Transport Committee on Oct. 31st, 2006

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Chair, Mr. McGuinty is asking that the minister appear next week on the topic of the estimates. Of course, after a delay of a month or month and a half, Mr. Laframboise would like Mr. Duchesneau to appear as a witness. It seems to me that a good compromise would be to call both to appear. We could ask the minister to come next Tuesday. If would like him to come back, we could plan that for after the November break, after Remembrance Day, for example. As for Mr. Laframboise and next Thursday's meeting, we will finally have the opportunity to discuss airport safety.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

As a point of information for Mr. Julian, we have to have a report back on the estimates by November 10. So it would be next week. Beyond next week, it is assumed reported as printed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Might I suggest we have an extended session on Tuesday, November 7?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I was going to make a suggestion, and we will deal with Mr. Laframboise's request.

In the note we sent out to members of the committee, we did ask what extra time they would have to allow us to set up some extra committee meetings. To date, one committee member has responded, so please put that in to us.

I was going to ask the subcommittee to have a meeting--and I agree with my colleagues on this side--to lay out the agenda beyond Bill C-11. It would include some of the motions that have been put forward and would also deal with future bills that are coming down the pipe.

I know everyone has a busy schedule, but from a selfish point of view, I would like to have a subcommittee meeting tomorrow. I would suggest from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Perhaps we could put some detail around the outside meetings we want to have and also the order of the motions that we've taken.

I felt I was under the instruction of the committee to organize the witness schedule and the clause-by-clause consideration, and I'm certainly prepared to listen to other suggestions, but beyond that, I think the direction of the subcommittee should make those decisions.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Do we have a motion on the table right now?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We have a revised motion from Mr. Laframboise suggesting that we bring Mr. Duchesneau and Mr. Cherry before this committee next week, on November 9.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Can we deal with that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

First I need to have unanimous consent for him to bring that motion forward.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I thought it was already--you don't need unanimous consent.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

No? Okay. All right, then. Apparently we do not, so I would.... Go ahead, Mr. Scott.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I don't want to be obstructionist here at all, because I think we want to do this. I think we have some statutory timelines here that we have to recognize, but we have to line them up.

We want to do this. We want to do this with urgency. We have to do estimates before they're deemed. I would even go so far as to argue that...maybe I missed it, but I don't think the committee has really gotten into the infrastructure side of this committee's work yet at all, in terms of bringing in officials and doing the infrastructure programs.

I think it's going to very difficult for us to do estimates without having a better understanding than most of the members of the committee would have on the infrastructure programs. It's a lot of money. It's policy-driven. I think it's an important thing for the committee to get its mind around.

I don't think these are impossible things to accomplish either, frankly, but I think we should charge the subcommittee to lay that out so that you can go back to the committee with a program to get the things done that need to be done, and we can just inform you for your deliberations--whoever is deliberating--and come back and see if that satisfies everybody.

There are some real deadlines here. There's a huge one looming in terms of estimates.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

I would like to maintain the date of Thursday November 9 for the appearance of Mr. Duchesneau and Mr. Cherry. As for the rest, we should meet tomorrow in sub-committee.

There is also the minister's appearance. As you know, we cannot oblige a minister to appear. The parliamentary secretary must therefore confirm when the minister will be available to appear before the committee to discuss the estimates. Even if Mr. Cannon's schedule is very open, it is unlikely that he would be able to come two days in a row. That would be a first.

I would be happy to give my time and have other meetings, perhaps on Wednesday November 8, for example. That is not a problem. What is a problem for me, however, is the appearance of Mr. Duchesneau and Mr. Cherry. I have just about had enough. Which is why I hope we will summon them to appear on November 9 and that they will be present. If two hours must be added to the meeting to address other files, I would have no problem with that, but after 3:30 p.m., on November 9, those two men must appear before our committee. These are my concerns.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. McGuinty is next.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Chairman, why don't we agree, if we're going to support Mr. Laframboise's legitimate concern to get Mr. Duchesneau there on November 9, to commit now as a committee to sit at least three hours, if not four, on November 9? That gives us the flexibility to be able to convene the minister if he's not available for one reason or another next Tuesday. I don't know why the minister would not make himself available to his standing committee with respect to his department's estimates; I'm sure he'll be there. It would give us flexibility, then, if we commit to that period of time, as opposed to having the subcommittee meeting tomorrow and having to go back and juggle twelve or fourteen different schedules, which I respectfully submit won't work.

If we're going to vote on Mr. Laframboise's good idea, I support what my colleague from the NDP said about extending the sitting next Thursday so that we can accommodate Mr. Duchesneau and hopefully Mr. Cherry, if he'll show--and if need be, we can even bring in the minister that day.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm not trying to be difficult, but you are asking people to sit extra hours on the 9th but asking the committee to excuse themselves on the 30th. I think we have to deal with the motion that's here first, and then we have to deal with yours to see if there is unanimous consent to bring it forward today.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

With respect, Mr. Chairman, I don't see the connection at all, because we're off November 30. We're actually talking about next Thursday.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Are we?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Yes, because we're now talking about a vote to get Mr. Ducheneau here with Mr. Cherry on the 9th.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Right.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

We have a motion in front of us. We're debating a motion that is not here before us--

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I am going to call the question on Mr. Laframboise's motion that on the 9th we invite Mr. Ducheneau and Mr. Cherry, and I will use a word stronger than “invite”.

With that, Mr. Bell, very briefly.

[Don Bell, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

The question in voting on this.... I had raised with you a question before on the issue of us having meetings in the morning rather than the afternoon, and I'm wondering if, ultimately, the members have been polled about that idea. This committee in prior years met Tuesday and Thursday mornings.

That would give us the flexibility, if we have a heavy work schedule, to also schedule meetings if we needed to on Thursday afternoons, if something came up that was a priority.