Evidence of meeting #11 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clerk.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
Yes. That will give the clerk the time to prepare the list of witnesses proposed by each party so that we can go over it on February 25.
Do you have any other comments on that?
9:40 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I am going to suggest a bit of extra work for the clerk and analysts.
Could you check when the G8 open data charter was implemented? We are talking about open data, but I would like to know how long those terms have been in use. It would be a bit of historical background. I think this is fairly recent.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
That should be included in the preliminary document.
Do you have any other comments about the study?
I am asked whether setting the deadline for Wednesday would give you enough time. Would Tuesday, February 18, work for you? That would give us two business days. The 19th would probably be more realistic for the analysts, but that would only give us one day. You would have to submit your list of witnesses by February 20, at 5 p.m.
Any other comments?
Go ahead, Mr. Trottier.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Chair, we have a nice action plan. To build on Mr. O'Connor's comment, I think this is to get the study rolling. I think as we get into it, we might have some ideas about other witnesses, so we could have a planning session further on in the spring if we need to.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
The agenda up to April and May is pretty good, but I am still open to your suggestions.
Earlier, Mrs. Day wanted to make a proposal.
February 13th, 2014 / 9:40 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me elaborate on that proposal.
We know that the Champlain Bridge in Montreal will be one of the biggest infrastructure expenditures made in Canada in the next few years. It is a major development infrastructure that has a huge impact on the entire economy in eastern Canada. It could also easily become a Pandora's box if we are not careful and fully transparent in clarifying some aspects.
I think the role of this committee is to look into anything to do with tenders and contracts, or the way everything done in general. Of course, we are not getting into the specifics. For instance, it would be worth having information on architectural competitions to figure out why they have been held or why they haven't. We know they have not been held in this case.
What were the criteria and guidelines for that? Things must be done so that people understand that there is transparency. Everyone—the Conservative Party, the NDP and the Liberal Party—has a stake in being very transparent in this matter.
How will the tendering process unfold? We know that it has to meet some major criteria and fall under various consortia. All those aspects and issues may well be addressed by the media and participating entrepreneurs, as well as by international companies. This is a huge issue and we would do well to be transparent, I think. I would therefore appreciate it if we could look into anything that has to do with the Champlain Bridge and that is in the mandate of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
Thank you for your remarks, Mrs. Day.
We must always stay within the committee's mandate. I was actually able to see a few points in your proposal that might be within the committee’s mandate. However, as the clerk told me, we would have to do some extra research on that. That will give us a little more time to confirm whether this study is within the committee’s mandate. I don’t have the answer right now.
Perhaps the clerk can elaborate on that.
9:45 a.m.
The Clerk
Yes, of course.
I was telling the chair that the mandate of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates states that the review of and the report on the effectiveness, management and operation of crown corporations and agencies falls under the committee’s responsibility, unless the House has already referred a study to another committee.
I mentioned to the chair that I would like to perhaps do some research on this to see whether any issues that have to do with the Federal Bridge Corporation Limited would be traditionally referred to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. If you wish, I could report back to you on this matter at the next committee meeting. If we see that the issues that are related to this corporation have not been referred specifically to another standing committee by the House, then the study will fall under this committee’s responsibility.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
9:45 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
I suggest that you keep in touch with the clerk of the committee and see whether the topic could in fact be part of the committee’s mandate. You can eventually come back with it if you really think that might be the case.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Yes, I agree that the request has to be clarified.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
9:45 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
I think we are done discussing Mrs. Day's proposal. We will probably come back to it later.
Go ahead, Mr. Martin.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're probably talking about quite far into the future, but I want to make an argument that we do undertake a study, and I'd like to get that out now. I can back it up and reinforce it later at future planning committee meetings. I have served a notice of motion regarding undertaking a study, on behalf of the committee, to investigate the effects of climate change on federal government operations and to examine the forecasting and the cost of climate change to programs such as the disaster financial assistance program, military disaster assistance, and any other public safety emergency measures operations.
Perhaps I could speak to it briefly. One of the biggest problems in me home province of Manitoba in balancing the budget has been the relentless natural disasters in terms of floods. We have seen this federally in Calgary and Quebec, and the number of weather-based incidents that are causing massive outlays of expenditures by the government has been increasing exponentially, and there's an undeniable connection to climate change. As the government operations committee, I think it's incumbent on us to participate in the forecasting necessary to cope with these increased incidents.
I point out that whereas the Government of Canada has never undertaken such a study, and the Parliamentary Budget Officer has never undertaken such a study on behalf of Parliament or the government, in the United States, the congressional budget officer has undertaken no fewer than five such studies in the last 10 years. They're recognizing that this is some of the forecasting necessary in the estimates process to cope with what is an undeniable increase in these natural disasters.
I'd be proud of this committee if we would engage the Parliamentary Budget Officer to undertake such a study. It could be something that could be commissioned by us so that the experts do the examination instead of the committee, but all it would take would be a motion from this committee and a letter of request from the clerk to ask the Parliamentary Budget Officer to undertake such a course of action.
9:50 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
Could you please read the motion?
Did you read the motion at the beginning?
9:50 a.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I didn't read it word for word, but I will. It's quite short:
That the Committee requests the PBO to undertake a study, on behalf of the Committee, to investigate the effects of climate change on Federal Government operations and to forecast the cost of climate change to programs such as the Disaster Financial Assistance Program or Military Disaster Assistance and other Public Safety emergency measures operations.
9:50 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pierre-Luc Dusseault
Okay.
The chair finds that the motion is in order, given that the Parliament of Canada Act allows committees to ask the Parliamentary Budget Officer to undertake a study.
We will now start the debate. Mr. Trottier, the floor is yours.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
We've already started one study and we also have some certain challenges with the open-endedness of this one. I suppose any individual members are fully within their rights to ask the PBO to undertake a study. We don't feel that the OGGO committee should be commissioning this study at this time, so we won't be supporting this motion.
9:50 a.m.
NDP
9:50 a.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
I was wondering if the Commissioner of the Environment, housed in the Office of the Auditor General, may have done any work similar to this. I'm asking through you, Mr. Chair, to Mr. Martin or to anyone who might know, because I would like to support this. I think this is a valuable piece of business. It would not occupy any time of the committee itself but would provide valuable feedback to us and to other parliamentarians about a growing and sensitive issue.
9:50 a.m.
NDP
9:50 a.m.
Carleton—Mississippi Mills, CPC
My problem is with the words “climate change”. I don't know what those words mean because they're a buzz term, “climate change”. If we're talking about what is our preparedness for natural disasters, that's one thing, but on climate change, if you want to talk about the climate, the climate always changes. It gets hot, it gets cold, etc.
What are we doing here? Are we worrying about natural disasters? Are we worried about our preparedness? I don't know. My problem is with the words “climate change”.