Given the extraordinary nature of the cuts to the Department of Human Resources and Social Development and the impact that will have on all of our communities across the country as we try to provide particularly for those who are most at risk and vulnerable--the cuts to the voluntary sector, for example--and the impact it will have on the hearings we're having here of employability when you look at literacy and youth employment programs, I think it's imperative that we suspend our activity for a time and have the minister come before us. I noticed this morning a notice went out that the minister is actually coming on the Tuesday after we come back, which fits nicely with this.

I think it's also imperative that we have before us departmental heads, so that we can speak to them directly about the impacts on their budgets, and what they can deliver, and how they feel about that, and to the groups themselves in our communities who are going to have to manage this reduction in funding as they try to provide the service that they're committed to.

That said, I would like to move the motion.

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Do we have any other comments?

Mr. Lake.

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

I'm a bit concerned about the idea that we would hold off on the study we're doing right now, which is really important. I think everybody around the table recognizes the importance of the employability study. Some of the things we learned today are a perfect example of why we're doing this. I'm not sure how long we would be derailing what we're trying to do here.

How long are we talking about, in terms of what you're suggesting? How long would this motion take?

12:45 p.m.

NDP

Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON

I would like to see us have a day with the departmental heads and a day with the groups who have been affected. We're probably talking about three days of committee hearings.

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

Three at least. We would also need to include as part of the discussion our talking to representatives of Canadians who would be adversely affected. You talk about the adverse effects of the cuts, but what about the adverse effects of ineffective government spending? There may be some people on the other side who want to speak to that as well.

12:45 p.m.

NDP

Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON

Well, move a motion to that effect. That's not my motion.

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Are there any other comments?

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK

To keep it consistent—we're on employability, which was certainly.... The author of this motion was quite excited that he had gotten employability on the table. We're on a roll after this morning with those witnesses. I thought we'd get lost, that you'd get this interrupted. We'd be going on a totally different topic, on a different wavelength. Doesn't it seem better to be consistent and keep on with what we're doing with our witnesses? Then we can prepare beforehand.

As you can see, we were all very prepared today for our speakers. I thought the questions were really good; there was excellent dialogue. When it comes to studying, I always envision that committees should be engaged and focused on the topic at hand. We have started this; it was very important to everyone on this committee. I'm just wondering why we aren't staying on it.

Three meetings is a lot, considering that we want to have this wrapped up at Christmas, and in between, we have the minister coming. As you've said, she has agreed...I'm not sure; I didn't notice that notice. I'm just wondering why we wouldn't want to stay where we are, and that is focused on this.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

I have Mr. Regan, Mr. Lessard, and then Mr. Brown.

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that literacy groups and others who've been affected by these cuts were going along fine, albeit that they were struggling with various things and could use more funding. But all of a sudden they're facing dramatic cuts and are not going along fine anymore. This urgent situation has been created by the decision of the government—not by members of this committee, certainly.

I think it is an important enough matter that it does call for us to interrupt our work. Frankly, I would hope that members from all sides would want to assist in putting pressure on the government to rescind this decision and reinstate the funding for these important programs.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Thank you, Mr. Regan.

Mr. Lessard.

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC

Mr. Chairman, in life, emergencies sometimes arise. In my opinion, this is an emergency. We need to establish some priorities and I think this qualifies as one. The committee has decided to travel to hold consultations on employability.

When a bridge is on the verge of collapsing, we stop to see what can be done to prevent that from happening. For women's groups, literacy groups, support workers at volunteer centres and aboriginals, the bridge is about to collapse. Are we going to stop and ask ourselves how we can shore it up, or are we going to continue on our way, as if nothing had happened?

I'm surprised by the arguments put forward by our colleagues opposite. I've often heard them make some very rational comments about these groups with a view to assisting them. I know the government is poised to make some cuts and that these colleagues are members of that government, but in life, it's important to distinguish between decisions in the public interest, and those that are not. In this case, we must act together in the public interest. We need to stop and see what we can do for these groups to prevent the bridge from falling down.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Thank you, Mr. Lessard.

Mr. Brown is next.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON

Mr. Chairman, first, what are you removing from our docket by doing this--I'm not sure there's any guidance you can give us on that--and how is it going to adversely affect our schedule? Would it have any effect on the planned travel the committee has, in terms of the work the clerk has already done there? Additionally, has there been any attention paid to which witnesses we would be unable to hear from if we added new stuff onto the plate?

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

I think we would leave the travel that has been booked in place and we'd have to work around some other dates that we have. What ends up happening then is that we put off some things, as Mr. Martin has mentioned. Instead of having the study done in the fall, we may have to go into the new year and do things like that.

We've already moved a couple of things around. I know we're looking at the social economy and poverty on October 31 and November 2; that's been scheduled. We put off employability after that. We will have to look at the schedule and work with the clerk to try to figure out how this would work.

Mr. Brown is next.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON

Subsequently, then, if we push employability into the new year, how does that affect the schedule for the new year?

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Once again, the committee is master of its own destiny. That just means that other things we were going to look at will have to fall into place in due course. Once again, you ladies and gentlemen decide the direction we take the committee in; it's part of what we do.

We've got Mr. Lake, and then Ms. Yelich and Mr. Storseth.

12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB

Speaking to Mr. Lessard's comment, I agree. You're saying the things we're studying are inconsistent with what some of us have said in this committee. I think the work we're doing is extremely important, and the funds we're putting towards these things mean nothing if they're being spent ineffectively or inefficiently. One of the members used the word “devastating”; we're not talking about devastating cuts here. Let's look at this in perspective. We're talking about becoming more effective and more efficient in terms of what we're doing, so that we'll actually have a real impact on the things we're working on. We're working on an employability study; we want to have an impact on employability. What we're talking about, with the cuts that we're talking about, is becoming more effective, more efficient.

I don't know if this is the right time to move an amendment. I would move an amendment that we add a bullet that says, “and representatives of Canadians adversely affected by ineffective and inefficient government spending”, because if we're going to bring certain people into the room from one side, we have to have all views represented. I would move that amendment.

You want it in writing? Okay.

Can I move one small separate amendment as well? I'll do the other one first.

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

While Mr. Lake is doing that, we'll clarify what that amendment is.

I've got Ms. Yelich, Mr. Storseth, and then Mr. Lessard.

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK

I certainly understand that we have an urgency here, but everything has been urgent. We're dealing with the poverty issue, so we've put that on the table. This expenditure review was under the previous government, and it had already been started. It's not a big shock that some of these programs probably may have been expecting this anyhow, because before we became government, we had literacy groups coming in asking us about their funding. I don't know if it is as critical as.... I'm very anxious to get this study done on employability, especially after hearing today's witnesses expressing that we're at crisis level. I'd like to see a little time on that.