FAIT Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES ET DU COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, April 20, 1999

• 0912

[English]

(Editor's Note: Technical Difficulty)

Mr. Svend J. Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): ...referring to the possibility of testing MOX fuel. That was the Chalk River test. It wasn't the broader issue. Now we have a response from the government basically on the broader issue itself, which clearly is within the framework of this committee.

Mr. Chairman, it seems to me it's important that this committee have an opportunity to take this issue up with the minister, particularly since this is the only issue on which the minister has made a very explicit rejection of this committee's report. I think it's important that we ask the minister to appear before the committee and clarify just exactly what the position of the government is on MOX and that the committee have an opportunity to review the matter.

As I said, Mr. Chairman, we've moved beyond just a test now, and the government has said, no, we believe we should be....

The Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham (Toronto Centre—Rosedale, Lib.)): Mr. Reed.

Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, I certainly have no objection to that. The government response says we shouldn't cut ourselves off from the possibility. If we're going to do a test burn and we decide it's safe and sound and does the job it's supposed to do, then we shouldn't eliminate that possibility. That's certainly what the response would indicate to me. If the opposition parties would like to have an explanation from the minister, I would concur.

The Chairman: If you're concurring, may I just leave everyone with this thought about this issue, which is obviously a very complicated issue. I notice Mr. Mills saying yes, let's do this, but we've also had a lot of pressure from members to do a lot of things, and we're very busy between now and the end of June.

The way I see this issue presently playing out is that at the moment the government will go ahead, presumably, with a test of these two small battery-sized whatever-they-are and then the plutonium in these two little things. It looks as if that's going to go ahead. The Chalk River people may say, look, it's not feasible to do anything with this, in which case the whole thing then goes away.

Mr. Julian Reed: That's right.

The Chairman: Or the Chalk River people may say, yes, actually this is feasible. From there you have to get the Americans, the Russians, the Japanese, the French, and everybody else in the world to agree to do this. Then they'll have to hold an environment hearing here in Canada and they'll have to have a hearing under the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board Act. This is years and years and years of stuff.

• 0915

I really think our original idea of handing this over to the natural resources committee, whose minister, Minister Goodale, is responsible for the overseeing of this, makes more sense than us quarterbacking this thing for the next what's going to be at least five years. Even if a positive decision were made, I don't see it going anywhere for less than five years, maybe ten. That's a personal judgment, and I'm not trying to prejudge the merits of the thing one way or another. I'm just trying to remind us of our time constraints and what we're trying to achieve. If you want to get the minister in for half an hour to say why he's doing this, fine, but apart from that this could take a lot of our time and energy.

Yes, Ms. Finestone.

Hon. Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, I know nothing about MOX, and prior to your arrival here there was an exchange that was quite interesting to me. I did react and ask the question because I didn't like the presentation of the question in the House by the NDP leader. As an ignorant Canadian watching and listening, I became concerned, and this is the reason for my questions this morning, which are: What is it? What can it do? How much can it explode? Can it burn? Is it bad or good? And so on.

I don't think we can just ignore it. If you're going to pass it on, and that may be the best move, I certainly think the present situation indicates some kind of a response by this committee, which wrote the report in the first place, giving the people of Canada some recognition of the fact that they don't have to be scared out of their mind and that nothing is in the offing. I think that's very important.

The Chairman: Sorry. I didn't mean to suggest we were going to ignore it. I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that we dealt with it in the committee and we made a recommendation. The other day when we discussed it, we thought maybe the committee that would be directly involved in it would be natural resources.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: That wasn't my point. That may be absolutely the right route, but in between that route there has to be some way to temper and to dampen the concerns that are being expressed.

The Chairman: Mr. Mills.

Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, Ref.): I see this more as a foreign affairs issue at this point, because our Prime Minister made this announcement in Germany. We are dealing with Russia and we're dealing with the U.S. as the two sources of this MOX fuel. We're doing it as an international goodwill gesture for getting rid of these materials, so it is strictly in the foreign affairs arena.

Once we actually approve it in the foreign affairs arena, then we start talking about transportation and all that. Now it becomes natural resources. But I think at this point the ball is still in foreign affairs' court, not in natural resources.

The Chairman: The environmental secretary has already said he's willing to have the minister come. I'm sorry, I've obviously introduced.... I didn't mean to waste the time....

Mr. Svend Robinson: Let's get Axworthy here. He is the minister who made the original decision. Let's hear from him in terms of some of the concerns that have been expressed. It was an issue that quite a number of witnesses who appeared before our committee did raise a concern about. I think we owe it to them, when the government says no, we reject this recommendation, to find out what's going on.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Can't we have both?

The Chairman: Mr. Lee has made a good suggestion. Why don't we ask the minister to come and we can ask him about the report as a whole. That way we can get some information and we'll deal with MOX as well. Obviously MOX is a contentious issue, so that will take up—

Mr. Svend Robinson: [Editor's Note: Inaudible]

The Chairman: Yes. MOX will be the contentious issue, but I think it would be helpful to hear him on the report as a whole. For example, I would be very interested, if we could ever get him before the famous NATO meeting, which is next weekend, to know whether or not this whole issue of NATO and nuclear disarmament is, by virtue of Kosovo, not going to be on their agenda.

