Evidence of meeting #1 for Natural Resources in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you, Mr. May.
Comments or questions?
(Motion agreed to)
That's all of the routine motions.
Mrs. McLeod, if you'll indulge.... I meant to do this at the beginning.
Maybe our analysts could just take a moment here.
4 p.m.
Sophie Leduc Committee Researcher
Thank you, Chair, for giving us the opportunity to introduce the work of the analysts to committee members.
Good afternoon to all committee members.
My name is Sophie Leduc, and I am accompanied by my colleague Xavier Deschênes-Philion. We are analysts at the Library of Parliament, and natural resources and energy issues are our domain. We will be assigned to the Standing Committee on Natural Resources.
First, I'd like to point out that you should have in front of you a package of information that you might find useful. It describes a little bit more our role in different contexts, whether during study of a subject matter, a study of proposed or existing legislation, or estimates. Also included in this package is a research document that you might find useful in your work.
There are key aspects that I would like to highlight. Analysts are the contacts for content issues that members might have in relation to the committee's work. As well, all our services are non-partisan in nature. I'll give you an example of one of the products we provide for the committee. In the context of a study, for each meeting we will prepare a briefing note. It will include information on topics that are under consideration, short biographies of witnesses who are invited to appear in front of the committee, and suggested questions that you may wish to ask witnesses. The briefing note is provided no later than 24 hours before each meeting.
At the end of a study, analysts also prepare draft reports, including recommendations for consideration by committee members. This draft is, of course, prepared in accordance with the committee instructions.
We would also like to remind you that not only do you have access to the work of analysts in the context of committees, but parliamentarians can also benefit from the expertise of Library of Parliament staff, be it for your requests for information or analysis. Of course, Xavier and I invite you to come and ask questions about our work before or after meetings. We very much appreciate feedback on our work, as it allows us to better identify your needs and improve our products.
Thank you for your time. We look forward to working with all members of the committee.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you very much.
Ms. McLeod, I hate to keep deferring your turn, but I understand that Mr. Cannings has another routine motion he'd like to move before I get to you, if that's okay.
4 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
This is a fairly short and, I hope, painless motion.
It's about in camera proceedings and it is as follows:
That any motion to go in camera should be debatable and amendable, and that the committee may only meet in camera for the following purposes: to discuss administrative matters of the committee a draft report briefings concerning national security And furthermore, minutes of in camera meetings should reflect...the results of all votes taken by the committee while in camera, including how each member voted when a recorded vote is requested.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you, Mr. Cannings.
Before anybody speaks to this, in my own experience from another committee where this motion was moved, the clerk on that committee advised us that the standing orders are very clear on in camera proceedings. The circumstances surrounding this motion needed to be reviewed further before that committee dealt with it, so we deferred it to the next meeting to consider once we had heard back from the clerk.
Having said that, I open the table for discussion.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
It would be fine if that's the way it went, but if we can deal with it now, all the better.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
I was going to speak to that. The motion that was brought back in June 2016 was more specific than this motion and also took into account that privacy or protection of personal information might also be considerations. I would agree with the chair that we should probably take a look at that and if some of these are in addition to that, maybe we can talk about that.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Does anybody have an objection to putting this over to...?
Thank you.
Finally, Ms. McLeod, we go over to you.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Thank you. Here is my motion:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), given that 26 mills have closed and over 10,000 workers impacted in British Columbia alone, and that Quebec forest products are still affected by 20% taxes and tariffs from the United States, the Committee undertake a study of the forest industry and what action the Government of Canada can take; that the witness list include representatives of provincial and indigenous governments; representatives of impacted communities; representatives of labour organizations; industry experts; Canada's Minister of Natural Resources; Canada's Minister of International Trade; officials from the Department of Natural Resources Canada, Global Affairs Canada, Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, and Western Economic Diversification; that the study contain no less than 10 meetings and commence on February the 27th and that these hearings be televised when possible; and that the Committee report its findings to the House.
