Evidence of meeting #39 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transport.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I don't have the agenda in front of me, but I'll give you the dates. Maybe while Mark is doing that....
Mr. Julian, did you have a comment?
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
No. I have other points, but I'll wait until you're finished with Mr. Bell.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
On the 21st, when we come back, we will continue with Bill C-6. We have confirmed Canada Post for the 26th. We actually lose the 19th because of the budget, just for information sake. On the 28th we will be dealing with the Tassé report. Now we have today's motion, which is suggesting that we want to get this in before the end of March. That would either have to be.... Do we have enough days? That would be a Wednesday--I guess the 28th. It would involve moving the Tassé report back into the next month to accommodate Mr. Laframboise's motion today. Is that agreeable?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I think we had decided that we would wait a little bit for your attendance, just to....
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
We perhaps would have a subcommittee meeting within the first week of returning after the break, when we could set those appointments.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Don Bell Liberal North Vancouver, BC
Okay. I'd like to be able to give adequate notice to the witnesses to attend.
In terms of the process, before we have Transport Canada and the carriers here, we should hear from workers, hear from witnesses other than Transport Canada and the railways. That way, when we have the railways and Transport Canada come in, we're in a position to ask questions based on the testimony we've had and we don't have to then call them back.
February 28th, 2007 / 5:15 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I wanted to come back to the issue of Bill C-6 witnesses. Mr. Holbrook presented a lot of material, and we had some real concerns that he come back before us. Justice Moshansky said very clearly that we should be hearing from the inspectors themselves. But those are two issues that I guess we'll deal with at the agenda committee.
The other issue is the motion that I brought forward for the national Marine Advisory Council. I just want to serve notice that I'll be bringing that up, now that Mr. Bell is back, on the 21st. So if we could reserve some time at that first meeting back to discuss that motion, I'd appreciate it.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
You're basically giving us notice of your motion to be on the table that day.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Chair, I want to make it known again—I thought everybody knew—that Mr. Preuss is here today. He is prepared to answer any questions. Bells are going to happen in 15 minutes, but anybody could take the opportunity right now to ask questions.
We could always bring him back in the future as well to satisfy those who are curious and want to deal with it.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I'm sensing that there's not a need for that meeting today. We will move forward with Mr. Laframboise's motion.
Monsieur Bélanger.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
This is just a thought, Mr. Chair, so you can dispose of it as you see fit.
If I follow you correctly, when we're back we have three meetings, not four. Two of those are not dealing with Bill C-6. Would it be something to consider that the first one, the meeting on March 21, not be Bill C-6 as well, so that we can dispose of other business if you...and then bunch them in April?
It just seems that we're being a bit disjointed here. Now, if we have to be, then let's be.... Let's try to bunch these six in April and dispose of it.
But that's just a thought. As I say, you can deal with it as you see fit.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you very much. I'll take it under consideration.
Are there any other comments?
Mr. Volpe.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
While you're considering that, I wonder if you would consider giving all members of the committee an opportunity to review some of the presentations by witnesses 24 hours before, maybe, rather than the day of. If we could suggest to them that they submit prior to, please, so that we can distribute, it would make it a lot easier for members to have a prepared approach to a committee.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Whenever we invite someone, we ask them to forward it. Then it kind of becomes their choice. But I'll reinforce that position.
Mr. Jean.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Chair, I do have a bit of a concern here, and I'm going to move a motion, on current business, that we listen to Mr. Preuss and ask any questions we have of him at this stage. He wants to clear his name. Some allegations have been made, and he has come forward at the first opportunity and has made it known that he wants to deal with it. I think that speaks to the man's character.
So I would move that motion.
5:20 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Out of respect towards him, but also because each one of us must have the opportunity to ask his or her questions in the time allotted. If I take up seven minutes and if the Liberals use seven minutes, then we will not be able to finish this round by 5:30 p.m.
Mr. Chairman, we must take the time required to get to the bottom of things.