Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources
Issue 1 - Evidence - March 9, 2010
OTTAWA, Tuesday, March 9, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources met this day at 5:08 p.m., pursuant to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate of Canada, to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Lynn Gordon, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources.
I see that there is a quorum. As clerk of your committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair. I am prepared to receive nominations to that effect.
Senator Seidman: I nominate Senator David Angus.
Ms. Gordon: Thank you. Are there any other nominations?
Seeing none, I will put the question.
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Seidman that the Honourable Senator Angus do take the chair of this committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Ms. Gordon: I declare the motion carried and invite Senator Angus to take the chair.
Senator David Angus (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Thank you very much, colleagues, for that unanimous vote. I cannot tell you how pleased I am to be back in this chair. All of you are familiar to me in one way or another but, in particular, the people who were on the committee in the Second Session of the Fortieth Parliament who are back here today know very well we have a full and important agenda of work that we have already established.
[Translation]
We have already established the fact that we work together very efficiently.
[English]
We have fun doing it, which to me is what it is all about.
I want to welcome the new members who are here today. First, from Toronto, a prominent journalist from a well- known family, recently named to the Senate, Linda Frum. Linda, I cannot say how pleased I am to have you with us. We have had our private talks already and I know you will be an enthusiastic and active member of our committee.
[Translation]
From Montreal, the beautiful province of Quebec, Leo Housakos.
[English]
Leo Housakos and I have been militants in political matters in Montreal for many years. He is also a relatively new senator. Leo, I cannot say how pleased I am that you are here.
We have been outnumbered in the past session by our western and northern colleagues, which is not to say that they are not tremendous members of the committee and great workers.
[Translation]
He is a francophone from the city of Montreal.
[English]
To my great surprise this afternoon, I learned of another member.
[Translation]
We have another Montrealer, stopping in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Senator Paul Massicotte.
[English]
Senator Massicotte is another colleague of mine and a former colleague on the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce. Also, we have other avocations. We have now become extinct.
[Translation]
We are rare birds.
[English]
The bagman does not exist any more in Canada. Together, we patrolled the streets of Montreal, one of us in a red suit and one of us is a blue suit. We worked cooperatively together.
Senator Massicotte, I am delighted to have you here in this committee.
Senator Massicotte: I am pleased to be here.
The Chair: I was pleased when I was notified that Lynn Gordon would be reassigned to this committee as clerk, not only because she has a tremendous corporate memory of what we are doing, what we have been doing and what we are hoping to do in the future, but because she has been a great help to me. It has been a wonderful learning curve for me. She has been kind enough to say that it is a mutual admiration society in our joint efforts to make a difference in the field of energy, the environment and natural resources.
I want all members of the committee to know that Lynn and I have had two full meetings already to plan the agenda so we do not waste a lot of time; we can get on with the job and use our time efficiently. Thank you for all the spadework you have done and for being you. You have helped me in terms of this agenda and how we deal with it.
The idea is, colleagues, and I hope you agree that it is appropriate, that we go through this list of formal motions to give the committee some legal life, and then adjourn the meeting. The steering committee will then meet and set the stage for a more fulsome meeting on Thursday morning.
I am conscious of the fact that I am accountable to this committee for the trip I took to Copenhagen before Christmas, on your behalf, to the 15 Conference of the Parties (COP 15) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. On Thursday morning, I thought we would have a meeting and I would give an off- the-record, unexpurgated description of my sense of what happened in Copenhagen. I have written for the public record an article for The Hill Times, which may appear on Monday. I will be glad to take all your questions then. We will have that discussion in an off-the-record way. We will then go on the record and deal with the formal motions that we need to take to the Senate in terms of our work going forward.
Before that work can happen, as Ms. Gordon reminds me, now that we have a chair, the second item of business is the election of a deputy chair.
Senator Neufeld: I move that Senator Mitchell be the deputy chair.
The Chair: Are there any other motions in this regard?
