FOPO Committee Meeting

    Honourable members of the committee, I see a quorum.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 106(3)(a), as clerk of the committee, I will preside over the election of the chair and vice-chairs.

     I must inform members that the clerk of the committee can only receive motions for the election of the chair. The clerk cannot receive other types of motions, cannot entertain points of order and cannot participate in debate.

    I'll now call 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 for the chair.

    Mr. Morrissey, go ahead.

    Mr. Clerk, I would move the nomination of Patrick Weiler to serve as chair of FOPO.

    Thank you.

    Are there any other motions?

     I will now put the motion to the committee. It's been moved by Mr. Morrissey that Mr. Weiler be elected as chair of the committee. Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?

    (Motion agreed to)

    The Clerk: I declare the motion carried and Mr. Weiler duly elected chair of the committee. I invite Mr. Weiler to take the chair.

     First, I just want to say thank you very much to the members of the committee for putting their trust in me to chair this committee. It was a great pleasure to be part of this committee in the last Parliament. I thought we were very effective as a committee. We were able to do some important studies and produce some reports that the government had to respond to. I'm really looking forward to working with everybody on this committee to follow in that legacy and to do some important work with everybody on the committee.

    Welcome back to Mr. Morrissey and Mr. Cormier from the last Parliament's committee, and welcome, Mr. Connors and Parliamentary Secretary Klassen. Welcome back, MP Small and MP Arnold—I really enjoyed working with you in the last Parliament—and welcome, MP Gunn and MP d'Entremont.

     I'd also like to welcome Alexis Deschênes, a new member.

    Before we continue, I would like to ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters. You will notice a QR code on the card that links to a short awareness video.

    I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the members. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking, and I remind you that all comments should be directed through the chair. For members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can, and we appreciate your patience and understanding in this regard.

    With that, if the committee is in agreement, I would like to invite the clerk to proceed with the election of the vice-chairs.

    Mr. Clerk, please go ahead.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the first vice-chair must be a member of the official opposition.

    I'm now ready to receive motions for the first vice-chair.

    Mr. Small, you have the floor.

     I nominate MP Mel Arnold.

     Are there any further motions?

    The motion proposed by Mr. Small is that Mr. Arnold be elected as first vice-chair of the committee. Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?

     (Motion agreed to)

    The Clerk: Thank you.

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

    I'm now ready to receive motions for the second vice-chair.

    I nominate Mr. Deschênes.

    Thank you.

     Are there any other motions?

    It has been moved by Mr. Cormier that Mr. Deschênes be elected second vice-chair of the committee.

    Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?

     (Motion agreed to)

    The Clerk: Thank you.

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

    Congratulations, Mr. Deschênes.

Congratulations to Mr. Arnold as well.

    With that, as is the usual practice, if the committee is in agreement, we will proceed with the routine motions.

    You all have received the package of generic motions that the whips have agreed to distribute. Is it the pleasure of the committee to look at these motions separately or to adopt them all at once?

     I suggest that we adopt them all at once.

    That's great.

     Given that they've all been put forward as a group, is it the will of the committee to adopt the routine motions?

    (Motions agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: The motions have been adopted.

     I'd like to invite our analyst, Natacha, to join us here at the front as well.

    Are there any motions that someone would like to move before we adjourn for the day here?

    Go ahead, Mr. Arnold.

     If I could, Mr. Chair, I'd like to move that the committee deem that it has undertaken and completed the study “Challenges to the Sustainability of the Yukon Salmon Stocks” pursuant to Standing Order 108, and that it adopt that report as a report from this committee pursuant to Standing Order 109; that the committee request the government to table a comprehensive response to the report; that supplementary or dissenting reports that accompanied the report in the previous session of Parliament be tabled with the main report; and that the chair present the report to the House.

     This is a study that we completed in the last Parliament. All members of the committee worked through the whole process. It was submitted, but because of prorogation, there was no government response received. This is simply to resubmit the report in this Parliament so that we can get a government response.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Arnold.

     We're keeping a speaking list here. Next I will turn the floor over to Mr. Morrissey.

     Chair, could we just suspend for a moment while we...? We're okay, but could we suspend for a few moments? We can come back to this.

     We're going to briefly suspend, as Mr. Morrissey said.

    Colleagues, I'm going to resume the meeting.

     When we left off, Mr. Morrissey, you had the floor, so I'm going to turn the floor back over to you.

