Evidence of meeting #53 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 chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Thank you.
Monsieur Laframboise, I have your name next. Were you on my list?
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
With respect to what Mr. Abbott said, or didn't say, it's part of the record. I would deem what has been said in the House to be part of the committee.
On March 15, 2010, Mr. Abbott said, “CIDA thoroughly analyzed Kairos' program proposal and determined, with regret, that it did not meet the agency's current priorities.”
On April 23, also part of the record of this committee, I would respectfully submit: “The criteria for the funding for Kairos are the same as the criteria for funding for anyone else applying for such funding. Kairos did not meet the criteria. It did not get the funding. There was no surprise there.”
In both instances, I would suggest that Mr. Abbott was certainly repeating the speaking lines as provided by the media inquiry, which was that after completing due diligence it was determined that the organization proposal did not meet CIDA's current priorities.
All of this, I would respectfully suggest, is part of the record of this committee. Therefore, Mr. Abbott must necessarily have been misled with respect to this particular application. Otherwise, what would be the reason for his apology? He, I respectfully submit, was misled. He feels badly about it. He did not intend to mislead the House. It was not his intention because he spoke out of innocence, I would respectfully suggest. This was part of the larger message of the government that it was a CIDA decision, not a minister's decision.
12:45 p.m.
An hon. member
It was.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
For whatever reason, the minister wanted to sell it as a CIDA decision, rather than as her own decision. Why she doesn't wish to own up to that decision, I don't really know. I don't know why for 13, 14, 15 months she kept continuing to spin the same story that it didn't meet CIDA criteria, when we know that it met CIDA criteria. Margaret Biggs said it met CIDA criteria, and she repeated just last week that it met CIDA criteria.
The core point here is that her own parliamentary secretary was caught up in this web of deceit, and he didn't know it. He had no idea that he was in effect a mouthpiece for the government to speak to this issue, to effectively mislead members of Parliament who were trying to do their job to find out what the real reason for the funding cut might be. That is the core point.
Otherwise, as I said, why would he have apologized? What is the point of an apology if in fact he didn't intend to.... In his case, I don't think he intended to mislead, but he in fact was caught up in a larger game plan by the government, for whatever reason, to download that responsibility onto the ministry itself.
As the Speaker observed in his first ruling, CIDA officials must be more than just mildly disturbed that they have been made to look as if they were the ones who made the decision.
Chair, you may have insight into this that I don't have, but I don't know and I don't understand why the minister didn't just stand up months ago and say “This was my decision, I made it, and this was the reason I made it”, etc. She has let it hang out there for way too long that this is a--
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Yes, it certainly appears that Mr. McKay is trying to filibuster, because I don't believe this is germane to my amendment. Also, Mr. Chair, the opposition continually talks about filibustering this committee meeting. Mr. McKay could have made his point long ago. We understand it completely. There are other people on the speakers list, so I would suggest that he wrap it up, and let others speak.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Thank you very much. It's not really a point of order, but thank you for getting that in.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I thank Mr. Lukiwski for that advice. It's very helpful to have Mr. Lukiwski on a committee like this. First of all, he tells you what questions you should be asking, because you've already asked the wrong questions. Apparently I've been asking the wrong questions all the time. Now he gives the advice that possibly I was going on a bit too long on the point.
I was only going on a little too long on the point, Mr. Chair, because I don't think the members on the opposite side actually have gotten the point thus far, and that is that the minister has misled the committee, has misled members of Parliament, and has impaired our ability to do the job.
So I thank Mr. Lukiwski for his generous contribution to my inadequacies as a member of Parliament. If Mr. Lukiwski could from time to time—
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I know you have the capability at times to do it. But it's about seven minutes to one o'clock, and we will adjourn very soon.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I don't know whether we could deal with it, but it is that the analysts start to work on the document of the witnesses who came in, prepare the document, and when we come in on Thursday, we could finish those—
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
That was my amendment. You voted it down, for God's sake.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Chair, his amendment was to get rid of this motion that was put to the committee. That's not what I'm saying.
I'm saying that with this up in the air, we'll continue on Thursday. At the same time, the analysts could start to work on the document to present what was put forward by the witnesses who came in front of us, which will be a continuance of it.
I'm not saying that we get rid of the proposal from the Liberal Party.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
We are getting close to the one o'clock hour.
Mr. McKay, were you finished?
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I'm going to take Mr. Lukiwski's advice and wind it up, because I'm getting close to the view that there's some possibility that they are actually understanding the point.
