Transport Committee on May 4th, 2006

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

Unless I put that in the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Unless you put that in the motion.

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

That was my intention, to put it in the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I have a list here. We'll go to Mr. Storseth.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I just have to say that I thought we had a lot of goodwill around the committee table. We sat down, everybody took a chance, we had an opportunity to discuss what our position was, and we tried to come to a mutual resolution.

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

And you just keep upping the ante.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

But unfortunately, I don't see where the hesitation on Mr. Jean's amendment is, because all he is saying is that when we sit down on Wednesday, we are going to come to a conclusion of this resolution on Wednesday. He has already said that he doesn't care if it's four o'clock or six o'clock or if you want it to be when debate collapses. All of us should have the opportunity to speak our points. But beyond that, you are clearly just filibustering this and you don't want to have a resolution to this at any point in time.

Mr. Jean's amendment is very reasonable when he says that at some point on Wednesday we have to come to a conclusion on this. It gives Mr. Laframboise the opportunity to do the consultations he's looking for. It gives all sides an opportunity to come to a resolution on this. I don't see how that is lacking in reason at all.

I also, Mr. Chair, would ask for a ruling from you, but I don't believe that we can put a motion on Wednesday to limit debate on this on Wednesday. It has to be done now, does it not?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Technically, we can't put limitations on through a suspension unless there is consent of the committee to do so, if we were to resume.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

We would have to do that at this point in time, when the motion is being brought forward. We cannot do it afterwards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

It can be done, again, with the consent of the committee.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Is that with unanimous consent?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

It is with consent.

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

But it is not majority rules. It has to be unanimous, unless it's part of the motion today. We can't limit the debate in the future. Any one member can continue debate forever if we don't put it as part of the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

It would be wise, I would think, to put it as part of the motion, but it doesn't need unanimous consent.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

And that's why we are moving that it gets done today as part of this motion. It's a very reasonable request. It is just ensuring that at some point on Wednesday there's a resolution to this. You know what? If you want to sit here at midnight on Wednesday still debating that, that's fine.

Anyway, that's my point, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Monsieur Laframboise.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

That's okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

One minute.

Mr. Julian.

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

I'll pass for the moment, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm following up on some of the comments I made earlier. I sense there's some frustration on the part of Mr. Volpe because I believe he is acting in good faith trying to bring this to resolution.

I don't understand what he believes we will be able to achieve by simply suspending these proceedings, because we've already spent well over two hours debating this particular issue, and I think he will agree with me that at this point there's no prospect of our being able to bring this matter to closure. Now, I know he articulated some optimism in terms of over the weekend, and perhaps early next week some compromise could be reached. Quite frankly, Mr. Volpe, I don't see a compromise. As I said earlier, this is an issue that is very clearly black and white. You're either with the remailers or you're with Canada Post. There's no middle ground, there's no grey area. And I'm sure most people understand that. So the only compromise I can imagine is that we agree on some new process for bringing closure to this issue.

Quite frankly, I think now is the time for us to discuss that. Let's talk about closure. I've come to appreciate the members of the Bloc quite a bit over my year and a half on Parliament Hill simply because they make decisions that often appear to be free of ideology. They try to cooperate as a part of this committee, so I hope they don't see my remarks and my position on this as being somehow antagonistic toward them. I sense there's a much greater agenda at play with Mr. Julian. And I know Mr. Bélanger also has a lot of pressure in his riding, and I understand that, and he's been very passionate about speaking on behalf of Canada Post.

However, that doesn't get us to a resolution of this issue. I want to see this matter brought to closure. My colleague Mr. Jean has put forward what I believe is reasonable; it's fair. We're giving the committee until Wednesday at 3:30 to come up with whatever compromise they may think possible. But the bottom line is we will be here whether we continue tonight or whether we continue on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday trying to bring this matter to closure, and ultimately I'm not sure we're ever going to change each other's minds on the merits of the issue at play here, which is the remailing issue.

I've sensed from Mr. Julian that he continues to want to drag this on and on and on, and the longer it drags on, of course, the more opportunity there is for Canada Post to step in and enforce their injunctive relief and put thousands of remailer employees out of business. He thinks that's a great idea. Mr. Chair, I don't. I feel for those people who have been employed—

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

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Julian, on a point of order.

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

Again, Mr. Fast is letting his emotions get the better of him. He is making comments that are unacceptable and he is straying from discussion of the business at hand.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Not a point of order, but I would again ask Mr. Fast to maintain relevancy to the amendment.