However, we'll speak to the parliamentary secretary and see if we can get the minister to come and speak on the issue of the report, and we can deal with MOX at that time. Then we can decide as we go along what further pursuit...members can always bring it up at steering committee as to what we want to do.

I still don't think it would be a waste of our time if I were to follow up the original recommendation of the steering committee and draw this to the attention of the chair of the natural resources committee. Don't you think we should do that at least?

Mr. Svend Robinson: We may want to hold off on that just until we've heard from the minister.

The Chairman: Okay. We'll hold that until we've heard from the minister. Thank you very much.

• 0920

We decided we would try to deal with the situation in Northern Ireland. As you know, it seems to be a bit stalled. There's some thought that—

Mr. Charlie Penson (Peace River, Ref.): If it's on our plate, we may as well deal right now with Bosnia.

The Chairman: We have enough on our plate. This is not something we would push something else off our plate for. It's if we can fit it in.

Mr. Charlie Penson: We'll solve the Yugoslav situation and then we'll solve northern Ireland.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Which one is easier?

The Chairman: I don't know, Mr. Robinson, whether you had the opportunity to meet with some Irish politicians who were in Canada recently. They may have met with some other members of the committee. They certainly met with me. They feel—and I don't think it's unfair to say it—Canada has more than just a passing role in all this. We have General de Chastelain there. We obviously have huge numbers of people of Irish extraction, from both the north and the south, in the country. They feel if we were to hold a hearing on it, we might be able to make a positive contribution. So I wouldn't like to lose that opportunity.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: It's a good idea.

The Chairman: We'll have to deal with our researchers and see if we can come up with something. We're not going to just have a hearing for the sake of a hearing. We'll only do it if we can get General de Chastelain and some people who can be helpful. Okay? But I promise not to....

One of your favourites is going to come up here one of these days, Mr. Penson.

This is Mr. Robinson's item, the Canada-Cuba....

Mr. Svend Robinson: It was Mr. Turp's.

The Chairman: Is there any objection to that? Are we agreed?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Chairman: It was also agreed that we'd meet with—

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Excuse me, what was agreed on Cuba?

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: To have the minister—

The Chairman: It's what it says right here. It was agreed we'd ask the minister if he'd ever come to talk to us about Cuba.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: I see, okay. I can read too. I want to know what the answer was.

The Chairman: Certain members were heard to suggest that the meeting be held in Cuba, but we resisted that. We said we didn't have to go there because the IPU has already been there so many times there's no necessity.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: It's on my list. You're just jealous, Bill.

The Chairman: Jealousy is a big feature of politics, I've discovered since I've been elected.

Then it was agreed we would also meet with the former President of Lebanon, Bechir Gemayel, who's in North America. He's teaching in the States, and if he can come here we'll meet with him. It would probably be a Friday, so it would be a question of who was here. We would certainly try to set up something with him. But everybody recognizes that this would be one of our courtesy visit type of meetings. Okay?

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Can I suggest something?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: I have no objection to meeting Mr. Gemayel, the former president, but before we meet him, I think it would be appropriate for our research staff to prepare something for us on his time as the President of Lebanon, and also maybe get a briefing from the department relating to his period as the president. His presidency is quite a controversial situation, and I don't think we should use this for any purpose other than just information.

The Chairman: Good.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: If that's the case, we need to have the right information so we can ask the right questions and have the right approach. That benefits everybody, not only his political interests.

The Chairman: I think that's a very helpful suggestion. That's very helpful and very wise. Thank you.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Very wise.

The Chairman: Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I think Mr. Assadourian has made a good suggestion. I assume this visit to Canada is at his own expense.

The Chairman: That's right. We're not bringing him up.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: He has enough money to pay for it.

The Chairman: Obviously Mr. Assadourian is much more familiar with the regime of Mr. Gemayel than the rest of us around here.

Did you have any business dealings with him, Mr. Assadourian?

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: No.

The Chairman: Next is the breakfast meeting with the high commissioner for United Nations Palestinian refugees. He's here in town, so this gives us an opportunity to meet and have a discussion with him. Obviously, since it's a breakfast meeting, people can come or not as they wish. I'd recommend coming tomorrow, Wednesday, April 21.

• 0925

The final thing is a recommendation that I think will be of considerable interest to members. I'll give you the background on this. The trade minister, Mr. Marchi, has suggested his department will be willing to share with us, on a joint venture basis, the publication of a book on the WTO and how it functions. We would then put this out as either an appendix to our report or with our report.

It would be sort of a booklet that would enable Canadians to know how the WTO works. It would be produced by the committee, and frankly it would be a book that would have a great deal of resonance. I would try to persuade us to maybe print enough so we could distribute them to high schools and other places. It would be very useful for Canadians to know how the WTO functions.

That was the purpose of that recommendation. I think it's a very good one, and the steering committee felt it was a very appropriate one as well.

