Transport Committee on Dec. 5th, 2006

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

Mr. Chair, I know the question is going to be called in a second, but I'm wondering whether the other members of the committee would look at a compromise that takes into regard all the circumstances, that forces the minister to do so if he takes into regard all the circumstances. It would be an amendment to Mr. McGuinty's motion. You're binding the hands of the minister.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

You'd never do that. You would not do that. In fact, I'm not aware that you did.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Seeing that there are no other comments around the table, shall the subamendment proposed by the government carry?

(Subamendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Shall the amendment, as proposed by the Liberals, L-3.1, carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We will now move to amendment L-3.2. We're still on clause 27.

Go ahead, Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

There is not much of a debate for me here, Mr. Chair. It's the same reasoning, the same argumentation, the same corrective action in the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Are there any comments?

Mr. Julian.

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

I'm in favour.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Seeing no comments, shall the amendment L-3.2, as proposed, carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 27 as amended agreed to)

(Clause 28 agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Julian.

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

Mr. Chair, given the importance of this particular clause, we--all four parties--have amendments. Given the time and the fact that I believe there is a presentation coming from our witnesses on this issue, I wanted to propose that we stand clause 29 and those amendments and come back to them later on in our deliberations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes, Ms. Borges.

[Helena Borges, Director General, Surface Transportation Policy, Department of Transport]

I would support Mr. Julian's proposal, but I'd like to remind the committee that the last time we delayed two clauses. One of them was clause 13, which deals with mergers and acquisitions, and the other one was clause 17, which was also part of the air section. If the committee is amenable, maybe we could dispose of those two options today and deal with the noise option on Thursday.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

With the direction and help of the front desk here, we put those two clauses at the end. It's simply to walk us through the process. We would put this one at the same position, which would allow for a briefing.

Is that reasonable?

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

That's what I proposed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Is everyone okay with that?

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I think they're proposing to hold up the other two.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm certainly prepared to entertain that. I'll ask if it's the will of the committee.

Mr. Julian.

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

Mr. Chair, are we standing clause 29?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I have an indication from the committee that it would be a good thing.

I'm now going to ask the committee if they'd like to bring forward clauses 13 and 17, which were stood at the end of the last meeting at the request of the department, or we can continue in the way the numbers are now. I'll look for a quick direction.

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

My preference, Mr. Chair, is that we continue with the agenda you've set out.

As Mr. Laframboise reminded me, we had asked for a presentation on railway noise from our witnesses. I'm not sure how long their presentation would be, but we have ten minutes to perhaps go into it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

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

Mr. Chair, I would propose going back to deal with the two clauses that really relate to what we've already been discussing. I would suggest noise is going to be a huge issue for this committee, because it is so important to Canadians. We can deal with the other two clauses, and it would wrap up a huge portion of this legislation. It would seem to be appropriate, given the circumstances.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Okay, if that's agreeable.

I would advise the committee that as we prepare to go back to the two stood clauses, due to some circumstances, not all people are going to be available tomorrow night for the infrastructure discussion. If we want to continue with this committee, we would certainly be prepared to continue on in that vein.

Do you want to hear it in French, en français?

[Some hon. members]

Yes, please.