Evidence of meeting #55 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was problem.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I would just like to say that we should get to the vote on the amendment, and probably everything. In terms of the committee not sitting, I think my understanding is if we want to sit even after the House rises, we have the opportunity to do that. Am I correct in that, if I can just ask the clerk?
If we decide that even after the House rises we want to sit as a committee, are we able to do that? Is that your understanding? Okay.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Right, but if it just rises, and I suspect that's what we'd be looking at.... So I guess that's the only point.
I think we still have an opportunity for some discussions, and I don't have an agenda here, other than to simply say that it's inappropriate or we compromise something by saying that there should be a moratorium. If we can get around this and be constructive as a committee, rather than destructive, I think we should be responsible in that respect too. Remember that there's a possibility of millions of dollars going up in smoke if we mishandle this in terms of the sale of this, as the bids are coming forward.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
No. I simply want to be sure I understand correctly. What bothers you with my motion is the word “moratorium“, which implies that we stop everything, while we wait for the information. That irks you. Am I right?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Yes, that is the issue. Because we're right in the process of still collecting the bids, I think we compromise the bidding process. Bids may not come forward if people feel this thing is going to be derailed. So the effort wouldn't be for private individuals. If indeed this does continue, even with our doing this, whatever we're going to do, calling the government to do this, we may jeopardize some of the bids that may be coming in over the next number of days.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
In your amendment, you are proposing to provide the information we wish to have, correct?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I'm proposing that we continue to ask for the information.
Now I don't want for a moment to tell you that I think the minister is going to divulge everything. I think there are confidentiality issues. But even in the discussions I've had with some of my colleagues who want to vote in favour of this, there are questions that haven't been answered. I think they are questions that could be answered because they are questions that I seem to have settled in my mind.
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Are you proposing that we ourselves ask for this information?
Forgive me, but I want to understand fully what we are talking about. What are you proposing in three or four words? Might I be told?
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
—additional information that individuals have requested. I don't believe there's one simple question that people have.
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
What do you mean by “additional information“?
I will not vote in favour of your subamendment if I do not have the assurance of obtaining the information I wish to have.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Four times now, people have appeared before us. In two of these cases, it was the minister. The deputy ministers have, they too, appeared. We have asked the same bloody question to these people. What are the percentages? What is the result? What direction are you taking? We have never been given answers.
The purpose of the moratorium is to ensure that the minister finally grants us this information. Are you telling us that if we do not enforce this moratorium, he will do as he pleases this summer and we will be short-circuited?
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
I am not putting into doubt your sincerity, but it is constantly a matter of information and numbers. It is important to be very precise and to put to paper specific questions. Some questions will remain unanswered and others will be the object of confidentiality agreements, which we will have to abide by.
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Could we not suspend the work of the committee? We could write down all of the questions that we wish to put to the minister and for which we want to obtain answers. Thursday, we could resume our discussion.
If we do not receive answers to our questions, we move on to the motion. Could we proceed in this fashion? Does that suit you? To my mind, this is an advantageous offer.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Diane Marleau
There is the amendment.
We have the amendment before us. Do you want us to deal with the amendment?
5:15 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oui.
5:15 p.m.
An hon. member
We have to.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
I guess my concern is this. We keep talking about this confidentiality agreement, but not everything is linked to that. I agree with you that the minister came to us and said there are some issues that are very touchy. We understand that. At the same time there has to be enough information for us to be able to do our jobs.
The minister could have told us why they selected these nine buildings for sale. Why was it appropriate? He refused to answer.