Evidence of meeting #51 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 amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Chad Mariage  Procedural Clerk

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Mr. Chair, I think this is another initiative in relation to the government and particularly to industry and what's taking place along the St. Lawrence and in eastern Canada.

I also think it is great to see the Liberals come on to this and support this particular motion. I'm looking forward to it. We'll look forward to a lot of people coming forward to provide evidence on this.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

We'll go to Mr. Watson.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

I'm not sure what the member fully had in mind on this. Will this encompass or have any discussion related to the new proposed international border crossing between Windsor and Detroit? Are we looking to deal with certain issues like that?

I believe that from our perspective, certainly that's a key aspect of where the government is going in the corridor, but I'm not sure what he had in mind. Did he want to give some indication of where he's going with this? I'm not opposed to the motion. I just want to get a sense of where the member's going with it.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Well, my third motion is to ask for information about these topics. I think once we get that information we would be in a position to be more precise on the content. I would think that the new border crossing could be a part of it, yes.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

We're asking to commence a study whose direction we can't determine until we get the documents. It almost seems like the motions are backwards. Why not get the information and then come back with this motion?

Anyway, I'm not going to put too fine a point on that....

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

The motion is that the committee begin a study on the progress of developing the gateway strategies for Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada; that the witness list will include, but not be limited to, the Honourable Chuck Strahl, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities; the Honourable Keith Ashfield, Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, and Minister of the Atlantic Gateway; and that the committee will report its findings to the House of Commons.

(Motion agreed to)

Mr. Jean.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Could the clerk advise us of how many studies we currently have under way? Should we move a motion to study how many studies we have? Maybe we should just study the studies we are studying....

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you, Mr. Jean. I will find that out and report back to the committee at my earliest convenience.

We have a third motion by Mr. McCallum, dated February 14.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

This one does not involve a study. It merely asks for information from the government, within seven calendar days, on the two gateway strategies, and also on the feasibility study for a Toronto-Peterborough passenger rail service.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Comments?

Mr. Jean.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

As Mr. McCallum is a former minister of the crown, he will understand that a seven-day timeframe would be quite onerous for the department. I support the motion. I would just suggest giving them a more reasonable period of time to provide this information. Unless there's some previous deadline, I would suggest that 21 days would be in order.

With the Atlantic gateway council...there might be some issues relating to privacy concerns, etc. I'm not 100% sure. It just seems that seven days from today is onerous, considering all things, and I was wondering if you would consider amending it to 21 days.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. McCallum.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

We seem to be cooperating so well today, so in the spirit of that, we'll do a compromise. Halfway between seven and 21 is 14, so we'll say 14 days.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Perfect.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

The motion has been amended to allow for 14 calendar days.

First we will vote on the amendment.

(Amendment agreed to)

(Motion as amended agreed to)

With that, we have no further business.

Monsieur Gaudet, you're okay?

4:50 p.m.

Bloc

Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC

I'm fine.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.