Yes, it is.
Evidence of meeting #49 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was costs.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #49 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was costs.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
If it's normal for me to have all the documents and be told the entire truth about a bill on which I'm going to be asked to vote, then I guess it's also true that it's not normal for me not to have them.
11 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
The word “normal” can have different meanings in the political sphere. What is “normal”? You have one idea of what is normal and Ms. DeBellefeuille may have another.
11 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
For me, “normal” means that I can have access to the figures. If I don't have them, that is not normal.
11 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
The principle remains the same: members of Parliament have a right to receive documents or information.
11 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Speaker Milliken was clear when he stated that a parliamentarian who wants to fulfill his responsibilities and represent his constituents must have access to information in order to make a decision.
11 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
Yes. On the other hand, it is possible for the government to explain to parliamentarians why the information was not provided and that parliamentarians will accept that explanation.
11 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
In the case of the documents dealing with Afghanistan, the Conservatives gave us a reason; they invoked national security. In this case, how much are the F-35s going to cost? How much are the prisons going to cost? How much are corporate tax cuts going to cost? They have given us no explanation in that regard, and they have just been hiding behind the Cabinet. They will continue to hide, will refuse to tell Canadians anything and, when the bill passes into law, we will get a big surprise and then they will be telling us how much it going to cost.
11 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
It is not up to me to say so; that is a political judgment.
11 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
So, over the last 20 years that you have been here, when you had responsibility—
11:05 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
Every time you talk about those 20 years—
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
That's what you said. You began working here at the age of 18. So you were really young.
In order for Parliament to work—I'm repeating myself and forcing you to repeat yourself—parliamentarians have the right to receive information; the Speaker himself said that.
11:05 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
There is an expression in English that goes
a decision is only as good as the information it's based on.
That could be said of parliamentary decisions. The decisions made by the House of Commons are only as good as the information members of Parliament have to help them make those decisions.
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Walsh, I was president of a union for a number of years. Imagine if I stood in front of a meeting of union members and said that I had just negotiated a contract with the company and wanted the employees to vote on it, but I couldn't tell them what the company is actually offering them because the information was provided by the company behind closed doors. That is sort of what we're dealing with here.
That is just a comment. You don't have to answer that; you will say that's my opinion.
What can we do? How can members of Parliament make decisions if they don't have the information? That's not the way Parliament is supposed to work.
11:05 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
In exercising your parliamentary responsibilities on behalf of your fellow citizens, you are obviously going to ask to have all the necessary information in order to vote for or against a proposal. It is up to you and your colleagues to ask the government to provide the necessary information. If you do not receive that information, it is for you to determine what you should do next: vote against the bills, raise a question of privilege, table a motion accusing the government of contempt, or request a vote on a non-confidence motion, etc.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Merci.
We'll go to the next round, five minutes this time.
Mr. McGuinty, you're leading us off.
March 16th, 2011 / 11:05 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Walsh, for being here today.
I just want to put a few things to you and get your response, if I could.
A lot of Canadians are watching this. They're a little confused about what this is all about. It seems to be very procedural. I want to remind folks who might be watching, listening, or reading just what's happening here. Maybe you can help us communicate this to working Canadians.
First of all, our research, provided by the Library of Parliament, tells us--the top researchers there have told all parliamentarians, and all Canadians, for that matter--that this question of finding a government potentially in contempt really has never happened before in Canadian history. Is that right?
11:05 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
It could be. I haven't searched the history books on that particular question.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
That's what they're telling us, and they're telling us that not only has it never happened here--that is, before the Speaker, Mr. Milliken, brought this government to heel over the Afghan documents, which it refused to release, claiming at that time national security, and then agreeing to form a committee so we could deal with this professionally--but on this frontier now, this is groundbreaking. This is all new.
Earlier, you were posed a question about minority governments, as if this minority government was perhaps victimized, I think, but I just want to get the record straight. We've had 13 federal minority governments in this country since this country was founded, and never ever has a government, minority or majority, been found in contempt or undergone this kind of proceeding, since 1867. Is that your understanding as well?
11:05 a.m.
Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
I don't know anything to the contrary.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Okay. That's what we've been told by the Library of Parliament in our research. It has never happened either, Mr. Walsh, in Australia. It has never happened in the United Kingdom. In fact, it has never happened in the Westminster model of government anywhere in the world before, so what we have here now as parliamentarians is something entirely new and entirely unique.
I want to ask you, if I could, about the ruling the Speaker gave. When the Speaker spoke his words and gave the ruling, was he addressing his ruling to opposition MPs or was he addressing his ruling to every MP in the House of Commons?