     Chair, we're okay. We support the motion put forward by Mr. Arnold, or the request by Mr. Arnold.

    Mr. Chair, could we get my Conservative Party colleagues' motion on the Yukon? I didn't receive it.

    Okay.

    Mr. Arnold, do you have the text of the motion that you could share with Monsieur Deschênes?

    I think we have it translated. Let me check with staff.

    It is being sent to the clerk so that it can be provided.

    I don't know if this is the right time to do so, but I'd like to propose an amendment to this motion.

     I want to clarify one thing: We're not in committee business right now, so if you bring forward motions, they will be notices of motion, because you do need to provide notice for them.

    As soon as I receive the text of the motion, I will send that to you.

    I propose that we move on to committee business and that we vote on my colleagues' motion. Our side is ready.

    That's a dilatory motion.

     It might be a procedural piece, but do we need to move to committee business and to remain public?

     I'm sorry; could you repeat that?

    Do we need to make a motion to move to committee business, or was it automatic that we were in committee business?

     We would need to actually have a motion for that right now, but first, I believe the motion has been sent.

    Mr. Deschênes, Mr. Arnold's motion was sent by email.

    If we need to move into committee business to discuss this motion, I so move.

     We don't need to move to go into committee business if we all agree. We can just do it like that. We are already in public.

     That's okay.

     The motion that was sent out was the wrong one. We're going to share the right one with the members.

    Mr. Cormier.

    Maybe we can just suspend while they get the language for Mr. Deschênes and then come back.

    Sure. We'll suspend briefly until the proper motion is circulated.

    I call the meeting back to order.

    Mr. Cormier, you have the floor.

     I was done.

     The correct motion has been circulated, so you should have that in your inboxes now.

    I think the question is whether there is unanimous consent to adopt this motion and thus allow the report to be tabled in the House to get the government's response. Before finishing that, there will need to be some small changes to update that report with the current session number and things like that. Those are the types of minor changes the clerks would have to make.

    The question here is whether there is unanimous consent to adopt that motion.

    Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a very simple amendment to this motion. It's to add, “for a maximum of two meetings”.

    That's another motion, Mr. Deschênes. The first motion that was emailed was the wrong one, so you were sent another email. The motion in question is simply to table in the House the report that was completed in September or October of last year and to get a government response. I don't think we need any more meetings for that.

    Yes, then, there is unanimous consent to move this motion.

    Thank you very much.

    The clerk will first have the report updated for the new session, after which I will submit the report to the House.

    Mr. Deschênes, you have the floor again.

    I'd like to give notice of the following motion:

    Thank you very much, Mr. Deschênes. Did you send that motion by email?

    Yes.

    Thank you.

    Is there anybody who would like to speak on this motion that's just been tabled?

    Can we wait until everyone has received the motion?

    We'll suspend very briefly while the motion is circulated.

     Let's resume.

    Everybody should have received the notice of motion by email. That notice of motion has been officially shared.

    With that, I'll go to Mr. Cormier.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    If it's a notice of motion, we agree with our Bloc colleague's motion.

    Mr. Arnold is next.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe there are a couple of amendments required for this. I'll try to make them as one.

    Mr. Arnold, I'm afraid that this is just the notice of motion right now.

    Are we not discussing the motion?

    No. Right now, this is just the notice being given for the motions.

    Okay.

    Is there anybody else who might want to move a motion here?

    Yes, Chair. Thank you. Have we concluded with the two?

    Mr. Chair, like Mr. Arnold, I would like to move this motion. It is that:

    Mr. Chair, this would allow the analysts to conclude the work that was begun in the last Parliament, based on the testimony and the evidence given, and to prepare a draft report that will be reviewed by the committee during the fall session.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

    I believe this is going to be circulated momentarily so that members of the committee have it as well.

    Chair, it's circulated using the verbiage I articulated.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

    We're going to briefly suspend until members have that in their inboxes.

     We're going to resume. All members should have received the motion by email.

    Because we're not in committee business, in order for this to pass, we would need unanimous consent. As Mr. Morrissey mentioned, this would just allow the analysts to produce a report over the course of the summer based on testimony that was received in the last Parliament. If it does pass, there would be an opportunity for members to provide any comment or direction over the course of the summer to the clerk as well.

    Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.

