Evidence of meeting #38 for Veterans Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
This is a substantive change to the motion. Would it not require another 48 hours to bring before the committee?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I was going to let Madam Sgro speak and then check for unanimous consent.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brant, ON
Point of order, Mr. Chair.
Just quickly, Madam Sgro, could you re-read it? I'm trying to write it down, and you spoke very quickly, and I didn't get all the wording.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Okay: “...inquiry into the chemical spraying of substances such as Agent Orange between 1956 and 1984 at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown.”
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
If I can just speak to it very briefly, I think we heard a variety of different issues mentioned the other day, and I think it might be helpful for all of us. I'm hoping we will move forward on this as an issue of non-partisan nature. I think this is an issue all Canadians should be concerned about, and all of us. That would be the reason it's there.
I believe with the change I have suggested, at the end of the day it might be much more helpful in trying to truly understand what happened in that period of time.
Again, this is not partisan politics. This is all governments and the rest of it. I think it's an issue we all need to understand better as Canadians, and make sure that what went on there never does happen again in this country of ours.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Does Madam Sgro have unanimous consent to change her motion?
Mr. Kerr had his hand up first, then Mr. Lobb.
Conservative
Ben Lobb Conservative Huron—Bruce, ON
I just wondered, for the record, if you could read the revised motion again.
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Jacques Lahaie
Ms. Sgro's amendment would read as follows. The new words are: “the chemical spraying of substances such as Agent Orange between 1956 and 1984 at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown.”
Conservative
Conservative
Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, this would apply whether it's this or back to the motion. I know the minister is quite prepared to come forward, but after the visitors we had, would it be appropriate to have him in here before the actual vote or not? I know he'd like to comment on a number of things that were raised and the parameters of why certain decisions were taken and so on. It seems to me that it would be appropriate to hear from him directly before we actually deal with the motion, because it may have an impact on it.
That's all I wanted to raise, that the minister is quite prepared to come forward and appear as a witness to the committee.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I would just ask first, does Madam Sgro have unanimous consent on the changes to her motion here?
No, we have no consent. All right.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I would still propose an amendment, which is the original reading to be voted on. It's not a friendly amendment. We could amend the motion.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
We can just have debate over the amendment to see what the discussion is on, why people would not give unanimous consent. That would be my interest—why they wouldn't want to look at agents other than Agent Orange, and why they wouldn't want to look at the period from 1956 to 1984, because that's all we're adding. I think we need that on the record, why there are people opposed to it, who just indicated they were against it.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I think, for clarification, it's my understanding that this is a recommendation to the Government of Canada for a public inquiry, not to study it, so why they would be opposed to—
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
That kind of a public inquiry.
I would then move an amendment to the original motion, which then inserts the words: “the chemical spraying of agents such as Agent Orange, between 1956 and 1984...” and then it reads as it continues. So it's exactly the same as was proposed, but as an amendment.