Evidence of meeting #3 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was mandate.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I have something to say, Mr. Chairman. I'm somewhat uncomfortable with deleting the reference to Ms. Oda's motion. We're talking about her legacy. Should she not go along with our recommendation, she would be renouncing her very own words. It's important to me that her name be mentioned.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Perhaps the text should be divided, or a clarification of some kind made.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
You started that, Mr. Abbott, but let me see if I can complete it:
That the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage ask the Minister of Heritage, before committing herself in the review of the SRC-CBC mandate, to comply with the motion that she herself had adopted during the 38th Parliament, part of which reads: “That the government, when establishing this independent task force, do so under the advisement of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage”. Further more, that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage be offered the opportunity...
I'm sorry, it's difficult to work in two languages.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
I'm going to read this. I'm not sure, because I've got arrows and everything going all over the place here, so here we go:
That the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage ask the Minister of Heritage, before committing herself in the review of the SRC-CBC mandate, to comply with the motion that she herself had adopted during the 38th Parliament, part of which reads: “That the government, when establishing this independent task force, do so under the advisement of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage”. Further more, that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage be offered the opportunity to review and comment and offer modifications to the terms of reference of the CBC-SRC mandate review prior to the commencement of the review; and that the chair report this motion to the House of Commons.
(Motion as amended agreed to)
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I have a question, Mr. Chairman. Will this be tabled in the House as report number one by tomorrow afternoon?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Thanks. No spears, just cheers.
Thank you for getting through that motion.
The second motion by Mr. Kotto is that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage review the mandates of the crown corporations under its purview to ensure their capacity to carry them out properly.
Mr. Bélanger.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Mr. Chairman, I have a question for Mr. Kotto.
Generally speaking, I support the motion, but to avoid any confusion, was it his intention to ask our research officer to undertake this task and periodically report back to us, so that subsequently, the committee could set priorities for reviewing the mandates of these Crown corporations?
4:25 p.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
That was the initial intent, inspired as you will agree, by the fact that we are witnessing the dawn of a new culture of governance which will make us review all requests for public funds. In some respects, it's a way for the committee to anticipate future changes and to get a head start on issues that could prove controversial if we don't get off ton the right foot.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
So then, initially we'd ask our research officers to undertake this task. Is that correct?
4:25 p.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
No. Eventually, we might ask them to do this work, provided they were up to the challenge. Otherwise, we could proceed. It remains to be seen. Everything is open to consideration. We could also proceed to hear from witnesses. We heard from certain persons during the 38th Parliament, following various budget discussions, as well as when the committee was examining the new film policy. It's a matter of dealing with certain formalities.
Officials have data and statistics that can shed light on the government's real intentions, in light of what likely to happen in the case of the CBC-SRC. It's a first step. There will certainly be more of them. To govern is to plan for the future. Of course, we're not the government party, but you do see what I'm saying.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
We've already agreed to review the mandate of CBC in the first motion, or we've essentially acknowledged that this is going to be undertaken by the minister. We're going to have input into that process. There's quite a number of crown corporations under our umbrella. Do we know how many there are, Mr. Chair?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Abbott Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
I just happen to have it handy: Canada Council for the Arts, Canada Science and Technology Museum, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Canadian Museum of Nature, Canadian Race Relations Foundation, National Arts Centre, National Gallery of Canada, and Telefilm.
I don't know if these would be crown corporations, but there is also the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board, the Public Service Commission, the Public Service Labour Relations Board, and the Public Service Staffing Tribunal.
So which ones of those do we want to do?
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
That's my question, Mr. Chair. The CBC review alone is a massive undertaking, and we're now adding to that workload of this committee all of these additional corporations. Mr. Angus did say earlier that we're going to be running out of time. I just don't see how this is manageable, but let's see where it goes.
