Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 15th, 2007

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I did want to talk about the work plan. In preparing for today's meeting, I realized that we had a lot of work before us.

With respect to the two motions that have just been announced, I think we should study them at the beginning of Tuesday's meeting. This is a real scandal, and I would not want to repeat what Norman Spector, Brian Mulroney's former chief of staff, had to say. Nonetheless, his comments were quite disturbing.

We also need to meet with the Minister of Justice. The new members of the committee must understand that trying to get the Minister of Justice to meet with us has become quite a saga.

I noted the dates, since there have been so many twists and turns in this story. In June 2006—

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Madame, this is exactly what we should be doing Tuesday, to deal with.... The passion that you have for these issues, you have a—

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Just let me go through the list. It is a long one. The meeting with the Minister of Justice—

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

No, Madame. Je m'excuse. This discussion is not an agenda item. The meeting is going to be adjourned, but as a courtesy to the committee, to accommodate your wish to have an opportunity to make your case about the priorities that this committee should address prior to the break in December, that we will have this opportunity to do on Tuesday, to do it properly, to make sure that there is consensus.... Because the steering committee can only recommend. It is the whole committee that will affirm an action plan, and we need to give the whole committee an opportunity to do that. We can't argue each and every one ourselves. It's not quite in order. So come prepared for next Tuesday.

I believe that our business is complete. Do I have a motion to adjourn?

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

No. One point, on the list—

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

I'm sorry. There was a list. What item?

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

I wanted to talk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

There's no motion or no item of business on the floor. Are you making—

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

No, Mr. Chairman. Well, then, I'll speak on a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

To accommodate the committee, I have two people who as a consequence of the discussion wanted to add something to it. I'll recognize Mr. Tilson and Mr. Martin.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say I agree wholeheartedly with your proposal. In other words, I agree that the idea of the three commissioners coming and speaking followed by a business meeting is an excellent idea. My only comment is that for the future it's the committee that decides the work of this committee, even calling commissioners. It's not the call of the chair, it's the call of the committee, but I happen to agree with what you're saying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Thank you. You're quite right. I was motivated by the fact that it has been five months since we've been here and we needed to save a day.

Mr. Martin, please.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I was only going to say, Mr. Chairman, that I think it's a good idea that you've made arrangements with the officers of Parliament who answer to this committee. I think that's the proper and courteous first thing to do, so I think the first hour of that meeting should be for that. I'm only wondering if you or the committee would entertain this idea. Rather than breaking out to the planning committee, the subcommittee, for the second hour, could we not meet as a committee as a whole and look at planning and thereby be able to make some actual decisions on Tuesday instead of postponing it until the following Thursday?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mr. Martin, I suspect that there are some matters on which there would be consensus and there may be some matters on which there wouldn't be. That's the reason we have a steering committee, to work it out in an efficient way. Sometimes you just have to say that unfortunately we cannot do it all, and somebody's going to have to say no. So I hear you, and I sympathize with the point, but I'm not sure that it will actually save us any time. I think we'll proceed as is.

We will have one last speaker, Madame Lavallée, and then we're going to adjourn.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

At next Tuesday's meeting, when do you expect we will be able to study the two motions we have just heard about ?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

There are at least three motions. They will be on the agenda of the committee but I don't think that we will be getting to them, and the steering committee in fact will probably have to do its work. This is the question you run into when the committee is into some business it has agreed to and a motion comes forward—whether or not you suspend the work you were doing to deal with a motion.

Now the idea is that the undertaking of the chair, and I think the goodwill of the committee, is that motions will be dealt with as soon as possible with the least disruption to the work of the committee, but not to be delayed for any reason whatsoever. Members have the right to bring these motions, and it is the intent of this chair to make sure the motions are dealt with as soon as they can be, once they've satisfied the notice requirement.

D'accord?

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

No, I do not agree, because it is not specific enough. What I heard was "as quickly as possible". That was the last thing you said. But does that mean at 11:00 a.m. next Tuesday?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

No, we have agreed to hear the representations of the commissioners and the members on their suggestions for the work. That's the order of business for Tuesday.

The meeting is adjourned.