Government Operations Committee on March 14th, 2024

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Chair, my only comment is that some of the sentence structure reads a bit funny, particularly with regard to the reference to officials, which is sort of added in at the end. The word “each” appears twice: “to each appear separately for one hour and a half each”.

I don't want to outstay my welcome by wordsmithing. I'm hopeful.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

It is written as it was adopted. I understand what you're saying, and we'll make sure we're clear on the intent of it.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I'm just hoping that the intent comes across. I'm unclear, reading it, how the order fits into this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis. You have a point of order.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm sorry. I've been trying for a minute. I had a technical issue.

Chair, the version that was distributed was not what I said in my amendment. I said “to each appear separately”. I think I was quite clear on that. I said put the word “each” before “appear” and then “separately” after the word “appear”. I think that will address Mr. Bachrach's issue as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's what we received from your staff, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm sorry. What?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That is what the clerk received from your staff.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I didn't provide written notice of it. I said “to each appear separately”. That is what I said on the record when I moved it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That is what your staff apparently provided to the clerk, and the clerk made the adjustments. Can you perhaps go back to your staff?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I moved an amendment verbally. I was clear about what I said, and the transcript will make that clear. No text was submitted.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

The clerk did not just pull it out of the air, Mr. Genuis. Unless he's mistaken, he informed me that the text that was sent out came from your staff. I understand what you're saying, but perhaps you need to confirm with your staff what was sent over to the clerk.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Perhaps my staff made an error, and I apologize if the staff sent something after the fact to the clerk by email in error, but I moved an amendment verbally, and that should be reflected.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Why don't we move to Mr. Sousa?

Why don't you draft something to ensure that the clerk has the right version, and then we can resend it back out?

Mr. Anthony, I see you're back. We're going to be a short while longer, I'm assuming, so you're welcome to disengage again, Mr. Anthony.

Mr. Sousa, did you wish to...?

Why don't we wait a few minutes? We'll get the correct version and redistribute it. We will suspend again for five minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I call the meeting back to order.

We are with Mr. Sousa. Go ahead.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I've been trying to read the amendment through now, as received. Once this is initiated, will we go back to the original? How does this play out? Will this be the final version, or is there an opportunity for us to revise it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We're on Mr. Genuis's amendment. Why don't I just have the clerk read it back in for the record, because there's been a lot of back-and-forth?

We're on Mr. Genuis's amendment. That's what we're debating and trying to move forward on.

We'll have the clerk read it back into the record and we will move forward if there is anyone else on the speaking list. Hopefully, we can vote on it.

[The Clerk]

The motion as it stands reads as follows:

That the committee invites the President of the Treasury Board, the Minister of Public Services and Procurement Canada and the President of the Canada Border Services Agency, Erin O'Gorman, to each appear separately for one and a half hours—

We'll remove the word “each” that is redundant. That can be removed.

—as well as officials, regarding the 2023-24 supplementary estimates (C), and that the meeting take place on Wednesday, March 20, 2024.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Perfect.

I don't see anyone else on the speaking list. Can we—

Go ahead, Mr. Sousa.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Yes, it's right on precedent. We're trying to combine them to provide for that and to provide the extra extended time, but now, the way the amendment reads, what we're doing is providing not only the ministers; now we've included officials and others to appear for a longer period of time.

The initial intent was to enable us to expedite and facilitate the meeting. What we're doing is extending ministers' times. We're extending the time and now including outside officials who normally would not be part of it. I think that's the part we're having difficulty with as we go forward.

What happens next, Mr. Chair? Is it possible to make amendments at this point?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We're debating the amendment, so we'd have to move forward on that.

Are you suggesting that perhaps we—I'm going to stick my nose in here—go back to the traditional one hour for the supplementary estimates with the minister and then the second hour with the officials?

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

I'm suggesting that we just combine them and extend the time so we can expedite it. I prefer—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Do you mean extend the time as in a three-hour meeting, Mr. Sousa?

I'm sorry; I'm just trying to work it out so we can move forward. Are you suggesting a three-hour meeting?

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

My question is.... As a consequence of what's being amended now, extension of time is now throughout this, with the inclusion of others. What happens after this amendment? If it gets voted down, what happens then? If it passes—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

If this amendment gets voted down, then we're back to the original amended motion, which was yours, with Mrs. Vignola's amendment.