Transport Committee on Feb. 7th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I have you at the moment, and then I could have Mr. Aubin, and Mr. Rayes again.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Chair, we have a motion before us, which you came prepared to answer. The motion was that we not consider any briefs until such time as it can be determined whether any of the organizations that submitted briefs received funding.

If that question has been answered, the next question perhaps becomes, “So what then?” Is there an opportunity to note in the report that some of the testimony came through Transport Canada?

I agree that it has already been determined that some of the briefs were paid for by Transport Canada because of the process that some of the witnesses undertook in terms of submitting them to this committee. We can vote on this, but the fact remains that we know the answer. Now what do we do with that, if anything? That is exactly what the opposition has been trying to get to with this motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Let me just say very quickly that it is not unusual at all for any of the departments to have a process parallel to the ones that committees have. It is not unusual or out of the question for the department to pay any group. I used FCM. FCM's funding did not come from this participant funding. It came from somewhere else, but it is established, as it was in the previous government, to allow groups to be able to prepare submissions, and so on.

It's not unusual at all, and it was done from the departmental perspective of Transport Canada for various components of this Navigation Protection Act. It was made available to organizations or groups, in particular aboriginal groups, that did not have the resources to be able to prepare, and so on, for the department or for whatever was chosen to help us with this process. The fact that 142 of the aboriginal organizations required funding in order for them to be able to prepare a brief from the department has nothing to do with us. It was their role.

On this committee we did not pay for anybody. We received 256 briefs on a variety of issues. The clerk has no ability to screen, to ask where something came from, or ask any questions at all. We, as a committee, receive them. There has been no interference between us and anything else.

It is important to ensure, as we go forward, that there is always a clear distinction between our role as parliamentarians, independent of the government, which is what our committee is, and the government itself, so that we are able to do our work without any interference from anyone. From that perspective, there is nothing wrong with helping organizations that don't have resources to pull resources together in order to provide us help as we move forward. Certainly, the opposition can put something in a dissenting report if they continue to have concerns, but we are where we are.

I have attempted to clarify that this committee had no interference from anyone and did not pay anyone to do anything or to submit any report. I am now going to go back.

We have a motion on the floor. Do we go to a vote on this motion now that we've had as much clarification as we have?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Can I have the opportunity to speak?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Only if it's very short, just because it's one o'clock.

Does the committee want to take five more minutes?

Mr. Rayes, and then Mr. Aubin.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Since our meeting is public, I would like to take this opportunity—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, Mr. Rayes, I got it backwards. It's Mr. Aubin, and then Mr. Rayes.

Monsieur Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a question about procedure.

Can we vote on this motion even though I have submitted a proposed amendment favourable to Mrs. Block—a proposal she has not reacted to—that indicates that we say instead that the committee will not consider any submitted briefs that may be contentious?

Does the fact that Mrs. Block hasn't reacted to my proposed amendment mean that it is automatically rejected?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

There were 142 briefs that were part of the departmental review.

Your amendment, Monsieur Aubin, is that the committee not consider any briefs. Well, Ms. Block's motion is that the committee not consider any briefs. What are you suggesting, Mr. Aubin?

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I suggested that the committee—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Is it that they exclude the 142 that Ms. Block is suggesting because they worked with the departmental review?

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I proposed that the committee not consider any briefs listed by Mrs. Block that are considered potentially contentious. Therefore, all the others would be acceptable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Is that the 142 that had worked with the department on the funding side? Then you would be denying 142 briefs to go forward.

[A voice]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Well, you're saying “any”, which is 256.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

No, that is not the spirit of this motion. It does not say that we will exclude. It says we want to determine.

It says we will “not consider any...until which time it can be determined”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Has it been determined? Are you comfortable now as to the source of support for the briefs that we received?

Then we don't need to go forward with your motion, and you can withdraw it if you like. You've made your point, I think.

Ms. Block, do you wish to withdraw the motion?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

We will withdraw the motion on the basis of this conversation that we've had today and in terms of what has been provided to us by way of how many briefs were, in fact, supported through funding.

(Motion withdrawn)

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to adjourn the meeting. My apologies, we're five minutes late.