    Obviously, Chair, everybody then would have input into the consideration of the report before it's adopted and returned to the House.

    That's correct.

    Mr. Chair, I want to make sure I understand correctly: Is the idea to continue a study that has already been started, or is it just to draft a report based on the meetings that have already taken place?

    The committee did the study last year. It has heard from all the witnesses and has completed its study, but the analysts haven't finished the report. This motion will enable the analysts to finish drafting the report. It's not about holding new meetings with witnesses.

     Is there consent in the committee to adopt the motion?

    (Motion agreed to)

    The Chair: Okay.

    Next is Mr. Arnold.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I'd like to move another motion:

    Given that the 45th Parliament has begun and Canadian fisheries are at a crucial moment, pursuant to Standing Order 108, I move that the committee invite the Minister of Fisheries to testify before the committee for no less than two hours, and her department officials for one hour, no later than September 26, 2025.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Arnold.

    I understand that you're giving notice for that particular motion. Once we come to the appropriate time, that's something we can look at in our next meeting.

     No. This is a motion. We're in committee business, so I can move a motion.

    No, Mr. Arnold. We're actually not in committee business at this time.

    Then I move that we move to committee business, Mr. Chair.

     Okay. I think that's a dilatory motion.

     Does the committee agree to go into committee business?

    Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.

     Chair, again, we would request a suspension for a moment to consider Mr. Arnold's request.

     We'll briefly suspend.

    We're going to resume.

    A motion has been moved to go into committee business, so I think we need to just have a show of hands. Do we have agreement to—

    Go ahead, Mr. Cormier.

     Before that, if Mr. Arnold agrees, I think we can just accept it by unanimous consent instead of going into committee business. If he agrees to that, we can just approve this by unanimous consent. We're okay with that.

    What is the unanimous consent for, exactly? Is it for that motion or to move into committee business?

    Unanimous consent is being sought in relation to Mr. Arnold's motion.

    I propose going into committee business, as was moved, to debate my motion, for which the opposition is proposing amendments, as well as that of my colleague and those of the party in power. Either we decide to give notice of those motions or we talk about them later. We shouldn't set one aside to deal with another.

    Mr. Chair, I'd like to clarify something for Mr. Deschênes.

    Our colleague Mr. Arnold moved a motion to invite the minister and the officials. Then, he proposed that we move into committee business so that we can approve the motion through a vote. What we are now proposing is to adopt the motion through unanimous consent, since we agree on the proposal.

    What I understand is that my motion will simply be put on notice while the others will have already been debated. I'm worried about it getting to be a little too late in the process. If we're adopting substantive motions, let's do so for all the motions that have been proposed. If not, let's give notice of all the motions, and we'll come back to determine the order.

    Thank you, Mr. Deschênes.

    Mr. Cormier, you have the floor.

    Mr. Chair, I'd like to clarify something for Mr. Deschênes. Each member chooses to table a motion or simply give notice, so it was up to Mr. Deschênes to clarify whether he was giving notice of his motion or proposing it. Mr. Deschênes' intervention was considered a notice of motion, but Mr. Arnold proceeded differently. That may not be the case, but that's my understanding. Mr. Arnold's motion was different from Mr. Deschênes'. Mr. Deschênes gave notice of his motion, whereas Mr. Arnold moved his.

     Just to clarify, the one that was passed unanimously was not a notice of motion. The other ones were notices of motion.

    In that case, I don't give my consent to adopt this motion.

     With that, there's a motion to go into committee business. That was put forward by Mr. Arnold. Do we have agreement around the table to go into committee business?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: Okay. We'll go into committee business.

    I have Mr. Morrissey and then Mr. Arnold.

     Chair, am I correct that we are now in committee business?

    Yes, that's correct.

    Then, Chair, I wish to move the following motion, which has been circulated. It's the return of the Fisheries Act to the committee.

     I believe the clerk has the notice, Mr. Clerk, given that we're now in committee business.

    Again, Clerk, this is a study that we began in the last Parliament. This would be moving for the committee to adopt the resumption of the study.

     Mr. Morrissey, you've moved this motion. Members should have this in their email, and of course we have a hard copy that's being circulated. I don't know if you want to say anything else to it at this time.

    No. It speaks for itself, Mr. Chair. If the committee adopts it, it's moving the study of Fisheries Act back to the committee for continuing consideration.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey. With that, we can open it up for debate if any members would like to say anything to this motion.