Madame Debien.

[Translation]

Ms. Maud Debien (Laval East, BQ): In suggesting that the WTO citizen's guide be an integral part of the report your committee will be publishing on the WTO, are you saying that it should be part of the committee's report as such or should it be published in the form of a brochure that could be distributed on a wider scale?

The Chairman: I propose that we publish a brochure to be distributed with the report and that could then be used more broadly. For example, what I see is distributing the brochure to the schools in my riding as well as to the public at large so that everyone can have as much information as possible on how the WTO works, because this organization will be more and more important in Canadian political life.

Ms. Maud Debien: I thought I understood that the printing costs would not be entirely paid for by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

The Chairman: No, it would be a joint venture.

Ms. Maud Debien: The two departments would be participating.

The Chairman: Yes, that's it.

[English]

Madame Finestone and Mr. Reed.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: The suggestion is an excellent one, particularly coming at this moment. I've just come back from the interparliamentary union meeting. The subject matter selected by the women—and there were 135 women present, the highest percentage of women ever in all these male parliamentary things—

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Out of how many?

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Would you believe there were 135 out of more than 400—24%? The subject selected by the women for discussion was the World Trade Organization, millennium round, and implications for financial trade, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.

In trying to present the issue to the women, one of the biggest problems was that they, particularly non-World Trade Organization people, had absolutely no idea how it works. It's a little bit like the MAI.

That kind of document will be very helpful. It can be distributed around the world with the Canadian cover—I think it would be a marvellous move—in English and in French. I would really like to support that. If you're just doing the World Trade Organization, we might also mention the institutions that are also impacted.

The Chairman: You make a very interesting point. We had a hearing on the relevance of the international financial institutions, but you're quite right, there's kind of an integration there that people didn't see before but now feel that's sort of a seamless web issue.

I'm sure we could get a chapter or a page or two in there, based on what we heard last time or what we've dealt with that will deal with that.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz (Committee Researcher): The issue of that will be a significant chapter in the report itself.

The Chairman: The issue of...?

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: It's the issue of the relationship to the international financial system and the international financial institutions.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: She'll appear before the committee. She sent us a document. Which one was it?

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: Sylvia Ostry will also address the issue in Toronto because her paper includes a comment on that.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Thank you.

The Chairman: She's done a paper, but she'll also appear before the committee. We had a hearing. What was the date of the hearing?

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: I think the last round table in Ottawa was on March 18. There was quite significant comment from some of the witnesses on that. Again, it's been addressed in some of the other briefs I've seen.

• 0930

The Chairman: The CCIC, for example, is very interested in that issue.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: At the cross-country hearings next week, I'm sure we'll hear more significant comments.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: People might think we have an open Parliament and open standing committees that are transparent. I think that will be very exciting.

The Chairman: I think that's a very good suggestion.

Mr. Reed.

Mr. Julian Reed: I just wanted to express my surprise that something is not already in print concerning the function of the WTO.

The Chairman: There's a lot on the web site.

Mr. Charlie Penson: There's printed material, too.

The Chairman: There's no point in entirely reinventing the wheel.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I'll bring it to the next meeting.

The Chairman: We'd appreciate it. Thanks.

Mr. Julian Reed: I hope we're not duplicating something that's already available.

The Chairman: No. We thought we would do something that would be about the WTO, but that obviously would reflect the report as well. So it would have that dimension to it that no other publication would have. But you're quite right, if there's a primer on the WTO that's there.... I know there's something on the web site.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: On the WTO's web site there are various things. There are descriptive types of things. But I think this is taking it to the next level and perhaps providing a bit of an analytical guide for the average citizen, including even how to access these sites, what's the most useful as well as sort of purely—

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Everybody doesn't open a web site. The ordinary people in my riding don't open a web site for themselves. So I think it's a presumption that everybody uses the web site and the Internet.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: You could combine something with the major substance of the report.

The Chairman: I still have to be shown how to do it. I always have to get somebody in my office to help me. I know how to get it open, but how do I get there? But my kids can do it, don't worry.

[Translation]

Ms. Debien.

Ms. Maud Debien: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to come back on the previous resolution concerning breakfast with Peter Hans. I thought we got a phone call informing us that this breakfast would happen at 3:45 p.m. tomorrow afternoon. I'm not at all sure about this but I'd like you to check and see so that people won't go there uselessly.

Mr. Daniel Turp (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ): That hour would be good for us because we always have a caucus on external affairs Wednesday morning between 8 and 9.

Ms. Maud Debien: I'm sorry I raised that point again.

The Chairman: Mr. Patry.

[English]

Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.): It's on my agenda for tomorrow afternoon. It's not for tomorrow morning. I'm just looking at my agenda.

The Chairman: CIDA has changed the time. We haven't heard anything. Obviously, CIDA has friends on the committee and some people who are not friends.

[Translation]

Ms. Maud Debien: I'd like to raise one last point concerning the WTO brochure. Can we find out the costs associated with this publication as we figure we'll be paying for part of it?

