Evidence of meeting #58 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. McKay.
Go ahead, Mr. Anderson, on the proposed amendment.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
We're ready to go to a vote on it, Mr. Chair, but I think I should just point out that when we move ahead with this study, if the Liberals want to put the minister on their witness list as one of their witnesses, they are more than welcome to do that, and it will be considered, absolutely. Therefore, I don't think the amendment needs to be supported. They obviously have the choice of putting him on their list as one of their witnesses.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
An hon. member
No, I think we have another speaker on the list—
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Okay. Who do we have on the list? I see Mr. Julian. I think Mr. McKay is indicating he would like to do a wrap-up at the end.
Go ahead, Mr. Julian.
Ms. Liu, were you on the list?
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
You're on the main motion? Okay. That's what I understood.
Go ahead, Mr. Julian.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Gravelle would like to speak on the main motion too.
I'd like to start, Mr. Chair, by asking the clerk to read the motion, with the amendment, one more time.
11:45 a.m.
The Clerk
Okay. It reads:
That the committee, in light of the comments by Senior Liberal—
11:45 a.m.
The Clerk
Okay. It reads:
That the committee conduct hearings on the economic benefits that flow from Alberta's energy sector across Canada, that the Minister of Natural Resources be invited, and that the committee report its findings to the House in order to ensure that all members of Parliament and Canadians are informed of these economic benefits.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you, Clerk.
This is a second chance, I guess, for the Conservatives to pull back from witch-hunt politics, Mr. Chair. We've had a first vote, and perhaps Conservatives at this committee misunderstood the role of the committee, and that's why they voted down the NDP amendments. Now we have a Liberal amendment that does the same thing: it's to take out the partisan witch hunt from the motion that was put forward.
If the idea is to do a study, there's a consensus here. Mr. Chair, the reason we objected so strongly to Mr. Calkins' bringing this up at the beginning of the meeting and delaying, completely unnecessarily, these four esteemed witnesses, these witnesses who we should be hearing from instead of having this motion brought forward, is that we all had an agreement on the idea of moving forward with a study on energy. That's the consensus.
What this government has done yet again is it has ripped apart consensus in a very mean-spirited, inappropriate, irresponsible way. Rather than dealing with the energy future of this country, which is something that we are all concerned about and all want to provide guidance on, we have this partisan witch hunt taking place for two members who apologized for their statements.
In fact, one of them, Mr. Chair, resigned from this committee. I know how difficult it was for the individual to resign from the committee. He obviously understood that his comments were inappropriate and he took the necessary steps. He apologized and resigned, yet we're continuing this in a partisan, mean-spirited fashion. It resembles a witch hunt to me. I find it completely inappropriate.
This amendment that Mr. McKay is presenting gives the government a second chance to do the right thing and move forward with a study that we all agree with in principle, but disregarding the partisan language of the witch hunt that, unfortunately, Mr. Calkins has brought to the motion itself.
Let's adopt this amendment. In adopting the amendment, I think we can then move on and hear from the witnesses, which is something that, on the opposition side, we all wanted to do from the outset. That's why we proposed that Mr. Calkins bring this motion forward in the appropriate way—at the end.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I agree again with Mr. Julian's comments, but I did want to speak to Mr. Anderson's comments about the witness. If Minister Oliver can be added as a witness on the list for this particular study, so also could Mr. Trudeau and Mr. McGuinty; what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Why a motion has to include non-compellable witnesses escapes me altogether, other than for the reasons as outlined by Mr. Julian, which do not, shall we say, elevate the quality of debate here.
I'm perfectly prepared to make an agreement with Mr. Anderson that if Mr. McGuinty and Mr. Trudeau are deleted as non-compellable witnesses and you wish to add them to the witness list, you're more than welcome, and similarly Mr. Oliver, the minister. If those aren't deleted, then certainly we have to include Mr. Oliver as a part of this motion.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
We'll have a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
The amendment is, surprisingly, very similar to the previous one. It would now read that rather than we invite the Minister of Natural Resources, the Minister of Finance would form part of the motion. Again, the Minister of Finance is a witness who would be very important to this study.
11:50 a.m.
An hon. member
The question—
