Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 19th, 2020

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

All right. The difficulty we're going to have is that on Monday, after hearing from the witnesses, we will have to make recommendations immediately, and then we're going to have to make sure that the… I just want to make sure that we will be able to follow all the steps together properly for this request. That's why I'm asking the analysts and the clerk to guide us.

[The Clerk]

There is also the issue of the invitation.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. May.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

It's obviously outside convention, but is it possible to approve via email? If we see the letter, can you send it to each of the offices and get consent that way to move forward, or can we move a motion now to give the chair the opportunity to approve it?

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Before we start debating how long it's going to take and when we're going to do it, have we established that we're going to go ahead with this?

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

If it can be done.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Go ahead, Mrs. Stubbs.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

I think we have to, if it can be done, because of how important this is and the relevance to our committee. Also, as a last resort, in the last term there were occasions where we did email okays in the final stages of some things.

My colleague has suggested this. After the Monday afternoon meeting, could we have a special meeting on Tuesday morning to complete it?

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

I doubt anybody would object, but I know I have another committee meeting, and I suspect other people are going to be in the same boat.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

I would be unavailable.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Maybe at 1:15 on Tuesday. That would give time to the analyst and it would be after the committee. All committees would end at 1 o'clock, so 1:15. We should not be getting a 20-page letter. We'll see what the witnesses say.

That's my first point, but to go back to your point, Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Working backward then, if we're going to meet at 1:15 Tuesday to review the report, they're going to have to receive some sort of drafting instructions from this committee after we hear the witnesses on Monday. That means we're going to have to hear from witnesses, and whatever time that concludes, we're going to have to do it almost on the spot, or sometime between then and Monday night to give them some time to draft this thing.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

This is a bit incredible. I appreciate the constraints and commitments of the other members. I feel the Tuesday morning meeting proposal is a good faith attempt to try to allow everybody to participate in our roles. We all have to recognize that the committee is in this position because of a vote taken by Liberal and NDP members at a different committee. Our initial motion provided a way longer timeline where committees could effectively do this work and not be constrained.

I suggest that it ought to be the responsibility of the members, maybe not the individuals here, but whose colleagues have put them in this position, to move toward us and accommodate the aim of the official opposition wanting to give the opportunity to every member to participate in a meaningful and comprehensive way. I want to state for the record that the Conservatives are the members here who had an initial motion that would not have put in place these extreme time constraints that we're all facing, which I fear might diminish our ability to do our jobs with the rigour they deserve.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Lefebvre.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I have two points, and I thank you for that intervention. Certainly, in the motion, if a standing committee listed does not consider the subject matter of the provisions.... I think you raised that and we're in agreement.

Number one, I would like to hear from the Bloc and NDP what their positions are on this motion.

Number two, once we have that response we go back to suggesting timelines and how we can achieve this, if that's where we're going to go.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you. Yes, we have some parameters on what this will take to get it done. I guess the first question we have to answer is whether we're willing to undertake this at all.

Mr. Cannings, do you have any thoughts on that?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

I think the suggestion of a 1:15 meeting on Tuesday is fine with me. I can't be there for the morning, or at least, I was on House duty, and now I have another thing, so I've already found a replacement for House duty to do this other thing. You know, I'm wearing out my welcome asking for replacements, so I'd rather.... I would agree that I can't see this as taking up much time—you know, more than 15 minutes—on Tuesday at 1:15, so I would be in favour of that.

I can't comment further on whether we should do this. I don't know what these clause-by-clause.... I don't know what the clauses say, so I would rather go through with this, say that we will do it. I want to respect our Conservative members in trying to do the work that everyone expects us to do. I think that having a short meeting at 1:15 on Tuesday would accomplish that.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. May wants to say something.

Mr. Simard, do you want to...?

Mr. May, go ahead.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

I have two quick questions, I guess.

First of all, when we talk about doing this on Tuesday morning, will that actually be enough time for the analysts?

We're having the meeting Monday. Do you need Tuesday morning to complete this work?

[Sophie Leduc]

Yes.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

There's translation.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

I think it's number one for all that. So that's number one: will we even have this in time for that short time frame?

Number two is this. I don't know that I got an answer to my question of whether we can do this via email, and that would solve a lot of this problem. Can we simply receive this via email, as early as possible on Tuesday? Let's say by noon. I know that's pushing it. Then we have a window from then until—the deadline's 4:00, so let's say 2:30 or 3:00. Then everybody has an opportunity to respond to that email with their thumbs up or not. Is that even possible?

I'm just thinking of logistics here. I chair another committee, so I won't be available at 8:45. I hate to suggest this, because I'm not a morning person, but the other alternative is eight o'clock in the morning.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Yes, right. I'm just saying that, if it's going to—but I think it's moot if the letter's not going to be ready at 8:45 in the morning.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mrs. McLeod.