The Chairman: Yes, we won't proceed before having an idea of how much it will cost. We won't go as far as $50,000. The cost will depend on how many copies are printed.

[English]

Mr. Bob Mills: This is going to be user friendly. This is for the consumer out there.

The Chairman: This is for the consumer, yes. Don't you think it's a good idea?

Mr. Bob Mills: Yes, that's who needs it.

The Chairman: This is not for the university graduates or university—

[Translation]

Ms. Maud Debien: I have another question. Would it be possible for us to look at the blues before the brochure is printed?

[English]

The Chairman: It'll be printed as an appendix to the report. When we look at the report, you'll have a chance to....

[Translation]

As I was saying, as the brochure will be published as an appendix and will be part of the report, we'll have an opportunity to look at it when we examine the report.

Ms. Maud Debien: That's not what my question was about. Will we have an opportunity to examine the guide before it is printed?

The Chairman: Yes, absolutely.

Ms. Maud Debien: Fine.

The Chairman: We will approve the content before it's printed.

• 0935

Ms. Maud Debien: Fine with me. Sorry for that.

[English]

The Chairman: Charlie.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I guess we're going to have ample time to examine this, but the way it will have to be presented is the WTO as it is presently constituted, and make it clear that these are our recommendations for how we would like to see the WTO changed. As long as it's—

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: I may be getting ahead of it. I've actually prepared something that I want to discuss with the chair first. I will say, as to incorporating, this could be an element in the report, but you could actually attach it to the executive summary and list of recommendations so that you kind of have the two together. In fact, I've seen this done before, where committees have produced almost a little pamphlet-sized thing of the essential message of the report.

So you have the guide and then you have what the committee has taken from the testimony it has received and its message to the government. That forms a little user-friendly pamphlet that can be also—

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: With cartoons?

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: Well, I don't know.

But it provides another kind of shorthand that can be distributed in mass quantities. We'll end up with a draft of it before it goes, anyway.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Sure.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: Absolutely. Yes, we're ready in research to talk about how to do this, and that kind of thing.

The Chairman: Are there any other observations for the moment?

Mr. Turp.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: I'd like to come back to the first point.

The Chairman: I'm sorry, but it's too late.

Mr. Daniel Turp: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry I was absent at the beginning of the meeting, but I'd like to understand what's going on. We were told there would be meetings every Tuesday between the hours of 8 and 9 in the morning so that parliamentarians can be properly informed about the situation in Kosovo.

If I understand correctly, this week, the committee is called to meet only once for a half-hour information meeting this afternoon from 3:15 to 3:45 p.m. and not Thursday morning from 8 until 9. This motion seems to indicate that we possibly wouldn't be called to any meeting during the first week in May. What's going on exactly? How can this Parliament, this committee, its members and other members who were to join the committee be properly informed about the situation?

You certainly remember that there had been a commitment that this committee would be the place to not only inform the members of this committee but also any other member interested in this question. What are we doing? I'm raising the question here, in committee, because in Parliament chambers, there are debates and we, from the Bloc.... There will be a question period, but the committee doesn't seem to be the place, contrary to what Mr. Axworthy promised us, where the members will be informed. One half- hour this afternoon doesn't seem very satisfactory to me.

The Chairman: For the record, I would like to indicate that there was no confirmation that two meetings a week would be held. That was our hope, and I fully support the idea. I asked for that, but a positive response from the Department turned out to be impossible because of staff schedules, since these people already have to hold other information sessions and are not available between 8 and 9 a.m. on Tuesdays and Thursdays. I agree that that would have been the ideal solution, but it is impossible. For the moment, there is a session planned this afternoon and another one the first week of May. In spite of all our efforts, that is the only possible solution.

Mr. Daniel Turp: It is completely absurd that the government is making the effort to have Jim Wright and the Brigadier General give long briefings for the newspapers and television. Although we parliamentarians try to listen to these news reports, we have other things to do in life. This government is not even able to find time to inform parliamentarians properly, on a day-to-day basis, about what is happening in Kosovo.

• 0940

The Minister did tell us that he felt it was important for us to be informed and brought together in this committee, but he is not keeping his promise and his commitment. Bill, you seem to be telling us that we should accept the fact that they are saying that they are unable to do it. It seems to me to be almost a violation of our parliamentary privilege involving the right to be informed of what is happening.

[English]

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Mr. Chairman, if you expect ministers or ministerial staff to be available between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. in the morning, it would be very difficult in terms of timing. They're planning their cabinet meeting, they're planning their day, they're getting their report from the night before, and I do believe that's an impossible timeline.

I don't disagree with some of the things Mr. Turp has just said, but I think the timing is inappropriate. You could ask for a half-hour briefing at lunch or you could ask for a high tea, cocktail hour briefing, but I don't think you can ask for an early morning meeting. It's unfair to the stress and strain and work of the ministers and their staff at this time.

The Chairman: Thank you. That's helpful.

Mr. Mills, and then Mr. Reed.

