Public Accounts Committee on May 2nd, 2024

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Chair, I have a second question, then.

Are we doing one meeting with two panels? Is that it?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That's what I will do, yes.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Okay, that's very good.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

The mandate is for a meeting. I'm going to work with the clerk on this. I think I will split it up a bit to ensure we have a balanced meeting.

Those are all passed and approved.

I will remind you all that on Tuesday, we have a long-outstanding meeting for the public accounts for 2023. I am expecting the Bank of Canada and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board to be here on Tuesday. The Department of Finance will also be here.

I'm going to recognize Madame Sinclair-Desgagné.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Mr. Chair, we had a discussion about the witnesses we wanted to invite. I know that all the members were there. Following that discussion, there is a witness that I consider important to the ArriveCAN study, and that is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

I want to be very clear that what we're trying to understand is the investigative process. Obviously, and I'll state it one last time, we are all aware that we will not receive specific details about the ongoing investigation. Rather, we want to understand the investigation process in general to determine how far the RCMP can go in this type of situation.

The RCMP is at the top of the list of witnesses that I want to invite. As the chair rightly mentioned at our last meeting, the RCMP's testimony must not be heard concurrently with that of businesses or other federal institutions, such as the Canada Border Services Agency. The RCMP will therefore have to appear as a stand-alone witness during a meeting.

I would like to read out a motion, which should be sent to you shortly. It reads as follows:

That the committee invite the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to appear for no less than two hours on the committee’s review of Report 1, ArriveCAN, from the Auditor General, within three weeks of this motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That motion has been sent to you.

In the meantime, I'm going to say a few words.

The subcommittee discussed this. I thought this needed to come back to the committee for a discussion. I did not like the idea of having the RCMP appear with other witnesses. I think that would be difficult for everyone at the table. Madame Sinclair-Desgagné is doing just that right now.

If you want to have a look at the motion, we can discuss it and perhaps resolve this in the next hour or so.

I will begin with Mrs. Shanahan. Then, Mr. Desjarlais, I understand you have your hand up as well. Thank you.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I was just going to ask if we are suspending.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Let me just hear a few comments. I hear where you're coming from, but I want to hear a few comments first.

Go ahead, Mr. Desjarlais.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I agree with the motion. My only potential concern was the one you shared during the subcommittee in relation to the potential that the RCMP may not be able to answer all questions during a pending investigation.

In that case, we would not want to prejudice the investigation, so can we find an option to confirm with the RCMP that there may be questions that are out of scope for them to answer in advance of this meeting so that we don't have redundancy?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

What are you proposing? Are you suggesting that we accept answers that...? Are you suggesting that we go in camera at some point in the meeting? What's your question for the...?

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I want to be able to protect the integrity of the investigation while also being able to ask the RCMP important and credible questions about ArriveCAN without compromising any potential investigation.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay.

Mr. Genuis, do you have any comments you want to make? Then I have Madame Sinclair-Desgagné.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'll just briefly say that we support the motion. In listening to it, I don't know that it mentioned the amount of time. I think it would be important. Is two hours in the motion?

Okay, that's fantastic. We're good to go.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, you have the floor.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Mr. Chair, as you alluded to, I think the chair can ask the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at any given time if they have information that they would prefer to share with committee members in camera.

I don't think it needs to be explicitly written into the motion. If the RCMP feels the need to provide information to the committee in camera, I would have no problem with that. You have my word.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mrs. Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I like the way Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné explained the motion; it aims to give us a better understanding of the RCMP process. I see the RCMP's testimony as being the same as a meeting with the Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation, a training session or an explanatory meeting with the Clerk of the House.

Part of the meeting with the RCMP should be held in camera to give members a chance to ask questions. However, I think a public hearing of one hour would be enough to provide information to Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, you have the floor.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

If I understand correctly, Mrs. Shanahan, you are proposing a one-hour public hearing. The only disadvantage I see is that it greatly reduces my speaking time. I have a lot of questions for the RCMP to understand the process. So that's why I suggested two hours, i.e., a full meeting.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

We could compromise. Since this would be an information gathering session, each member could have approximately the same amount of time to ask questions. We could also do it informally, as we have done with the Auditor General from time to time.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Are there any comments on this?

I'm sorry, Ms. Shanahan. I was jumping ahead. Are you proposing an hour in total or in public?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I'm proposing an hour in public, because the RCMP cannot respond to any questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Yes.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

With all due respect, if we have members who are going to insist on asking them directly who they're charging and who they have warrants for, etc., that risks being prejudicial to the investigation, and I don't think anybody wants that.

If we're going to make it for educational purposes, which I think is valuable, then that would be one hour in public, or it could be one hour—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm actually just asking questions. I don't have a position on this. I'll wait for the committee.

Is it an additional hour in camera, then, if necessary?