Evidence of meeting #1 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was toyota.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Bonnie Charron

9:10 a.m.

The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Bonnie Charron

Ladies and gentlemen, I see a quorum.

We can now proceed to the election of the chair.

Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the chair must be a member of the government party. I am ready to receive motions to that effect.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC

I nominate Merv Tweed.

9:10 a.m.

The Clerk

It has been proposed by Mr. Dhaliwal that Mr. Tweed be elected chair of the committee.

Are there any further motions? Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?

(Motion agreed to)

9:10 a.m.

The Clerk

I declare the motion carried and Mr. Tweed duly elected chair of the committee.

Before inviting Mr. Tweed to take the chair, we will now proceed to the election of vice-chairs. Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the first vice-chair must be a member of the official opposition party. I am ready to receive motions to that effect.

Mr. Watson.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

I'd like to nominate Joe Volpe as vice-chair.

9:10 a.m.

The Clerk

It's been moved by Mr. Watson that Mr. Volpe be elected first vice-chair of the committee. Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?

I declare the motion carried and Mr. Volpe duly elected vice-chair of the committee.

(Motion agreed to)

9:10 a.m.

The Clerk

So we can move to the election of the second vice-chair.

Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the second vice-chair shall be a member of an opposition party other than the official opposition party.

I am now ready to receive motions for the position of second vice-chair.

Mr. Gaudet, you have the floor.

9:10 a.m.

Bloc

Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC

I nominate Mr. Mario Laframboise.

9:10 a.m.

The Clerk

Moved by Mr. Gaudet that Mr. Laframboise be elected second vice-chair of the committee.

Are there any other motions? Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?

(Motion agreed to.)

I declare the motion carried and Mr. Laframboise duly elected second vice-chair of the committee.

I would invite Mr. Tweed to take the chair.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you, everyone, for your kindness and confidence.

I have a statement to be read, and then we'll proceed with some of our other business.

On Wednesday, March 3, 2010, the House of Commons adopted the following order:

That, for all standing committees, routine motions in effect at the time of prorogation of the previous session be deemed to have been adopted in the current session, provided that committees be empowered to alter or rescind such motions as they deem appropriate.

Accordingly, the routine motions that were in effect at the time of prorogation are reinstated. The clerk will reflect the House order in the minutes of this meeting. The committee can, if it chooses, amend any of these motions. Finally, for information purposes, the clerk has distributed a copy of the motions to all committee members.

Does everyone have that?

I don't know what the committee had thought of for plans, but I would like to suggest that the committee could now adjourn and go into our subcommittee to make our plans. I know there are some motions on the floor, and we have had some direct contact, particularly with Toyota. I'm advised that they're available to this committee as of Tuesday of next week. I also know that there are budget items we can talk about. I think we can decide that in the subcommittee.

But I am open to suggestions from the floor if there are other things the committee wants to discuss. If not, I would recommend that we adjourn the committee as a whole and break into the subcommittee for planning of business, starting on Thursday of this week.

Are there any comments?

Mr. Volpe.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, colleagues, for vesting your confidence in my position as vice-chair. I think we have some interesting times ahead of us.

Mr. Chair, I think probably the best thing for us to do, as you suggested, is to go into steering committee, but I think it would do us a lot of good to just spend a moment or two on some of those motions, so that we can at least say that they are here and that members who are interested in moving them have an opportunity to have at least a moment's intervention.

It's not my intention that we carry this on, but it would be important to be able to establish that very first item that you suggested; that is, that we go on to talk about the motions related to the Toyota recall file. If we can do that very briefly, then I agree that the committee should adjourn and the steering committee convene, and that we set out the agenda for at least the next six weeks.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Monsieur Laframboise.

9:10 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

Mr. Chair, we have received two motions on the Toyota file. Before we meet as a subcommittee, I would be ready to discuss these motions. I have no objection to an open debate. Mr. Watson and Mr. Volpe have tabled their motions.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Jean.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

In anticipation of this meeting and this topic of speaking to Toyota directly, I did have a chance to, as I'm sure some of you had. My understanding is that they are available. The president and the managing director of Canada are available. This corporation is different from the one in the United States and has a different structure. There are different parent companies.

They have suggested that they are prepared to come forward immediately, next Tuesday, March 16. My suggestion is that, if possible, we set aside that day now as a committee of the whole to study this, to study Toyota and what's going on with the recalls. I do understand that except for 2004, when Mr. Volpe was the Minister of State for Transport, we haven't had as many recalls as we're currently anticipating for this year. Of course, as Mr. Volpe knows, 2004 was a record year.

But I'm wondering if we could have a study then, because if we do the joint study that's suggested by Mr. Volpe, we could be putting that off for weeks, if not months, without any real timeline to do this. I think Canadians want to know about it now. I think it would just be better if we were to follow the invitation and suggestion by Toyota Canada and deal with it immediately on Tuesday, so we can get it dealt with. Really, I don't think we have anything pressing before us--certainly not government legislation.

If we could do that, then, and if we find we have to do additional studies, possibly we then could look at doing one with Industry Canada or somebody else.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

If I may, before I go to Monsieur Laframboise, I will note that there are two motions that are similar, as we know. Mr. Volpe's motion of March 5 talked about a joint meeting of our committee and the industry committee in dealing with the Toyota recall issue. Then there is Mr. Watson's motion of March 8, which basically invites Toyota to come to our committee.