Mr. Bob Mills: I've been at a lot of briefings here and now I've started watching the CNN and Newsworld briefings, and they are far, far superior. They're people who are there. They're on the ground. They're seeing it change hourly. They are far superior to any briefings I've ever received from any of our officials.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: So are you saying there is no need for a briefing here?

Mr. Bob Mills: I'm just saying that if you watch CNN and the Newsworld briefings—

Mr. Charlie Penson: Just imagine Minister Axworthy there instead of—

Mr. Bob Mills: —you're hearing Robin Cook this morning, you're hearing Arbour, Tony Blair. You're hearing these people who are on the ground. They're doing this right from there.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: It's going to be on TV tonight.

Mr. Bob Mills: Well, I'm not holding my breath.

Mr. Daniel Turp: I'm not seeing anything on Canada, what Canada is doing and the position of Canada.

The Chairman: If you're so interested in this subject, I might tell you, right now, as we sit here debating, we're missing an important broadcast of CBC's This Morning, which was recorded last night, in which I am debating this issue. It goes for two hours, until 11 a.m. So if you want to be brought up with a host of information, get back to your office and turn on your radio. You will hear me, John Polanyi, Michael Bliss, and a whole host of others.

Mr. Bob Mills: If they are going to be structured so that they're informative, so that they are going to tell us exactly what's happening, I'm all for it. I think we should get that. I think that's important. But let's not just do it as public relations so that we can say we've done it, because that's a waste of our time.

Mr. Julian Reed: I'm a little bit confused here. I thought these briefings were agreeable to the committee the way they were set up. This is the first time I've heard that you want daily briefings.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: We would like to have regular briefings. Once a week, as is now the case, isn't enough. This week, only one briefing is planned, which is this afternoon.

[English]

Mr. Julian Reed: I thought they had tried to set up two briefings.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: You can ask the clerk. No other briefing is planned for this week.

The Committee Clerk: That will be Thursday.

Mr. Daniel Turp: No, that one is no longer on the schedule.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Turp, I want to assure all members that the clerk and Mr. Mucci, my assistant, spent hours trying to line this up. This has taken an enormous amount of time, and for the reasons that Mrs. Finestone pointed out, our original idea from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. just didn't work. In my view, our original idea of 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. would have been perfect. I agree that with 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. Tuesday and Thursday we would have all known about it and we could have just done it. But that just wouldn't work in the way in which the system works, so we're looking for another thing.

So we have this one, and the reason there isn't one next week, of course, is because the committee is travelling out west. Then we'll have one the following week.

Mr. Julian Reed: There's another one on Thursday.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: All right. I reserve my opinion on the quality of the briefing that we will get, but I am pleased to know that there will be at least two. Will that be enough? I am not yet convinced that it will be, given everything that is happening every day, every hour.

• 0945

[English]

Mr. Julian Reed: Okay.

The Chairman: Wait a minute. This said “and a briefing on the same issue with the Minister of Foreign Affairs”. I mean, it's one thing to get a series of briefings with the officials, but to try to get the minister when he's down in Washington and Brussels and everything else....

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: That is not what we are asking for. We understand that Mr. Axworthy cannot always be there.

[English]

The Chairman: No, no, exactly, as long as we understand that. But believe me, we're doing our best. And the department has been very amenable to trying to do it. It's just trying to get the time. The department is willing to help.

Mr. Julian Reed: We can agree to reserve judgment until we get through this week and make an assessment as to how he feels about it then.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order.

The Chairman: Yes, Mr. Penson.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I gather we're going until 10 o'clock, one hour this morning. We've spent 45 minutes on the first...we're not finished the first item on the agenda yet.

The Chairman: Well, we've finished every other item.

Mr. Charlie Penson: No, we haven't. We haven't finished the travel to Brussels and to Geneva by the WTO.

The Chairman: It's not on the agenda, but okay.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Are we not discussing that this morning?

The Chairman: Yes, I'm sorry, you're right. It wasn't on this agenda I had in front of me. I'm very sorry.

Your point is you'd like to move on to it.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Yes.

The Chairman: Before I do that, though, Mr. Speller, did you have an announcement about the NAFTA commission?

Mr. Bob Speller (Haldimand—Norfolk—Brant, Lib.): [Editor's Note: Technical Difficulty]...NAFTA trade ministers, and I just wanted to give an opportunity to members to have a briefing on it. I've set up a time on Thursday, this Thursday, at 4 o'clock in room 112 north, just to give them an idea of what is on their agenda.

We sent a notice to the chair.

The Chairman: Okay.

Mr. Bob Speller: I just thought it would be an opportunity to give people a chance to know what's going on.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Let's go back to proposed travel to Brussels and Geneva, which is item number 2. We've now covered all the items on the report.

I have some information that sort of totally makes Brussels not only problematic but nonsensical. Friday, May 14, is a national holiday in Belgium. On Saturday, May 15, the committee will not get anyone to come from the European commission or from NATO. The European parliament will have dissolved for the June elections, and the new European commission will not be in office.

Mr. Julian Reed: The perfect time to go.

The Chairman: I would respectfully suggest that any trip to Brussels might be considered by ourselves and the Canadian pubic as nothing more than a frolic and less than useful. So Brussels is out on those dates. I think the whole idea is still a very good idea, but unfortunately those two days at that particular time....