If not, then I declare nominations closed. Senator Mitchell is elected.
Senator Mitchell: Thank you.
The Chair: Are you all comfortable with the fact that Senator Mitchell sits up here? For both of us, I find it much better than having the deputy chair in another place. Those are Item 1 and Item 2 on the agenda.
Senator Mitchell, do you want to make any opening remarks?
Senator Mitchell: I want to thank everyone for their support. It is always a thrill to win an election, no matter how that occurs, so I am taking it.
I second what the chair has said, except to say that after five years I have been on a number of committees in the Senate. While each of them has been good, this committee is exceptional. It has been a first-class group of people. I welcome back all the former members and I welcome the new members as well. We have a tremendous task to do and an interesting study. It is unique in the country, though maybe not as unique as we thought. Nevertheless, the study is ahead of the curve. We have an excellent group of people to ensure that we do it exactly right. Thanks to all of you. Thanks to the staff, Ms. Gordon and others, for all the work you have done. I look forward to working with you as well.
The Chair: Item 3 on the agenda is next. Members of the committee have the motions before them. I suggest we do not read them out in detail but go through them one by one.
The next one is the constitution of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure, otherwise known as the steering committee. I will be pleased to entertain a motion.
Senator Lang: I so move.
The Chair: It was moved by Senator Lang that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed, et cetera, and empowered, et cetera. Is everyone in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Contrary-minded?
Carried.
In terms of the designating one other member for the steering committee after the usual consultation, the usual consultation has taken place between the chair and the deputy chair, as we now are, and Senator Lang is designated the third member of the committee. We look forward to working with you, Senator Lang. I know you will be a tremendous help to us. It is all part of our cooperative effort.
Next is Item 4 on the agenda. You can see the motion to publish the committee's proceedings. Do I have a mover?
Senator Peterson: I so move.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Contrary-minded?
The motion is carried unanimously.
Next is Item 5, authorization to hold meetings and to receive evidence when quorum is not present. For example, as long as there is a member of the government and a member of the opposition present, any two members can hold a meeting but they cannot have formal decisions taken. However, they can place evidence on the record that ultimately can be ratified.
Senator McCoy: I want to put forward an amendment to that resolution that a member of the committee from both the government and opposition and an independent senator be present.
The Chair: Is anyone in favour of the motion, besides you, Senator McCoy? All the other independents?
Contrary-minded?
Some Hon. Senators: Contrary.
The Chair: Unfortunately, that amendment is defeated.
All in favour of the motion as drafted?
Some Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Next is the financial report. That is Item 6.
Senator Housakos: I so move.
The Chair: All in favour?
Senator McCoy: Is there discussion on the first report? I take it that Item 2 on page 2 of the report under "Transportation and Communications" is with respect to our special study on issues relating to energy. Is that the study that we launched last year?
The Chair: This is the money we spent in the last session with respect to our study. Do you want to know what the transportation part was?
Senator McCoy: I am trying to distinguish between Item 2 and Item 3. I am also looking at an itemized breakout of transportation and communications in Item 2.
The Chair: We had two orders of reference. One was for our general mandate. I think you are familiar with that mandate. The other was for the special study. Item 2 was the special study and Item 3 was the general one.
Ms. Gordon: Item 2 was our study last year, our overarching mandate, the order of reference on emerging issues. Item 3 was the energy study.
Senator McCoy: Okay: How did the transportation and communications line break out then?
Ms. Gordon: Regarding transportation and communications, you will recall the trip to Washington in the fall of 2009. That number includes all the expenses under travel and accommodation, the per diem, ground transportation and taxis. The bulk of that number is for that trip.
For professional services, we had contracts that went under that order of reference: for example, Climate Change Central and Delphi. That is where that number comes from.
Senator McCoy: That number was for the energy study as well, then?
The Chair: Yes; budgets were submitted. Both were substantially under budget. Under rule 104 I have to go before our colleagues and, as we heard Senator Dawson do today regarding the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, simply table it.
