Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 18th, 2024

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

But you have been.

[Shannon Stubbs]

You keep talking about it.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I'm just here to point out why we need it to move forward.

With that, I'm really, truly encouraging everyone to make sure that we do have the minister here to speak to supplementary estimates (B) so that we actually move forward to pass the supplementary estimates (B). I think I've highlighted some of the reasons why the supplementary estimates (B) will be so important to all of our communities and to our country at large.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Let's vote, then.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

With that, I hope I have the support from everyone here.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Ms. Dabrusin.

Now I'll go to Mr. Falk.

Mr. Falk, you have the floor.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to Ms. Dabrusin for putting this motion on the table.

I think it's mostly a good motion that we invite the minister to come to committee—which is his job—to defend the estimates and the supplementary estimates (B) and for us to review them with him; I think it would be prudent that we do that.

I'm also very hopeful that the minister will come with the documents that would help answer a lot of questions that the House has been seized with the last several weeks—the unredacted documents. He could bring them here on his way to the RCMP station, and we could get a preview of them and we could ask the questions that need to be asked to find out why $400 million of Sustainable Development Technology Canada funds were distributed to SDTC board members and their companies.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Now we're debating the privilege motion.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I think to have the minister here to answer some of those questions would be fantastic, and I think that's something Canadians would want us to do.

However, on the issue of the reports and studies that she says we've completed, we actually haven't completed them. We keep getting the agenda switched around here by the Liberals. We start on things. Then we get witnesses cut short during the study, and then they produce a report. We start doing the report, and before we can even approve the recommendations, we jump to some other subject, so we're just kind of willy-nilly jumping all over the map here in this committee and we don't ever finish anything. We start a lot of things, but we don't ever finish. It would be nice if we could finish something soon and actually produce results for Canadians and produce something that we could move forward with.

However, I think the motion, being as good as it is, is missing a date. I don't know when she's planning on inviting the minister. Will it be before Christmas? Will it be next week? Will it be in the new year, in February? It's missing a date, so it would be nice if that date could be provided as well, and it maybe could be included in the motion at the minister's earliest convenience. If she's working on that now with her staff, it would be great to establish a date.

With that, Mr. Chair, I would move that we now adjourn debate and bring it to a vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Are you moving to adjourn debate?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I'm moving to adjourn debate and bring it to a vote.

[A voice]

Then the parliamentary secretary can come back with a date.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Do you want to adjourn debate, or take the motion—

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I want to adjourn debate on the motion; let's vote on the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

There are other speakers on the list, so once we exhaust those speakers—there are not many—we can go to a vote.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I think it has been our practice in the past that when somebody moves to adjourn debate, we then vote on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

If we adjourn debate, then we completely.... We will not be voting on the motion. We will be adjourning debate on the motion and we will be—

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

We'll vote on the adjournment, and then we'll vote on the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

I'll let the clerk step in to clarify, Mr. Falk. I don't think what you want is possible. I think it could go in reverse. If we continue on with the debate and the debate collapses, we can get to a vote.

As I mentioned, we have two speakers after you, and I'm thinking they're looking forward to engaging and then moving forward. I just want to clarify that you're not asking for that.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I have a point of order.

Who are our two speakers—me and who else?

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Mr. Angus, we have you and, as of now, we have Mr. Simard.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

I don't have any other hands up yet, so I'm going to go—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Okay. Is that it?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

If that's it, then I'll vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

That's it so far, but it's at the will of the committee. Members can raise their hands at any time, so I don't know. I'll leave it up to you folks.

Mr. Falk is done.