Now if members want to go just to Geneva, and just skip Brussels...because it looks like the dates are getting harder and harder to find.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Can the dates be restructured so that Geneva was at the early part of the week in place of the dates we had for Brussels? That would make some sense to me.

The Chairman: Your suggestion is go to Geneva first and then go up to Brussels for the Monday and come back from Brussels?

Mr. Charlie Penson: Well, I don't even know about Brussels at all, given what you've just said. But at least if we were to go to Geneva and do that....

The Chairman: This is for the purpose of our report. This is for WTO.

I still think Geneva is very important.

Excuse me, maybe Mr. Speller has an observation.

Mr. Bob Speller: What happened to the end of the month? I thought we were thinking of Friday, May 28, and May 29, 30. We had agreed on those dates.

• 0950

The Chairman: The trouble with the end of May is that on Saturday we're still going to have the some problem. The European parliament will have dissolved. I have no idea whether the European commission or the new commission will be functioning by the end of the month. We'll still have those problems respecting Brussels. Not Geneva, Brussels.

If people want to go at the end of the month....I'm personally not available at the end of the month, and that's not the end of the world; I don't have to go.

Mr. Bob Speller: What days are you available?

The Chairman: [Editor's Note: Inaudible]...U.S., which some of the members here attend.

Mr. Bob Speller: Canada-U.S. is the—

A voice: It's the long weekend, 21 to 24.

Mr. Bob Speller: Yes, exactly.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Bill, 21 to 24 is the long weekend in Canada.

The Chairman: I appreciate that.

Mr. Bob Speller: We're talking May 28, 29, and 30.

The Chairman: Yes. Members, do you want us to try to work on that? Would that be feasible? Look, you guys talk about it. You're the ones that have organized all of this. Go ahead.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: It would certainly be preferable if we had the chair with us, obviously...we could incorporate it into the report. But if we're trying to get the report through in June it doesn't give a lot of opportunity.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: June 13 is the election in the European parliament.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: But I'm saying if we were going to shorten it to just the Geneva program, we could still even have somebody from our mission in Brussels come to Geneva and brief us on what's happening at the commission and so forth.

I think the main value in this program that is WTO-related is basically based in Geneva because that is where all the directly WTO-related institutions are—in Geneva.

On the dates, it's really sort of a political judgment as to who—

Mr. Charlie Penson: The 14th and the 15th of May, just cutting it back to Geneva and having our ambassador from the OECD—

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: And of course our ambassador to the European commission in Brussels could—

Mr. Charlie Penson: They could both come, and we could even add an extra day on and even just go to Geneva at that time and cut out the Brussels portion altogether.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: The three ambassadors can go from Brussels to Geneva to meet you very easily. There are three ambassadors in Brussels.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Would the 14th and 15th work for you?

Mr. Bob Speller: Yes, but we don't need to go on a Saturday. That was another reason we chose a weekend, because it seemed to fit. We could go the 12th, 13th, and 14th or something.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: But you want to bring up the Friday and the Monday and it still leaves people most of the week.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I'd favour that week.

Mr. Gerald Schmidtz: Just from the point of view of utilizing information...the report draft.

The Chairman: We would leave here possibly on the night of the 12th and have the 13th and 14th as working days in Geneva, and then members could either stay for an extra day if they wanted to or come back or whatever their constituency or other requirements are, in time for them to start the break. Is that what you're suggesting?

Mr. Charlie Penson: Yes.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: What are the dates of the break?

The Chairman: It starts on the 15th.

[Translation]

It starts on the 15th.

[English]

That's a helpful suggestion. Should we work toward that? Now, everybody recognizes that not everybody's going to be able to go. It's going to be a select small number of us. We'll try to work in as many as we can.

What about the budgetary options to this?

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Option number 1, total cost with five MPs and two staffers is $50,000. Option number 2, with nine MPs and two staffers, is $35,000. How could that be?

The Chairman: Well, because in the second one, the MPs are all going to link arms and flap them like this and the staffers are going to ride on their backs and—

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: What's the explanation for that?

The Chairman: To my recollection, the explanation was that on the second one we said members would use—

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Travel points.

• 0955

The Chairman: You can't use your parliamentary, within-Canada travel points, but many of us have many travel points that we've acquired in travelling around that we can only use for official business, and this would be official business and we could use those. I don't know how many Air Canada ones I have, but I occasionally find a way to use them for official business. This would be official business; you could use those.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Frequent flyer points.

The Chairman: Your frequent flyer points. You could use those.

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: That makes sense.

The Chairman: If we all did that, more of us could go and we would cut the cost down substantially. And I think we'd have a better chance of getting approval from the House leaders if we did that. Don't you agree?

Mr. Charlie Penson: I'm suggesting, Mr. Chairman, that maybe one from each party in the opposition would go, and then whatever it takes from the Liberal Party in order to give that balance. But it seems to me that we don't have to have the full committee.

The Chairman: No, we were never suggesting that.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I would favour the smaller number, and by cutting out the Brussels portion we would have to refigure the cost; it would be lower.

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Is there any indication that we'd have budget problems in terms of having this approved without using frequent flyer points? As you've said, you find ways of using them, and others do as well. I'm not sure we all have enough points to use.

The Chairman: We'll have to recheck the budget then and look at it. But Thursday we'll come back with another budget.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Good idea.

The Chairman: You ask me if there's any chance of losing House approval. I'm not pointing a finger here, but I'm just saying usually your party's resistance is where the problem often comes. So maybe you could give me better advice on that than I can give you.

Mr. Charlie Penson: It's just a matter of whether we feel we can justify it.

The Chairman: I appreciate that, but in terms of justification, I don't know whether Mr. White's or Mr. Strahl's justification would be better served by us using frequent flyer points or not.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Let's bring it back on Thursday. I'll talk to our people and I think others should do the same.

The Chairman: I would be willing, for example, if we did some combination. I'd be willing to use frequent flyer points, and then maybe another member could go and you'd just have to pay the ground transportation or something like that. We even ran into trouble with that when the defence committee had that issue some time ago. Remember?

Mr. Turp.

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: I want to make sure I understand. Are we really proposing to eliminate the Brussels portion of the trip?

The Chairman: Yes, unfortunately, because it is absolutely impossible to go there. To begin with, there is the election of the European Parliament, and we would not have people's attention between now and the end of June. Besides, the new commission is not yet in place, etc..

Mr. Daniel Turp: My second question is about the costs. I do find it surprising that a ticket from Ottawa to Geneva, in economy class, costs $4,031. There is something completely—

The Chairman: That is true.

Mr. Daniel Turp: Why does an economy class ticket for Geneva cost $4,031? Who are we buying these tickets from? Is it Rider?

The Chairman: That is the economy class price. Frankly, the supplement for business class is not all that much. That is the problem when you have to travel on specific dates. If we bought the tickets three months in advance and were willing to leave on Thursday and come back on a Tuesday morning at 3 a.m., we could get a better price. Our problem is that it is always very difficult for members, who travel a great deal, to organize things so as to be able take advantage of the cheaper fares. So these are full fare tickets.

Mr. Daniel Turp: I am a member of Parliament and I see what Rider is charging us for airline tickets; there is something completely unacceptable in this.

The Chairman: Perhaps. We talked a lot about it. For example, our clerk has told me that for next week, there was enough time to organize it so that the whole committee is travelling on charter flights or cut-fare excursion flights. When it is possible, we do that. I have a ticket to go to Winnipeg on Sunday night. I already have something very important going on in my riding and I have to find some other way. It is very difficult for the staff to organize trips on specific dates for members and otherwise it is impossible to have low fares.

• 1000

Dr. Patry.

Mr. Bernard Patry: I just wanted to say that we always had the same problems in the associations, whether it is the IPU or the Francophonie association. We met with the Rider people, and those are in fact the cots. We tried to buy tickets from Montreal, in the economy class, but unless the reservations are made three months ahead... You can't cancel your tickets in that case. So we end up with these fares that are very expensive.

[English]

Mr. Sarkis Assadourian: Maybe this is a question to the clerk. You buy an economy class, round-trip ticket for $4,031. You could buy the same ticket for $1,200 through a travel agency. Why do we have to pay $2,000 or $2,500 more?

The Chairman: Wait a minute. We just went through all this. You can buy it for $1,000, as you know. But you cannot buy it for $1,000 if you (a) want to change it or (b) want to go and come back when you want. You can buy it for $1,000 only if you leave on a Thursday night and come back on a Tuesday morning, don't change it, don't get ill, or whatever. In our experience with members of Parliament, that doesn't work. They don't function on fixed schedules. The day you're about to leave the minister wants the parliamentary secretary to do something else, or I've got something in my riding. We end up like all business travellers paying the full economy-fare tariff because we want the flexibility of time. If you want to lock yourself into something else, try it. But I think you're asking our staff to do an absolutely impossible task. We've tried this on every trip we've ever gone on, and there's always somebody who doesn't turn up or wants to go at a different time.

Mr. Julian Reed: And those are planes with little, teeny weeny seats.

The Chairman: The staff have tried and they do it when they can. But I can tell you, as chairman of the liaison committee, we've discussed this. Many chairs.... For example, I remember the chair of the aboriginal affairs committee arranged and had the whole thing lined up three months in advance. It saved $20,000. Then the House leaders turned down the trip because they didn't like whatever the heck it was, because it was too this and too that. In the end, it got approved, but only five days before they went. It cost $30,000 more. It would have cost $20,000 less if the House leaders had approved it, but to save money they cancelled it, and when it came back the second time around, they had to pay full fare and it cost $25,000 more.

That's the way this place works. It's totally goofy, but anyway.... I don't think we can ask poor old...our clerk. She has to work within the constraints of this system, which is very complicated. We do our best. I promise you we do our best.

Mr. Charlie Penson: We'll be bringing this back on Thursday with a revised budget.

