Go ahead.
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.
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.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
As I indicated, I think we could look at and vote on this motion as it stands. When we have our committee meeting of the whole, if we want to readjust the number of meetings, we can move an amendment at that time.
Certainly, if we look at the economic development agencies, the industry stakeholders, there are a lot of trade agreements. I think there are a lot of things that are very important within this, so I certainly think we can look at voting on the motion as it stands with the adjustment of the date for the start. Certainly, I know the analysts do a fine job in laying out what they think would be a valuable study. We can have that conversation and can move an amendment at that time.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
In the spirit of moving to try to vote on it today, I'm wondering if you would be willing to remove the number of weeks altogether, and we can determine that when we have a better sense of what this would look like. We could move to vote on it today, with an amendment taking out the number of meetings in the last half of the last sentence.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
We take out the words “that the study contain no less than 10 meetings”.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Yes. We don't know who the witnesses are going to be, we don't know how.... I think it would be much easier to have that conversation than it would be to amend it after the fact.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Let's put this to the piecemeal here.
First of all, Ms. McLeod, what you read is different from what is on this paper, so we'll have to deal with that. That just deals with the date and not anything to be concerned about.
Are you agreeable to what Mr. May is suggesting?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Yes I am, provided the analysts know and we agree to a robust study that does the work that we need to do to look at this serious issue.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
I don't think anybody's going to suggest we end it after two meetings.
4:15 p.m.
An hon. member
No.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Okay, were there any other comments, then?
The motion will read as has been presented to us on this piece of paper with the exception that the word “immediately” is removed, the words “that the study contain no less than 10 meetings” are removed, and somewhere in there it should say “commence on Monday, March 9”.
All right?
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Does everybody understand what we're now about to vote on? There are no more comments? Okay. All in favour of Ms. McLeod's motion as amended?
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
See? Remember what I said about the spirit of co-operation at the beginning? Thank you.
On the next piece of business, I assume that everybody has seen the letter we received from the chair of the Standing Committee on International Trade. Is that a yes? Okay.
They have requested that we review certain provisions of Bill C-4. The gist of the request and of the motion that was passed at their committee is that we have the option to agree to do it, in which case we would have to provide a response to that committee no later than 5 p.m. next Tuesday.
That would require us to deal with this sometime between now and next Monday, presumably have some witnesses come and speak to us and then turn to our analysts, who have just explained to us what they do and ask them to become superheroes right out of the gate and turn something around in less than 24 hours. Then we would have to review it ourselves.
Option number two is that we decline to accept this invitation, in which case we can notify the trade committee by Friday.
I'll throw it out there for discussion.
Mr. Lefebvre.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
The Standing Committee on International Trade has asked us to review certain provisions of the Canada–U.S.–Mexico agreement. We are ready to hear from witnesses on Monday. Perhaps the clerk and the analysts could explain to us the procedures to be followed. We need to determine immediately or shortly who the witnesses will be. Some of them could appear on Monday.
Our analysts will then draft a report, which must be submitted in both official languages to the Standing Committee on International Trade by 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday. For our part, we must be able to review and approve the document.
Therefore, I am asking the analysts and the clerk to give us suggestions as to how we can meet those deadlines.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
The short answer from our analysts is that they could conceivably do this, assuming there aren't too many witnesses and not too much information to distill in such a short turnaround period. Then we'd have to find time on Tuesday to deal with it ourselves.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
There are two things on that, then, if that's the case.
This question is more for the clerk.
Will the chair have the authority to approve the report that will be produced by the analysts? Also, are we prepared to give him that authority?
4:20 p.m.
The Clerk
Normally, reports are adopted by the committee and tabled in the House by the chair.
4:20 p.m.
The Clerk
It isn't consistent with our practice to give the chair the authority to approve a report himself. It must be approved by the committee members.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
What do we have to submit, a report or a letter? I want to make sure. I think it's a letter.
4:20 p.m.
The Clerk
You're right. It's a communication between the two committees. The committee can adopt a motion or ensure that the chair has the authority to communicate recommendations directly to the other chair.