I'll ask Mr. Volpe to be ready to make his comments, but I have Monsieur Laframboise and Mr. Kennedy, in that order.

9:15 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

I prefer Mr. Jean's proposal. Obviously, I will be supporting Mr. Watson's motion. We could meet with the people from Toyota on Tuesday, and then on Thursday, at the next meeting, we could spend two hours with the Transport Canada officials if we have any questions for them and if they have any suggestions for us.

March 9th, 2010 / 9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

I guess I wonder, in terms of what we're trying understand about the recall and the jurisdiction, if industry isn't necessarily going to be involved, won't there be duplication?

In other words, if the point here is not expeditiousness and whether the company is available or not--presumably they'll make themselves available when Parliament asks--but rather to get to the bottom of how best to protect people and whether all those protections are securely in place, and what the impact is for the 270,000 people driving Toyotas in Canada, then we may wish to make sure it's thorough. Therefore, it's worth the time to coordinate with the industry committee. I put that forward for the committee's consideration.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

I think it's important to note for the information of the committee that the industry committee has the same request before it in the sense of dealing with it jointly.

Mr. Volpe.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Mr. Chairman, thank you for repeating that for every member on the committee. As Mr. Kennedy has pointed out, though it is efficient to have parliamentary committees deal with issues that are of interest to them and germane to their competence, it's important for us to think about the issues we might want to address. Some of that has to do with the competencies of Transport Canada and therefore the minister, as well as with Industry Canada and therefore its minister.

The common thread in both, of course, is the company itself. It is a representative of the industry, but because we're talking about recall specific to one company, obviously that company must be here.

I think we can move this along really quickly. I stand to be corrected, and the clerk might be able to confirm whether or not the committees are unable to have a joint study but are able to sit jointly, i.e., they can sit as two separate entities at the same table at the same time.

I'm not sure whether that requires a heck of a lot of work, quite frankly, but it does give us an opportunity, as members of the transport committee, to profit from the insights that members on the industry committee might demonstrate, as they will, through their questioning both of Toyota and of the ministers. We'll also avoid the opportunity that would invariably emerge for people to say that something was not in their area of expertise or competence and that therefore questions on it should be directed to somebody else, and then we'd have to try to do that in the weeks following.

This is what I mean by having two committees working at the same time on particular issues. It's not because we need to beat anybody up, but because we need to get at some issues as lucidly as possible. So I'm going to make the case again. I've talked to a few members around the table, though not everybody, unfortunately. I think it doesn't hurt us to accept in principle the opportunity to pursue this joint sitting. If we agree that in principle we can pursue it, then the steering committee can make the decision for us as we go forward after this.

In closing, I want to compliment my colleague, Mr. Jean, for always doing his research in a thorough fashion and for giving me credit I don't deserve for things. We are, all of us, in a position where we like to think we're more important than anything else in God's creation. I once suffered under a similar illusion. I was minister for all of Ontario, so my head was bigger than this room, but I don't think I was ever Minister of State for Transport.

So in a rare moment of humility, can I ask him to withdraw his claim that I was actually something I was not? Even though it was obviously done in the spirit of giving me great compliments, somebody else, and not me, deserves them.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you.

I'll go to Mr. Jean.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

I withdraw my great comments and thoughts on Mr. Volpe; I certainly wouldn't want to do that on purpose.

Thank you, Mr. Volpe, for pointing that out, and I appreciate any correction that you may find for me in the future.

I was going to suggest that obviously the best thing to do would be to set our own agenda and to invite the industry committee to participate. They can certainly come around the table and deal with it on the basis of our agenda.

I don't know if any other members have heard from Toyota directly, but I would really encourage you to do so, because the voluntary recall is just that; it's a voluntary recall in Canada. A different piece of equipment, in fact, has been causing some of the problems in the United States, so certainly there is a different scenario there. I don't know why the minister is involved. Is he involved in some way because he drives a Toyota? I'm not sure exactly how he is directly involved with the recall except through the department, but I think it would certainly be best to have Toyota here, and to invite industry, and to get on with it.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Mr. Chairman, we don't want to be really quick and jump at Toyota or any other assembler. I think here we're talking about a government responsibility. I don't know whether the minister drives a Toyota or not, or whether his department is replete with automobiles that come from that manufacturer, but since you've raised that, I think no matter what we do with respect to bringing Toyota here on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or any other day of the week, we should not forget that the Minister of Transport is the very next person on the table as well.

So I'm assuming that when you made the proposal to have Toyota here, you also wanted the Minister of Transport here.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Watson.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Herein lies the wisdom of your original suggestion, that the subcommittee begin to address the issue, plan it with respect to context, and explore the issue in some depth. But if the purpose is simply to get a start on next week, I think my motion is sufficient. It will allow us to then tell Toyota and transport officials to prepare to meet.

If we determine as a committee at some point that more needs to be done, let the committee do that. If we want to plan out and get extremely detailed, then let the subcommittee do this. If we're going to make up our minds today, I think my motion is sufficient--enough to start planning and to move on with it.