Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 25th, 2024

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Angus, when you were providing your feedback, you talked about every member of this committee having the opportunity to be able to bring their point of view. That's what accountability is and that's what the process is. Yet, you accuse me of filibustering, which I'm not. I'm trying to make a point. I haven't repeated one comment. Then you're also telling me it's a waste of your time.

I don't think it's a waste of time. I can use the same concept and say that us debating is a waste of time.

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

Chair, I rise on a point of order. I have two concerns.

One is I think he has to address his remarks through you as the chair. I don't think you think it's a waste of time, because you're the chair. Whether or not I think he's wasting my time is my opinion and my perfect right as a democratically elected member of Parliament. I do believe he's not supposed to be attacking me personally. I think he's supposed to go through you, and then you can convey that he thinks I'm wasting his time.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you for your point of order.

Colleagues, let's focus our conversation on the amendment, on the importance of what members would like to state or on comments of debate that members have, which you may agree or disagree with, but not on anything personal in nature, I will say.

I would like to continue on in our proceedings, because Mr. Jowhari has brought this amendment forward and I think he still has more to add.

Mr. Jowhari, go ahead.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through you, to all my esteemed colleagues, the point I'm trying to make is around the fact that there is a big piece of information missing. That piece of information is the insight that the government and various departments had in the project, which would be a very fundamental part of a debate that we need to hold in the House. I'm not arguing. I'm not saying that we should not move concurrence. I made a commitment to Mr. Simard that I will be getting up and having that debate as part of that three-hour debate.

I have also already, during my intervention, through you, to my colleagues, talked about what points I am going to get up and have a conversation about. I want to have a conversation around accountability. I want a conversation around risk, around gating and around how these processes were approved. Why did we switch from a government sponsor to financially sponsored for the rest of the project? How do we cover all of that? We won't have those answers until we do the report.

For us to have a debate on a topic based on the PBO's report without having all the elements of this equation so we can have a very substantive and complete debate is the wrong thing to do, I think.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Jowhari.

Mr. Patzer, go ahead, please.

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

Thank you.

I would appreciate the opportunity to hear from Mr. Jowhari in the House during the three-hour debate. That would be refreshing. That would be a nice little change from the usual comedy show we get from that side in the chamber.

I just wanted to inform Mr. Jowhari, and maybe even Mr. Schiefke, that maybe it would be good for you guys to go and join the public accounts committee for a little while and hear what the Auditor General has to say.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

Sorry, this is just a quick clarification. My last name is pronounced Schiefke. It's just a small thing, but I want to make sure we're all respecting each other, and I want to respect my last name as I will respect Mr. Patzer's last name.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you, Mr. Schiefke.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Chair, I have a point or order.

I'm glad you made that clarification since the chair was also mispronouncing it.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Colleagues, once again, I think Mr. Schiefke has just brought something to the attention of all committee members. Let's not make fun of that. It's important to him and other committee members as well—

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Nobody is making fun of it.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

—that we have pronunciations that are correct.

Thank you, Mr. Schiefke, for—

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Chair. I don't want to say that Mr. Patzer was willfully trying to make fun of my last name. I just wanted to put out there that's the correct pronunciation of my last name.

That's all. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

It's good to let us know, because folks may not know across the committee. Thank you for doing that.

Mr. Patzer, back to you.

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

There, I learned something today.

I would like to propose that members spend some time on the public accounts committee and listen to what the Auditor General has to say about government responses to committee reports and recommendations from committees. Her language is saying that she is becoming increasingly frustrated by the lack of action by the government when there are recommendations to departments and they take these recommendations seriously, and then nothing ever happens.

Multiple reports came through public accounts when I was on that committee and those were her exact feelings on all of them, that the government was doing nothing. Lots of times there was a report on a report on a report. There was a report that was done say in 2017. There was a follow-up report done in 2019. Then there was another follow-up report done in 2021. All along, nothing was done.

That is the record of this government when it comes to reports from committee. I think that is why members, at least on this side of the table.... I won't speak for the other two parties, but I would think they would agree with me to a certain extent that it's part of the reason why they don't want to simply have another report stashed on the shelf for the government to completely ignore and why we would like to have a concurrence debate in the House of Commons so we can further bring awareness of the issues at hand for Canadians.

We have different perspectives on how and why the purchase of Trans Mountain was a bad idea by this government, but, nevertheless, there is a debate that should be had in the House of Commons on this. That is something we will endeavour to do.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order.

Through you to Mr. Patzer, I think all the 338 members of this House are on public accounts because we are trying to make sure that we are holding the government accountable.

This is exactly the point that I was trying to make, that without a response—

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Mr. Jowhari, I know you raised your hand to get on the speaking list. I put you on, and I think you may have misinterpreted that.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order.

It is 1 p.m.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Thank you.

Colleagues, we have the minister for supplementary estimates scheduled for Wednesday. I would propose to do what we did last time: we have the minister come in on Wednesday, we adjourn today's meeting, and we will continue on if members decide on a future meeting with the topic at hand.

Monsieur Simard, please go ahead.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

If the minister is present for two hours, I understand that we will hold another meeting. If he's not present for two hours, on the other hand, we could resume the discussion after his appearance. So it would be good to know that today.

[The Chair, Liberal, George Chahal]

Colleagues, the minister most likely will be attending with officials. I will leave it up to colleagues to decide at the meeting once we exhaust the time with the minister, or with officials, to proceed in the manner you wish.

If everybody's in agreement, we will adjourn.

The meeting is adjourned.