Government Operations Committee on May 31st, 2010

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Madam, I never said it was a motion; we were in the middle of a discussion.

What I want to propose—I am getting there—is that everything be translated. There is a consensus; Mr. Watson, Mr. Gourde and Mr. Gaudet said the same thing. This way, nothing will be lost and all the documents will be available to everyone in the language of their choice. Is that clear?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Fine. So you didn't have a motion. We have Mr. Gourde's motion, and the motion is that all 725 pages of relevant or irrelevant documents pertaining to the study by the committee of the renewable energy projects, whether they pertain to the renewable energy projects or not, be translated.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

I ask that all documents on your table be translated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Is there any debate on the motion? No?

(Motion agreed to)

Okay. So the 725 pages will be translated. And we are the committee of government operations and estimates. Wonderful!

The next thing I have is you have received a letter that was written to Minister Prentice. There was a response received. If you look at your file, you will see a letter written by us to the minister requesting documents. The response by the chief of staff was that, by virtue of article 20 of the Access to Information Act, they could not release the documents.

My response to them as chair on May 21 was that:

Please note that this was not a request under the Access to Information Act, it is as you referenced in your letter a committee motion. ... For your information, I have copied below the relevant section of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice Second Edition 2009.

They have not responded.

Yes, Ms. Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I just want to speak to this issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Fair enough.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I'm concerned about this. You have a letter from government saying basically that they won't release the information because of access to information. You've written back and requested and said to them that they can't do that under that rule, and they have yet to respond. And that's 10 days ago?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

So do I need to make a motion that would require them...? What's the process here? Would I make a motion at this point in time to force them to...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You can do that, but I'd like to hear the committee's views on it.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

First of all, I'm concerned that they are hiding behind this whole issue of access to information. We have nobody else who's done this. They've raised this issue; they didn't have the respect of the chair. The chair went back to them 10 days ago and said, “You can't do that”, and they haven't come back. So I think they should be made to; it's a breach of our privilege not to have that information. If they have information—

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Madam Chair, I am not aware of the context. Could you tell me what this is all about? I do not know what you are talking about. I have no idea. I think my colleagues on the other side are not aware either.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Your colleagues across are not in the same boat, because as a committee we passed a motion for the production of documents, and we had instructed the clerk to obtain documents. If the clerk did not obtain the documents, then he would come back to me and ask me what our next step would be.

One of the documents we did not receive, Mr. Gaudet, is the document from Minister Prentice's office, which they said they could not provide us because it was an access to information request. Our response was that this was not an access to information request. It was actually the committee's motion for the production of documents.

So instead of getting into a stalemate, I would like the committee's direction. Do you wish to have a motion citing the department for contempt or potential contempt? Do you want to negotiate with the minister's office? Do you want to see if they could come to a meeting that would be in private? Those are options we have. I do not want to ram anything through.

Madam Coady, and then Mr. Warkentin.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I think your office or the clerk's office sent copies of the letters that were received to all of us. I just want to make sure.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

None of us substituting received that.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Okay. The ones substituting did not, so I'll provide that.

I just wanted to make sure that everybody had received it, because there was some concern.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, we had it. I think we distributed it last week as well.

Mr. Warkentin, what would you suggest?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think we should make available an opportunity to view the document. My understanding is there may be sensitivities surrounding market information or different things as they relate to the documents we're requesting. There should be some type of mechanism that we can set up, as a committee, to review the information that may be requested. But let's seek clarification from the department and give them the opportunity to disclose that information. If it needs to be at an in camera meeting, I think as a committee we're happy to do that, as long as the argument can be made that the department has information that should be held confidentially because it could have some influence on the market or have some contractual requirements that might be disclosed in a meeting, and that would be problematic if they became public.

So let's clarify that, but our time is running out, and there is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, and I wanted something to be given. I have to have 45 seconds in private for such notice of correspondence.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Right.

What we absolutely need to have is the information from Sun & Partners. Now, we received a letter that was circulated by the clerk, which relates to the fact that Sun & Partners have given the information that we've requested—they were given five working days to get it to us—to Derek Lee. It hasn't made it to this committee, so I think it's important that we now find them in contempt of this committee as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, Ms. Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I think you've gone on to other business, and I want to conclude this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Sure. Let's conclude this one.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I'm okay with Mr. Warkentin's suggestion that the chair go back again and request the information. There's nothing in the letter from the minister's chief of staff that said it was confidential and therefore couldn't be released. He didn't come back to negotiate or discuss or say he was concerned about the information being released. He just said, “Sorry--access to information--we're not giving it to you.” That's a breach of our privilege. I'm glad you sent the letter ten days ago, but if you've not heard from the minister's office, it concerns me. You know, time is passing.

I would suggest, in the spirit of what Mr. Warkentin is saying, that we ask the chair to go back, and if we don't hear within a day or two, then we will probably have to put forward a motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Fair enough.

Mr. Warkentin, Sun & Partners--I had that down on my list as well. I need the committee's direction as well on that one.

Is the committee in agreement that we approach the minister's office and give them a day in which to respond, if we can ask them to share this information? Again, it's not national security. It's not the Afghan committee. It's nothing that the committee...because the committee does not want to get into a fight. We need to get information, and information is important to us. If we can ask seek a compromise with the minister's office and see if they can help us review the documents in an in camera meeting....

Is it agreed?