Senator McCoy: I am trying to figure out which ones are which.
Ms. Gordon: As well, I do not believe that we had the energy order of reference and the budget through by the time we were travelling, so it was put under the "emerging issues" order of reference.
Senator McCoy: Fair enough; thank you for satisfying me.
The Chair: Thank you for your question, Senator McCoy.
Senator Massicotte: I have another comment. We are approving something on March 9, yet the report is dated March 10. Can we change the date?
Ms. Gordon: My apologies; we used the date it goes into the chamber if it is approved today, March 9.
The Chair: The motion was moved by Senator Housakos. All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Next is Item 7, research staff. May I have a motion?
Senator Neufeld: I so move.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I invite, with your permission, Sam Banks and Marc LeBlanc to come forward and take their usual places.
For the new senators, they are our capable folks from the parliamentary library who are our designated researchers. They are knowledgeable. You will find them helpful and useful to us as we do our work.
I introduced the new senators; I think committee members know the rest of us.
I might say at this point that Senator McCoy has not only produced a useful primer on energy, originating from a request from Senator Seidman, but the primer took on a life of its own and she has shared it with all or most of us. She may want to share it with the new senators now.
Senator McCoy has also offered to make herself available to help you folks in any way that you might need. I am sure you will take advantage of that offer, knowing the depth of her knowledge and background, and her willingness to make this committee work and do a good job.
Thank you, Senator McCoy. We appreciate that.
Senator McCoy: Thank you.
The Chair: Welcome back. I know that you have been working away, and I have seen the fruits of your labour here. At the steering committee we will see more of that work.
Next is Item 8, authority to commit funds and certify accounts. Senate rules require a committee to grant the power to make financial commitments, et cetera. This power is normally conferred individually on the chair, deputy chair and the clerk of the committee. Do I have a motion?
Senator Banks: I so move.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Item 9 is travel. That item, again, speaks for itself. The steering committee is given some power in that motion. Do I have a mover?
Senator Lang: I so move.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: The motion is carried unanimously.
Item 10 is next, designation of members travelling on committee business. This item is relatively new. There have been a couple of changes. We can get into the changes in more detail later but I want you to know that the Journals of the Senate publish every day who is present and who is not and who is on public business and who is not. Sometimes — and I am guilty of this omission as much as some others — we go on a committee job but we forget to go to the steering committee first and say: "By the way, I will be at the GLOBE conference in Vancouver on such and such a date; be sure I am marked present." It then is reported in an official way. If we do not tell the steering committee now, we might not be considered to be on official business.
The important thing is that, if we want to claim some outside business we conduct legitimately for the committee, ensure the steering committee knows about it in advance and gives it a green light. That is what this item is all about.
Senator Lang: I have a question for Lynn Gordon. I do not follow this item. For example, does a trip to Washington automatically go on the record or does our office have to put it on the record? I am not sure how the procedure works.
Ms. Gordon: No, our office reports the attendance to the whips of who is travelling when it is on official committee business.
The Chair: Of course, the steering committee approved that trip and that was fine.
This item refers to attendance an individual basis. For example, let us say I see something happening in Montreal and it is on a day the Senate is sitting. I go to the event, do my thing and report later to the committee but I forget to tell the steering committee. It then becomes an issue. They are getting stickier all the time. I draw that item to your attention.
Did we approve that motion?
Senator Seidman: I so move.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Item 11 is next, travelling and living expenses of witnesses. This item speaks for itself. It is a technical thing, but if witnesses want to bring more than their chief executive officer and their chief financial officer, for example, we have to go through a certain process. This item deals with that process.
Senator Neufeld: So moved.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Item 12 is communications. This motion has been modified significantly from previous sessions. I want you to know that. Previously the motion dealt only with the use of electronic media coverage. However, in an effort to formalize the role and direction of Senate communications officers it is proposed that a broader motion be put forward.
Lynn, you might want to flesh out that explanation for me.
Ms. Gordon: The item speaks for itself. Basically, it is to formalize — as the relationship of the Library of Parliament analysts is formalized — their relationship through a motion. This relationship is formalized for Senate communications by having them mentioned in this motion.
Senator Massicotte: I do not think there is any obligation for any committee to use, necessarily, the Senate's communications directorate. There have been many debates in the past about the committee having the discretion to use communications experts if it is so budgeted. This resolution forces the committee to use the Senate's employees, as opposed to going outside. The policy is probably a good one, but certainly not consistent with the obligation of the committees today.
The Chair: Right; you are showing your past experience on the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration. We have gone through these hoops, because the deputy chair and I have had much positive experience with outside communicators. We have tried to be good corporate citizens, if I can use that expression, and use the Senate communications people.
Towards the end of the last session Tracie Leblanc was assigned to us from Senate communications. She started developing knowledge, especially given the energy study that we will tell you about. She has been reassigned to us. You may know that Blair Armitage has been put in charge of the communications portfolio at the Senate. Things are starting to take more order. We, in good faith, said we are willing to try. We have reserved our right to hire.
Senator Massicotte: This motion seems to suggest otherwise.
The Chair: No, I do not think it ties our hands.
Senator McCoy: I have heard that it does not exclude additional outside communications help. If I am wrong, Senator Massicotte, then I welcome an amendment.
The Chair: It does not exclude it, and I do not think we need an amendment. I would welcome Senator Massicotte's motion that we adopt this item.
Senator Massicotte: You may need to come back to the committee for authority to hire outsiders. This motion gives authority to hire a Senate communications person.
The Chair: I think it is appropriate that we go back because we need a budget for it.
Senator Massicotte: You need to come back if you need further authority?
The Chair: Yes; you will learn we are trying to get our own website up and running.
I had a meeting with Mr. Armitage last week. Every other committee is asking what the energy committee is doing that they are not. We like to keep a leg up and I am a great believer in cooperation rather than confrontation. If it does not work the committee can tell me to do it another way, but for now we are trying to be good corporate citizens and to play ball with the administration. I think in the long run it will redound to our benefit.
For your benefit, that is the way we are playing it but you know me well enough to know that if it is not working we will be the first to kick in the traces.
Will you move that motion?
Senator Massicotte: Yes, I move.
The Chair: Is everyone in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Item 13, again, speaks for itself. It is not a motion; it is to indicate our time slot. No, we do not have any choice. This room is our home room also, but as you have seen in the past, again we are getting a leg up. There are only four rooms that are equipped for TV. We were successful in having every one of our hearings televised. There are 15 or more committees vying for the rooms, and I always ask for the room in the Victoria Building because I think it is more comfortable for televised hearings than this room and the room in the Victoria Building has the monitors and so on.
We will see as we go along, and we are always open to doing it another way, but Lynn has done a great job in getting our oar in the water in the right place to have televised meetings.
Senator Lang: Did I hear you correctly that both our meetings will be held here?
The Chair: This is our home room, but when we are on TV we will try for room 9 at the Victoria Building. This room is equipped for TV. Not to knock the room, but when we have hearings on the environment and the witnesses tell us that there are so many megawatts being used by these big lights and all this equipment here, as Tommy Banks and I know, I do not feel comfortable as the environment guy.
Senator Banks: You do not feel that green.
The Chair: Moving to other business, on that score, the Conservatives heard me say today but I say to all of you again: When we are on television, let us remember that we are members of the Senate of Canada. There is a certain comportment and decorum involved and the Senate publishes a booklet on that subject. I ask all to be mindful of that. Often there is food. We do not need to eat our supper, breakfast or lunch on TV. Let us do our best. It is not always easy.
The other point is on the use of paper. We used to print copies of all the documents for everyone; documents that you already had in your own offices. At the end of the day, Lynn and her staff often had to dump them in the bin. I am as guilty as the next one — let us try remember we are members of the committee on the environment, as well as on energy and natural resources. It is good business to be as green as we can be, given that we have taken on this portfolio.
In terms of our workload and the two orders of reference that we had in the past, I suggest we go to the Senate for an order of reference generally on the emerging issues as and when they arise, the legislation and all those issues. The second order of reference will be specific to our energy study.
I have had hundreds, literally, of emails, and so has Senator Mitchell, from people out there attesting to the fact that Senator McCoy and Senator Neufeld were right: There is a huge appetite in the energy sector for some order and a policy; not necessarily a "national energy policy" but to have firm direction from government of what the rules of the road are. I have found out this summer that three other groups are working on an almost identical study, so it is our intention to bring those people to the table to tell us what they are doing. I have agreed to have lunch tomorrow with Duncan Stewart, the head of one of these groups, to hear what the group is doing. Senator Mitchell and I had lunch with some of their people before we adjourned in November or early December.
The idea is not to get out there and see who is on first base first. Let us try to do our work as efficiently as we can and, at the same time, I hope the committee can trust me and the deputy chair to make it clear that we are the government committee and we are probably in the best position to influence public policy at the end of the day. If we can piggyback on their work, they can piggyback on our work and we will all work better.
Interestingly, when I was in Copenhagen, I had a long and interesting lunch with David Emerson, the former Liberal and the former Conservative cabinet minister who seems to chair one of these groups. I am not sure of the name of the group. It is an umbrella group out of Calgary, although he lives in British Columbia, I think.
Senator McCoy: He chairs a committee for the premier of Alberta on future strategic direction.
The Chair: I think it is for energy, and he is joined by Doug Black and people like that.
Senator McCoy: When you talk of Alberta of course you include energy, but it is economic, I think, more than energy only. He also apparently chairs a similar committee for the premier of British Columbia. Energy is part of that committee, too.
The Chair: Right; all of this is to say we will try to be as efficient as possible and work with these other groups as much as possible.
These two orders of reference, which have been circulated, are basically the same, if not identical, as the ones we had at the last session. If we can pass them now, it will be easier for me to have them approved by the Senate soon and legitimize everything we are doing. Will someone move the motion?
Senator McCoy: When can we discuss them, Mr. Chair? Do you need a motion first?
The Chair: If we need to discuss them we can discuss them now.
Senator McCoy: Do you want the discussion before motion or after a motion? My question is, if this is the appropriate time to raise this question, what is the difference? There are slight differences. Do we need both orders of reference? I do not understand why we need both.
The Chair: One is a general mandate and with the other, we are trying to give the energy study — what should I say — some pizzazz. That is why we had a separate order of reference last time and that is why I think we should have a separate one again. That approach strengthens, for example, our communications initiative and having a special website dedicated to the study. It is out there now in the community and it is also to outlast the other motion: as we say, 180 days after the tabling.
Senator McCoy: They both have the same end dates and there is crossover so I was curious to know why. I do not mind having a broader emerging issues mandate, et cetera, I do not question that, although I might be inclined to be even more generic in my wording on what I will call the yellow resolution, which is sort of the emerging one. You might want to consider that possibility. Certainly, I agree 100 per cent with the green resolution.
The Chair: You had a lot to do with drafting it.
Senator McCoy: That resolution is the one that you, Senator Neufeld, Senator Banks and everyone else helped to draft last time, so I think that wording had consensus and I wholly support it.
The Chair: Why do we not pass the resolution as the green one? Do you move the motion?
Senator McCoy: Yes, I move it.
The Chair: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried: On the yellow resolution, do you think we can make it a little sexier, because I am all for that? Have you suggestions?
Senator McCoy: Not having seen it before this moment, I am inclined to say only, examine and report on emerging issues relating to energy, the environment and natural resources, and leave it at that, without trying to limit it. That wording is broad; it is generic. If we ever need to fit anything under that mandate, we can.
For example, in (a) , you try to say "energy"; in (b) you try to say "environment;" but as soon as you say "environment," it becomes more limited than perhaps we need it to be. I think we should go generic on that order of reference.
The Chair: I hear you. Senator Banks, I think during your time as chair, we developed this format. Will you like to speak to that point?
Senator Banks: Yes; the green mandate is less specific. It has passed and it relates to the report. It talks about developing, by whatever name, a national energy policy, or making recommendations to develop one.
We do not decide the yellow order of reference. We propose the yellow one, and it must be approved in a number of places before it goes to the Senate for the Senate's approval. When, in the deep, dark, distant past, I assumed the chair of this committee, the yellow mandate had been in place in a form close to this one for several decades. We changed it a bit to try to broaden it. Since I can tell this tale out of school because the school is different now, the committee that makes these decisions told us to go back and tighten it up a bit and make it more focused because it was so broad we could do anything under our original mandate — except operate a bank and a railroad.
Senator McCoy: So my instincts are right.
Senator Banks: We did the reverse. We came up with this language, which is broader than the one that they told us to tighten, and we snuck this wording past them. In my opinion, unless the regime has changed as to its intent, this wording is as broad as we can be. We can try to broaden it. I am willing to try, chair. You have to pilot that wording through; but I suspect if we try to broaden it more and make a less direct link between this mandate and what it says in the Rules of the Senate that establish this committee, we might have a tough time.
Senator Lang: I appreciate what Senator McCoy has said, and I have listened to Senator Banks, but I think we have to pick our battles. To me, this wording is as broad as I want to go from my point of view, as a committee member. I cannot think of too many other things I want to look at, and I am not sure if I want to look at some of the aspects in this mandate, in view of the time frame we are up against.
We have many other serious issues to deal with. As opposed to going back to the powers that be to change the order of reference and explain the change, I do not think we necessarily need to raise this point and have it become the issue.
The Chair: Frankly, what the yellow paper says, as Senator McCoy suggests, to report on emerging issues related to its mandate is enough. The order of reference says that, and without restricting the generality of the foregoing, A, B, C, D, it gives the answer to the question we will need to answer in the Senate: What do we mean?
If Senator McCoy is okay with the wording, I want to muddle along, because this wording protects us as much as anything and there is some history.
Senator McCoy: I am fine with it.
The Chair: Your points are well taken. It obviates the need of going back there every day. It is specific enough that we do not have to argue that international treaties are emerging issues; we know they are.
It was moved by Senator Brown. All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried. Thank you very much.
There are new people here and some of us were here before. One thing we agreed to do in terms of our energy study was to hold hearings at strategic places across Canada. We decided to hold our first set of hearings in British Columbia at the end of March because it coincided with the Globe 2010 energy conference, which is a world-class conference that brings energy and the environment together, with 10,000-plus experts from around the world. Unfortunately, the timing is such that it is not logistically feasible for us to hold hearings at the end of March. There is simply not time to have the budgets approved. There are rules that prevent us from hiring stenographers and translators to hold hearings at the last week of March in B.C., so the steering committee will not propose that we go ahead with those hearings. However, the Globe 2010 conference takes place, whether we like it or not, on March 23, 24, 25 and 26. Some of us agreed that we wanted to go — in fact, the whole committee was invited to go — but the committee was dissolved and the budget was dissolved. Some of us gambled that we would be still interested. I think there are four or five of us: Senator Lang, Senator McCoy, Senator Neufeld and Senator Angus. Senator Mitchell, have you registered?
Senator Mitchell: I do not know.
The Chair: We had to register on our own hook. Some of us have and we are committed. We paid the amount out of our office budgets. Now the question becomes the following: Because there is an aura of constraint in the air for travelling, those of us from the government side who have paid and want to go are experiencing a lot of push-back. I will try to deal with it in an appropriate fashion because I think the conference is extremely important.
