've already discussed, it just means that we've got either one less day to study the energy partnerships or it extends one day further down the road.

I don't know how much more I should say.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

I think what we're saying is important.

I'd actually like to practice en français at some point, but I don't think you want it today. I'll tell you what we'll do. Mr. Chair. There seems to be some request for me to try to cover some of these issues in French, so what we can do is probably come back next meeting and we can do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I do want to say, Mr. Anderson, that I won't allow you to just repeat the same message, because one thing I'm watching for and listening for is that there's not repetition of the exact same message. So far, I haven't heard a lot of that. I certainly wouldn't want you to be repeating the same message in French, Mr. Anderson.

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

Well, if I came, and if I try that, Mr. Chair, I don't know if you'll be able to tell that I am.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

No, I'm certainly not done. I fully appreciate the encouragement from the other members. If Mr. Allen has some more to say, I don't want to stop him.

But I'd like to move away from the trivial games. Maybe if we leave the meeting here, Mr. Cullen would reconsider and pull back his motion. Certainly at some point the minister will be returning. I think she comes back for the main estimates at some point in time. We don't want to be involved in having to play political games and trying to manoeuvre at every committee meeting.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

There's a point of order.

Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I just want to clarify how the committee's rules are established. Since the motion has been called today, will the vote proceed at the end of committee hearings, prior to you striking the gavel? I just want to make sure that's how we do things. I understand the government's going to try to talk the clock out, but I just want to ensure that process.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We have to come back to it as the first item on the next agenda.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

So in terms of productivity, the government has the option of continuing to speak to the motion, burn committee meeting after committee meeting, if they so choose. I just want to understand our rules.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Yes, as long as they don't start repeating. I'm not going to sit here and listen to the same thing repeated over and over. Anyone is free to speak at this committee. I'm not going to interfere with that.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

So I'll make the point in this point of order that there's been repetition. “There's nothing new” or “there's no contradiction” has been said at least a half dozen times tonight. I appreciate you looking for the repetition, but the point of that argument has been made by all members who have spoken to this point, and it's now taken us 45 minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

This is a point of debate, Mr. Cullen, not a point of order.

On a point of order, Mr. Regan.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

On the point of order, am I correct that we only adjourn by agreement?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I end the meeting when the time that was allocated on the agenda is over.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I think you'll find if you check with the clerk, Mr. Chairman, that technically you seek the agreement of the committee to adjourn. If there's no agreement to adjourn, there's no adjournment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I have to deal with the point of order here.

Yes, Mr. Regan has made a valid point. There are certain circumstances where commonly as chair I certainly wouldn't ask for a motion to adjourn. In this case it's pretty clear there isn't unanimous agreement or consensus to adjourn. It would be hard for me as chair to move ahead and do that, so your point of order is well taken, Mr. Regan.

Where shall we proceed from here?

Yes, Mr. Anderson, then Mr. Bains.

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

Can I make a motion to adjourn, then?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You can make a motion to adjourn.

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

Okay, I'll make that motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

There is a motion to adjourn.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Does that motion to adjourn go before the vote?

[An hon. member]

Before another motion? He can't do that.