    Go ahead, Mr. Small.

     Thank you, Chair.

    I'm wondering what Mr. Morrissey's thoughts are on the witnesses. Will we be opening up new invitations to new witnesses or going back to the original witness list?

     Mr. Chair, as usual, that would be entirely up to the direction of the committee. When it is considering this, the committee can go in any direction it chooses with a majority decision at any time. If it's the wish of the committee to add more witnesses, that would be considered.

    It is the Fisheries Act, as I stated. We had significant witness appearances on it, but it would be up to the majority of the committee when the bill comes back from the House, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

     Is there anybody else who would like to weigh in on the debate?

    Go ahead, Mr. Klassen.

     This is just for clarification, since there are some new members here and we weren't part of hearing any of the witnesses speaking.

    I'm not sure how that impacts how we would be voting, for example, as we do not have all of the history in front of us at this point. Could we get some clarification on that?

     Sure. I can mention that in the fall, we probably had four meetings on that. We had a number of meetings in the fall as a prestudy for the review of the Fisheries Act. A number of witnesses from across the country appeared as part of that.

     We didn't finish that study. I forget how many meetings we still had to go. This would be a continuation of what was started in the fall, although because it's a new session after prorogation, we would have to start from the beginning.

    Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.

     Chair, the committee could simply adopt by unanimity bringing forward the testimony and the witnesses who were already on the record. Am I correct?

    I am, yes.

    Then again, to go back to Mr. Small's question, as in any study, the committee can always choose to amend the witness list and extend it, or not, at the will of the committee majority at any time.

     Thank you, Mr. Morrissey.

    Unless there's anybody else who would like to say anything about this, we can move to a vote.

    (Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: Go ahead, Mr. Arnold.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

     I want to clarify my motion to have the minister appear. Do I need to move that again, now that we're in committee business, or was it deemed adopted?

    You don't need to table it again. You've already given notice, so you can move it now.

    Okay. I will move that motion now, as we're in committee business.

    Given that the 45th session of Parliament has begun and that Canadian fisheries are at a crucial moment, I move as follows: “That, pursuant to Standing Order 108, the committee invite the Minister of Fisheries to testify before the committee for no less than two hours, and her department officials for one hour, no later than September 26, 2025.”

     Thank you very much, Mr. Arnold.

     We had a very brief discussion before, but is there anybody else who would like to weigh in on this motion?

    Go ahead, Mr. Klassen.

     I would like to see the date removed from that and have the minister come for one hour, which I think would be more than appropriate and more than the norm, and have the staff come for two hours.

     Mr. Klassen, are you moving an amendment to the motion?

    Yes, I am.

    With that, we'll open this up to debate.

     Mr. Arnold, go ahead.

     Thank you.

    I'm going to oppose that amendment. It is an invitation for the minister to appear, and we've always asked for two hours, if she's available, and for one hour for the department.

     It's very important, and I think it's extremely important now, when we see potential significant changes in the department. I believe we've all seen the messages out there that the Canadian Coast Guard will possibly be moved to a different department of government and no longer be under fisheries, and we see that in the title of the fisheries minister, with it no longer being “Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard”.

     I think that we, as a committee, deserve to understand what the new mandate of the minister will be, how the work of the department is going to proceed and what the priorities are going to be, and I don't think that can be covered off in one meeting. That's a very short round of questions for the many members of this committee. I'll oppose the amendment.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Arnold.

    Is there any other debate on the amendment?

    I have Mr. Morrissey.

    Just so we're clear, we're going to vote on the amendment to Mr. Arnold's motion. Clarify the amendment again for me.

    Mr. Klassen moved that the minister would appear for one hour rather than two hours and that the date would be removed.

    Go ahead, Mr. Cormier.

    I don't want to go above my colleague, but I'm thinking about the time of two hours. It is an invitation, Mr. Arnold, but can we at least remove the date? It's an invitation. I'm pretty sure the minister will come to this committee. It's just the date. Why not just remove the date and leave it as it is?

    I have Mr. Arnold.

    Are you proposing a subamendment to the amendment? That's what it would be doing.

    It's a subamendment.

    Monsieur d'Entremont is next.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    I'm sure that in three months' time, the minister will be more than prepared to come and meet with us for two hours to answer our questions, and I think that putting some kind of deadline on that is important. We want to see her as early as possible, because she will help us form our discussions as we go forward.