The Chairman: Yes, we are.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Let's deal with it then. Mr. Chairman, we have other business. I would like to raise one other issue.

The Chairman: Oh, that's why you were so anxious to get that thing going. I want to get back to this interesting debate on radio.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I do too, and we're all waiting for that.

The Chairman: Well, it's on until 11 a.m.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Mr. Chairman, in light of the Chinese premier being here and the discussions about China's accession to the World Trade Organization, I think it would be interesting to have the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade before the committee to discuss that issue. It's a very big matter that China might be coming on board, and I think it would be really relevant at this time to have him here to brief us and answer questions on that issue.

A voice: Is this hypothetical?

Mr. Charlie Penson: No, no. We just discussed it here on Thursday or Friday.

The Chairman: Do you want to raise that with him when he comes on the estimates, as a starter?

Mr. Charlie Penson: There's no time when he comes on the estimates, Mr. Chairman. I think he should be here on that particular issue specifically.

The Chairman: Mr. Speller.

Mr. Bob Speller: [Editor's Note—Technical Difficulty]...quite a few times, and certainly it's an important issue. He would be more than pleased to brief committee members on it. Again, the chair says it's time to figure out timing. It might be best, as the chair said, to bring it up during estimates. I mean he's here. If you think we're going to get into the nitty gritty details of the negotiating position, that won't be the case. But we can certainly give a briefing on where it's going.

• 1005

Mr. Charlie Penson: I'm not talking about getting into the negotiating discussions. I know he's not going to do that. But he can certainly brief us on what they're looking for and what China expects out of this. There are still a number of questions that should be asked. We're dealing with the WTO issue before the committee right now, and I think it's very timely that he would come after the discussions that were held just last week with the Chinese premier.

Mr. Julian Reed: Charlie, the basis of joining the WTO is common to all countries. They all have to adhere to the same set of fundamental principles in order to be able to join. I went through this discussion with a couple of countries when I was in Geneva last year. So if you want to look at the parameters that China will have to fill, they're there for all to see, and they know what they have to do. What I'm trying to point out is that China is not unique in this situation. They adhere to a certain set of rules and then they become eligible. If they don't do it, they're not eligible.

Mr. Charlie Penson: I don't agree with you. I think it's important that he be here. He was just in the United States and held discussions there as well. And there are different points of view of what the criteria might be for China to come on board.

Mr. Julian Reed: Well, every country feels they're different and special.

Mr. Charlie Penson: Just a minute now. You've outlined what has been the norm, but that isn't necessarily what might take place. I think because our committee is studying this very question of the WTO, it would be good to have an update from the minister about these discussions, and I lay it out for the committee. Let's have a go at it.

The Chairman: Madame Debien, then Mr. Mills.

A voice: I don't see why.... We can always ask the minister.

Mr. Bob Speller: As I said, I'll see what I can work out, and if he—

[Translation]

Mr. Daniel Turp: I would agree, since the China situation is really unique; no one can claim otherwise. What China is looking for is a status within the WTO. In meetings in the US, that is the only thing that China really wants to discuss with the American President. That will enable us to discuss with the Minister his views on the future of the WTO, the granting of membership not only to China but about 20 other countries, and the worldwide presence of the organization. It would be worthwhile having Mr. Marchi come to share with us his philosophy on what the WTO would like after China and other countries join.

The Chairman: Within the Department, as you know, there are a number of people interested in policy. So there is a whole philosophy and not just the Minister's personal opinion involved.

Mr. Daniel Turp: They can come with him....

The Chairman: He can bring Mr. Fried and other people.

Mr. Daniel Turp: ... because this is important. China will change things in a fundamental way.

The Chairman: I quite agree, but he needs to come with Mr. Fried and other people because this is a long-term project.

Ms. Debien, did you have something you wanted to add?

Ms. Maud Debien: I think it is all the more important that we meet with Mr. Marchi, since the Chinese Prime Minister's visit to the United States did not bring the expected results regarding China's participation in the WTO. Moreover, given that we live next to a superpower that influences Canadian policy, it would be important for Mr. Marchi to come to talk to us about Canada's position in this area.

The Chairman: Are you talking about Brazil?

Ms. Maud Debien: I was talking about our superpower neighbour and not about Brazil.

[English]

The Chairman: I think we've got.... The parliamentary secretary says he'll check with the minister. Let's try to work it out.

Mr. Bob Mills: My own comments were to Mr. Reed, who's left. China is different. There are 500 million immediate consumers there, which, not devaluing the UN, is part of that agreement in the WTO, and that of course stabilizes the whole block there. I think that's extremely important.

The Chairman: Mr. Schmidtz just reminds me that on May 12,

[Translation]

and that might be of interest to you, Ms. Debien, because some experts on the United States will be coming. That might be an opportunity to ask them about the American position on China, etc.

• 1010

Ms. Maud Debien: It will also be important to let them know Canada's position concerning the United States.

[English]

The Chairman: Okay. On Thursday we'll come back with a revised budget for Geneva.

Thank you members. The meeting is adjourned.