Transport Committee on May 13th, 2010

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

A former member.

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

No.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Anita Neville?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

I had not worked with Anita on this, but it is my understanding that she has a very similar bill on the order paper. That's why I acknowledged her in my presentation. She has actually also supported the bill in that sense.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Can we understand the substance of how the council would be organized and established? The minister would be responsible for striking this council, and it says that “the Council would organize the fundraising campaign”, but the minister would be responsible for allocating the public land and then the minister would strike the council. Could you tell us precisely how this would operate procedurally?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

What I would like to see is that members of the public would apply to be a part of this council, and that would be based on their understanding of the Holocaust, their relevance to the Holocaust, and maybe their personal connection to the Holocaust, and hopefully we could have a wide background from across Canada to be a part of it.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

But aren't there only five members...if you have people apply far and wide?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

You can have members from different parts of the country. I don't think that having a committee of 25 members would be productive, so I think initially five is good. They could then set up their own fundraising chairs or whatever they like for each province. That, to me, is not a concern. But I think with the five members, we felt that through their applications we could figure out if they were competent enough to be able to get out and raise the funds needed and also to get the design together.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

How would they be selected? By region, by background, by expertise?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

I think it has to be more by merit, if you want to call it that--their understanding of the Holocaust, their understanding of the project, and their ability to do the job, which is to raise funds and put a design together.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Speaking of raising funds, what do you anticipate the total cost of the monument would be?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

I have personally stayed away from a number on purpose because I don't want to dictate what the thought was and have people say, now it's gone way far beyond what Tim thought it was going to be. I think the number would be based around what kind of design is chosen, and those who choose the design will also have to be aware of how much money they think they can raise.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Mr. Uppal, are you familiar with Bill C-547, An Act to establish a Holocaust Monument in the National Capital Region? The bill was introduced in the 39th Parliament, the second session, which ended in 2008, and the sponsor was Ms. Susan Kadis, the member from Thornhill?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

No, I am not familiar with it. I know there were previous versions of this presented; that's why I stated that earlier as well.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you, Mr. Uppal.

We will now move to clause-by-clause.

Mr. Gaudet, on a point of order.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to move a motion. We have listened to Mr. Uppal and asked him questions on his bill. We have had some time to look at the Conservatives' amendments and we support this bill. However, with their amendments, the Conservatives seem to be wanting to draft a new bill. We need time to consider all of this. This is why I move to adjourn clause by clause until May 27. I do not know if everyone agrees.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

The motion has been put on the floor that we adjourn debate on clause-by-clause until May 27. I have just the information that we talked about earlier. We had confirmed the minister for the first hour of the 27th, but again, the committee is in control of its own destiny, so I will open the floor to debate on Mr. Gaudet's motion.

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I think Mr. Gaudet is trying very hard to find a rose in the thorn bush. I applaud him for it.

One of the things we haven't addressed is that these amendments, which aren't anywhere yet, apparently...have they been tabled or have they just floated from heaven?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

They're on notice.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

If they are on notice, Mr. Chairman—and I think Mr. Gaudet will appreciate this—the substance of all these amendments goes to the heart and principle of the bill. As I indicated in my question to Mr. Uppal, the amendments go to the issue of whether the government is prepared to establish a site for the monument and to initiate the development of a monument.

My colleagues, Madame Mendes and Ms. Crombie, have indicated that the government can do that without the benefit of a piece of legislation from one of their members, legislation that they're now proposing to amend completely, clause by clause. They could do that administratively. They could put the funds forward. They don't need anybody's support. The principle has already been established. It was established in the previous Parliament--and, I might say, by one of my colleagues in the Liberal Party.

We support this bill. We support the principle of the bill. The amendments tear that principle apart. When I asked Mr. Uppal whether in fact the government had sought his okay to present amendments, it wasn't because I was being devious but because he, as the mover of the bill, would have to accept an amendment that's friendly.

I don't think there's anything friendly about these amendments. These amendments can only be ruled out of order. They go against the very principle of the bill. They tear apart the business of what Mr. Uppal gave in response to my question—that is, fundamentally the government must provide the territory and it is not doing it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean, on a point of order.

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

My first point of order, Mr. Chair, is what amendments is he talking about?

My second point of order is, if he does have those amendments—and he has mentioned that they change the bill substantively, which quite frankly I would argue to the contrary—maybe he can enlighten us as to how they change it.

So although you may not substantiate the issue of a point of order, certainly if he's going to rant and rave about how bad the amendments are, he could talk about some specifics in relation to how they change it. My understanding is, from looking at this, that this perfects a previous bill in relation to the administration itself of it.

We're all in agreement on a national Holocaust memorial. We are ready to proceed on the government side to correct any problems it may have. My question to Mr. Volpe is, is he prepared and is his party prepared today, right now, to correct any issues in relation to this and move this matter forward as quickly as possible?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Is this the same point of order?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I was in the middle of my presentation, but I guess the honourable member, the parliamentary secretary, wanted to illustrate that whenever there is a thoughtful approach to enunciating a position different from his own or the government's, immediately it's a rant and rave--