    I think that what Mr. Arnold has proposed is more than acceptable and is more than enough of a heads-up for the minister to be prepared.

    Thank you, Mr. d'Entremont.

     Next I have Mr. Klassen and then Mr. Arnold.

     I was just going to ask whether it is possible to remove my amendment and substitute Mr. Cormier's amendment for my amendment.

     I believe that in order to do that, you would need the unanimous consent of the committee.

     Is there unanimous consent for Mr. Klassen to remove his amendment?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    (Amendment withdrawn)

    Mr. Chair, I'll remove my amendment also, so that we'll just go with the actual motion. Do we have unanimous consent for that?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    (Amendment withdrawn)

    I believe I had Mr. Arnold next, and then—

    It's a subamendment to the amendment, so I will cede for now.

    Okay.

     Mr. Deschênes, you have the floor.

    I'd like us to debate the motion for which I gave notice.

    We have to finish debate on the main motion first.

    I thought we had passed that motion. I apologize.

     With that, if there's no more debate on the motion, we can move to a vote.

    Does everybody consent to Mel's motion?

    (Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: That's agreed. Okay.

     Next I have Mr. Cormier, and then Monsieur Deschênes after that.

    Mr. Chair, I'd also like to move a motion in connection with a study I proposed in the last Parliament.

    Regarding the study on the next generation, I move the following:

    The text should have been sent to the committee members just now.

    Mr. Chair, I'd like to have a brief moment to read my colleague's motion.

    Yes, of course.

    Mr. Cormier, can you email the text of the motion?

    It's done.

    Okay.

    I'm going to suspend the meeting for a few minutes.

    I call the meeting back to order.

     Mr. Cormier moved the motion. It should have been circulated. Everybody should have that in their email, in addition to the paper copy that we have here.

    We can open it up for debate. Does anybody want to speak to the motion on the floor?

    No one does. Let's go to a vote, then.

    (Motion agreed to)

    The Chair: Next is Monsieur Deschênes.

    I want the committee to debate my motion. If I understand correctly, my colleague from the official opposition wanted to propose an amendment.

    Okay.

    We're back to Mr. Deschênes' motion, which he put on notice a little earlier.

    Does anyone want to move an amendment?

    Go ahead, Mr. Arnold.

    Thank you.

     I've spoken to MP Deschênes about this. The last line in the motion that was circulated says that the committee would set aside four meetings. I'd like to amend that to say that the committee set aside the required time to complete the study, so that we don't have to specify four meetings for that.

    I'd also add that the chair present the report to the House, or the usual language that's in a motion.

     Thank you, Mr. Arnold.

    Go ahead, Mr. Cormier.

    If I understand correctly, we're talking about the motion that Mr. Deschênes gave notice of earlier and that he has now proposed.

    If that's the case, I'd like to propose a small amendment that echoes what Mr. Arnold mentioned earlier. I'll read it and circulate it as well. It would just add after the last paragraph, “; and that, pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request the government to table a comprehensive response to its report.”

     Thank you, Mr. Cormier.

    We have amendments, on top of which we have subamendments. Is there any debate on the subamendments?

    Go ahead, Monsieur Deschênes.

    I support the proposed amendments.

    Is there debate on the subamendments?

    All those in favour?

    (Subamendments agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: We're now dealing with the amendment from Mr. Arnold.

    Would anyone else like to weigh in on the changes proposed by Mr. Arnold?

    All those in favour of those changes?

    (Amendment as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: Finally, we have the motion as amended.

    Does anyone else want to comment on that?

    All those in favour?

    (Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: I think that's all we have to deal with in committee business.

    Is it the will of the committee to adjourn?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    Mr. Chair, I'd just like to ask a question before we adjourn: When are we going to decide the order in which the motions will be debated? Has that already been set out in the agenda for the next meeting? Will it be done before the summer or only in September? How do you see it happening?

    That's a good question, Mr. Deschênes.

    Our next meeting may not be until September, so I don't think now is the right time to plan our meetings. Still, the first thing we'll have to do when we come back in the fall will be to discuss this and plan our work. We'll have a report on abandoned vessels, and we'll have to determine the studies we're going to conduct. That should give us a lot to do during the first meetings, but we'll figure that out in the fall.

    With that, the meeting is adjourned.