The first question I want to ask is, does anyone else want to go? At this time, the registration fee is $1,485. It was only $800 at the time that we made our commitments. If anyone else wants to go, I want to have a sense of it now. I think it is probably appropriate, and easier for the chair to make the request smooth and efficient, if we have three government members, as we have, and three non-government or opposition members in addition to Senator McCoy. Are you interested, Senator Massicotte?
Senator Massicotte: Yes, if it is very, very good.
The Chair: It is supposed to be very, very good. Senator Banks, can you respond because you are the big advocate of the Globe 2010 conference and you gave a terrific report about this conference, which we tabled in the Senate, and I can circulate to everyone between now and Thursday.
Senator Banks: Yes, circulating that report will be useful. The report does not go into detail but it indicates the scope of the conference.
The Chair: It is the last one that you went to.
Senator Banks: Yes, members of this committee have been going to the Globe conferences for the last several years; almost since it began. The conference always takes place in Vancouver. It takes place only every second year. It is the largest resource-based ecological energy-related conference in the world, I believe. People come from all over the world. The reason that many committee members have gone to the conference in the past, rather than sending one or two members, is because one or two members of the committee are not able to see a quarter of what is going on; attend a quarter of the interesting events; meet a quarter of the interesting people there; or hear a quarter of the wonderful expository presentations that are made.
In other words, there is such a concentration in one place of events exactly relating to our mandate, with the best people in the world and heads of government, that we have always recommended that as many members of the committee as possible should go, because we have to spread out when we are there to cover some but not all of the bases.
I do not know if our researchers were there, but if they were, I think they will back up what I am saying. There is never on earth a concentration of people like this one who are at the front of what is going on. The information that we gain from the conference is immensely useful. I want to go if you are looking for someone.
The Chair: I am glad that Senator Banks said those things, because I think they need to be heard, and it is especially useful for people sitting in the back of room to hear that. It is an important conference.
Senator Brown: I want to go as well.
The Chair: The steering committee will meet right after we adjourn, and if anyone else is interested in going, please let me, Senator Lang or Senator Mitchell know between now and Thursday. The conference is expensive. We have hotel and travel expenses, and we want to include them in the budget of the committee. We have to find a time when Internal Economy is up and running and has a subcommittee. Then we need time to register and book our travel and hotels. We need to decide our own view pronto, and then the steering committee will deal with our whips and the other interested parties to make it fly hopefully. You have convinced me, Senator Banks, and hopefully anyone else who is listening on the webcast.
Senator Massicotte: Many of us will not attend irrespectively, but if these people are the world's best leaders, maybe we can arrange that they stop over and meet us here at the committee before or after the conference.
The Chair: That suggestion is interesting, and the steering committee will consider it. My gut tells me right off the top that it is not feasible, but it might be. We were planning to piggyback on the conference if we were holding a round table and hearings in Vancouver. New members of the committee may not be aware that Senator Neufeld was a former minister of natural resources in British Columbia. He is the guru, and is plugged in to the relevant community in B.C. He is already making plans to expose those of us who go to events outside the Globe conference to experiences that will edify us in the work we are doing in terms of going to a certain power plant. These ideas are good, and we will take advantage of them.
Are there any other comments or any business that anyone wants to bring before this committee?
Senator Neufeld: Before we adjourn, Mr. Chair, we had intended, when we were in British Columbia, to have testimony and that kind of thing. I understand, with the time crunch, we cannot do that. What happens now? Will the steering committee talk about another time that we can go to British Columbia to hold those kinds of hearings, or is British Columbia now out of the loop?
The Chair: We plan to hold all our round tables in Quebec, within 15 minutes walk of my home. The steering committee is conscious of that issue, and we wish we could have done as planned, obviously.
We have had an excellent summary by our researchers of the evidence already adduced before us on the energy study. The summary is being circulated to you as we speak, so that information should be useful.
I declare the meeting adjourned. Will the steering committee members please stay behind?
(The committee adjourned.)