Mr. Chair, I've certainly been anxiously waiting for this committee to get up and going because of the significant crisis. If you will note, the date I've suggested that we commence does allow us the opportunity to deal with what I understand is a very short timeline in terms of the letter that we received, which the clerk distributed earlier, on what next Tuesday is. I thought it was imperative to get this motion on the table quickly because, of course, next Thursday will be rolling around and I know that it's a challenge for the clerk to get things going. I thought it was a good thing to have a conversation about and to discuss in this meeting today.
Thank you.
February 19th, 2020 / 4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
Listen, I was going to propose something similar as well, but it was with respect to forestry. I think we're on the same path or the same page on that, so I think we can work it out. I find 10 meetings a lot, given the studies we've done in the past. We'll have to determine a list of witnesses together. Each party would bring a list of witnesses and see where that brings us, but certainly that's something we're in favour of looking at.
On that note, I know we have a motion before us, but we also have to deal with the trade committee request to us. I think that's probably why you have the 27th. That leaves us the Monday. We'll have to talk about that as well. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page. We really need to deal with that.
The only thing, obviously, with respect to the Minister of Natural Resources, is the availability, but he's willing to—
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
Yes, and the Minister of Global Affairs.
It's certainly something that we're open to entertaining.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
We meet Mondays and Wednesdays, right? So this would be the 26th, not the 27th.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
I take it that it's accepted? Okay.
Mr. Lefebvre, you have something to say.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
I'd just go back to the language. It says, “no less than 10 meetings”. If we're satisfied that we're done after six or seven meetings, I don't think we should be forcing ourselves to go to 10 meetings. I think it's when the committee is satisfied that it has heard what it needs and the analysts are saying that we have the information we require. I'm not saying that because I want to reduce it. Obviously, this is extremely important, but I'm sure there are other studies we all want to do as well. Actually, our plan was to work in concert with the other parties as to how we could come up with the topics and then take the angles that everybody wants on those. I just find that 10 could be....
Did you want to jump in on that, Bryan?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Can I make a suggestion, then?
Given what we're about to talk about, which is what we have to do on Monday, I was going to suggest that next Wednesday be used for committee business anyway. It will be our first opportunity, and in the spirit of what you raised earlier, we'd do it with the group as a whole.
It sounds like you have a consensus developing here on your suggestion. I was going to invite others to submit any proposals they might have.
So let's do that. If they could get them to me no later than Monday, I could immediately circulate them. They will have to be translated, of course. Then on Wednesday we can come here as a group, prepared to discuss perhaps one or two or three motions, including a list of witnesses. The following week is a non-sitting week. That would give the clerk an opportunity to line up witnesses so that we could be ready to start the first meeting we come back.
Ms. McLeod.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
I will amend it so that it's starting the first week after the break week, if you want a day for committee business.
To be frank, though, when you have thousands of people out of work and a crisis, I think it's critical that we deal with it initially. Certainly, I would be prepared to say that we can talk about other motions, but if this passes now, and the clerks, once they hear the witnesses...if we want to adjust the meetings either up or down, maybe we can change the motion at that time. I would really like to pass this motion today and just adjust the date to the Monday following the break week.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
I think we're onside with the motion, and I just want to follow up with what MP Lefebvre was referring to with regard to the 10 weeks.
Doing a quick perusal of what that means for us, I agree with you that this is a crisis that need to deal with quickly. This wouldn't be done until probably May. We wouldn't be getting a report back until June, based on 10 weeks. We almost need to cut that in half to be able to get to this much more quickly. That's assuming we don't take on anything else. That's assuming there's no legislation or motions that come to us. You wouldn't have a report to even table until we're almost ready to break for the summer.
I'm wondering if, maybe not now but at the committee business meeting, we could get a breakdown of what those 10 meetings look like. Obviously we're going to have a meeting with the ministers, a meeting with the officials. An hour and an hour is usually what I've been used to. Maybe we could get an idea of what those other nine meetings look like. Is it possible to do this in a more condensed form? That's my thought on it. Ten meetings seem like a bit long.