Evidence of meeting #14 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clerk.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Is that clear enough? Okay, let's carry on.
The next meeting that is open and that hasn't yet been designated is the May 26 meeting. Is this the meeting where there would be full agreement to bring the PBO forward? The study should be out by this coming week.
Mr. Martin.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I don't think we should be committing those dates.
In the interest of finishing what we start--I think Ed had a good point--we need to finish this report, and hopefully we can do that today. It's embarrassing to take nine months to do a report from this committee, and it's only about eight pages long.
Secondly, I think we really need to conclude this study of the possibility of undue lobbying or undue influence of lobbyists over the administration of the green infrastructure fund. I'd like to be able to conclude it to the point where we as a committee might even issue a report to Parliament. So whatever vacancies we have.... Personally, I'm disappointed we can't get out of the main estimates on the 10th and the 12th, but I don't believe in giving up the 26th or the 2nd or the 7th for that purpose.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Just for committee members' clarity, it is a requirement that we deal with the main estimates before May 31.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Or they're deemed, that is correct. If the government operations and estimates committee doesn't review these, then....
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
It would be good if we opened them, at least, and had a little look.
3:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
I think in terms of our committee's business, this would be a priority, or it should be a priority.
So I think there's general consensus that May 5 is now named. May 26 we'll leave free, and there will be time to develop that. Is that what I'm hearing?
Then we'll maybe proceed to deal with our in camera business.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Can I just ask something? I'm confused. I'm new to this committee, as Mr. Holder is, but can't the committee decide that we would move around some of these dates? We have to deal with the PBO's corrections.... We do have this report that we're trying to move through, and that's on the green energy, on the green funds.
So I would like to suggest that we try to move May 10 and May 12, if that's at all possible.
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
The difficulty with that is these have to be reported back on May 31. The government operations and estimates committee is the committee responsible for main estimates. This is why the committee was set up. So the only date we could push it off to is the May 26 meeting, but the difficulty is we've confirmed the witnesses, and you know how it is confirming witnesses around this place. We finally have something set in stone, so I'd be reluctant to move those dates because we do have confirmation of witnesses.
Let's have Wednesday's meeting and see where we leave off. If it's in our interest, we can maybe leave some time towards the end of the meeting, on one of the dates that we deal with main estimates, to bring forward future business so we can discuss witnesses for the May 26 meeting.
Mr. Szabo.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The committee has a very aggressive plan here for witnesses. I think there should be some agreement as to prioritizing for the next meetings after May 5. It would appear that the main people here, based on my knowledge, are Mr. Jean, Helena Guergis, Derrick Snowdy, the three clients, including Mr. Wright, and four ministers. They are the principal persons.
As you said, Mr. Chair, and others have indicated, people have time restrictions, and in terms of coordinating the scheduling of these people, I think the sooner they are contacted to find out their availability, the better picture the clerk will get.
Following that, I think all of these other people, from Togneri right down to Ian Harvey, should also be contacted now to advise that the committee has indicated that they would like to have them appear, and we would like to find out their blackout dates; we'd like to find out their availability. Then I think the committee should consider probably two or three panels of three or four witnesses, rather than one at a time. Some witnesses will obviously be better witnesses for the purpose of the committee. Others will be duds. I don't think you can afford to take a whole round of questioning even. So availability and then panelling, but you will have some time as you see that unfold.
I assume the committee has agreed that Mr. Jaffer should be the last witness.
4 p.m.
Some hon. members
Yes.
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
As soon as possible, but no later than the end of Wednesday, we should provide the clerk with, first of all, the list of everybody who members are interested in, and then the prioritization. If you could provide it earlier, then he could begin this sooner, and maybe even advise us of something on Wednesday. But if we can, let's have all members provide the list of witnesses, and prioritized. Then, also, if you do have contact information, let's assist the clerk in any way possible.
Mr. Szabo.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Chairman, time obviously is of the essence, so I would suggest that committee members indicate right now if there are any other witnesses they would like to propose so we can all have the complete list now. I'm not aware of any others if there are any, so I think we can give you the prioritization right now, because the names are here.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
I think the list sounds fairly comprehensive, so I don't have a comment on that. But I just imagine, having heard our dialogue so far--and I would hope that members around the table would agree--that it's important for everyone who's involved, all the authorities, including the Commissioner of Lobbying, to complete their work. I think we would all accept that they should be able to do that independently without interference.
When we talk about everyone we want to bring into this process, I'm mindful of--and it begs the question from a timing standpoint--the extent to which this might interfere with the Commissioner of Lobbying and others who are doing the work they need to do. I suggest that members of the committee reflect on that with regard to the witnesses we ask.
We have a big laundry list, and I get that. I can't imagine who else you'd add--I really do know that--but I am mindful of the impact when the others are trying to do the work they do.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Okay. I think generally there's an understanding. I think lists are already being submitted. If anybody else has one, of course provide that to the clerk.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
I think there was one other name of interest. Was it Wenger?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Chairman, I think Ms. Coady will be submitting, based on all of the input of all of the members, a consolidated list of all of these names, prioritized, by the end of the day.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Thank you.
Before we move on, you've had my motions before you for quite some time, and I'd like to make sure that we move through them. Are you going to call for my motions?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal