Government Operations Committee on Feb. 5th, 2008

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

To be honest, the government operations committee has the jurisdiction to investigate any form of government operation. This committee has a very broad mandate. It really does.

[An hon. member]

It requires some discretion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Well, there can be some discretion.

I'm going to call the vote on the amendment.

(Amendment agreed to)

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I thought we had to have debate on the main motion.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

As a point of order, Madam Chair, we already had debate. You allowed debate to be on much more than just the amendment. You allowed debate to be on the entire motion. I didn't make a point of order at the time because it was my understanding that the debate was occurring on the motion in general. As chair, you have the prerogative to say that we had a very expansive debate on this and it's time to call the question.

On that basis—

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

To be honest, on a motion of this kind, as long as there are speakers who wish to speak, I have to recognize them. That's also in the rules.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

I know, but the question is whether or not that debate is taking place for the purposes of obstructing the business of the committee, or whether that debate is legitimate. I didn't make a point of order because we'd just finished debating the entire motion, not just the amendment. I allowed that to go on without making a point of order, because I explicitly and implicitly understood that we were having the whole debate on the whole motion at one time.

Now we're having the same debate all over again, and I would put it to you that the only purpose of that debate is to protract the process, and that is not legitimate. Therefore, I would request that you utilize your prerogative to say that it's time to call the question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Moore wants to speak. We'll hear what he has to say because he has put his hand up and maybe he has some great new additions for us.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

That was nothing short of an attack, Mark.

I'm not going to belabour the point or prattle on, but I did want to again reassert the importance of this committee being a new committee in parliamentary history that does have a broad, but still relatively focused, mandate. It's broad in that it can touch activities of government but it's focused in the sense that we're supposed to be overseeing the processes by which decisions are made. What we're doing here for obvious political manoeuvrings is taking one particular individual case of a municipal contract—not a federal contract—and bringing that into the federal arena for the purposes of debate and exposure and attack and criticism and so on. That's what we're doing here.

I think this committee has worked very well. Madam Chair, you've done a very good job and this committee has seen a lot of issues come before it. We started off very rockily in this Parliament with the whole Gwyn Morgan issue. We've recovered a bit. We've regrouped. Our professionalism has re-established itself. We're talking about a lot of issues. I think we need to continue to keep that spirit going forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I'm going to go to Mr. Warkentin.

Mr. Kramp, do you have anything new to bring to the discussion?

You also know that I've been a very fair chair and I will continue to do that and try to control, so that there are no reputations that are sullied unduly. I really believe we have to be responsible and respectful, and I'm going to try to continue to do that as long as I'm chair of this committee.

Mr. Warkentin and Mr. Kramp.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you very much.

Looking at the motion as it now reads, in the first paragraph we're talking directly about the former Treasury Board president. We're looking at an unprecedented decision. We're asking other people to comment on a decision that the minister made or didn't make. He isn't going to have the opportunity to discuss the matter. I'm wondering if we should just change it to “the decision by Treasury Board” or some other discussion. Really we're asking other people to comment on what he may or may not have been thinking. I'm not certain that really was the intent of the original motion.

Having said that, that's something the committee should maybe look at.

As you just talked about, Madam Chair, with regard to being fair, and obviously we all want this to be fair, before this particular meeting is held I wonder if there'd be an opportunity for us as a committee to speak with the in-house legal experts just to discuss—

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I'm certainly quite willing to ask the House legal experts to give us an opinion on this. I have no problem.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

It's an opportunity for us to ask what we should refrain from asking. Specifically, I'm thinking about a lawsuit that may currently be in process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We can make arrangements to have legal counsel from the House of Commons come before the committee at the next meeting to explain to us just exactly what the parameters might be on the legal side.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

It wouldn't even have to be the next committee meeting, but maybe just the committee meeting prior to when this happens.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Point of order, Mr. Holland?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Point of order.

We've had a very fulsome debate on this. We either have a vote now or we.... I heard a lot of concern about wasting the time of committee. I would ask that as the chair of the committee--particularly with all the expression of concern about wasting the time of the committee--that we have the vote. It's either now or never. I think we've had a very fulsome debate.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Well, if it's now or never, then never.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Well, not now or never, but I mean for today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We'll go with one short statement. No? Then we'll go to the question.

(Motion as amended agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

We will ask legal counsel to come and give us an opinion whenever we can arrange that. Perhaps he or she could give us a written opinion as well. We'll look into that.

I thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned. See you on Thursday.