Human Resources Committee on Feb. 5th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay, I've got Mr. Vellacott, Ms. Minna, Mr. Martin, and then Mr. Lessard.

Mr. Vellacott.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

I have a question, I guess, in terms of seeking some clarification of the voting status if you were then to have an additional person from the Conservative Party, be it the parliamentary secretary or otherwise.

I don't know if I need to propose this or if that was inherent in the motion that was put forward before, but there may be a consideration of the chair then not having any vote so as to keep him neutral and out of the fray, so to speak, but only the other—be it the parliamentary secretary or the other person—having a vote. I don't know if that's a consideration by the other members there too, if the concern is about issues of votes.

I am supportive of it because I've seen in the past how it can work. I've served on these particular subcommittees like this, and you want the chair to be able to be neutral and remain neutral, if you will. I think it protects our chair, Mr. Allison, to kind of stay out of the back and forth so much and just moderate the discussion. I think it actually has the merit of doing that, so I would encourage that.

But I guess I should get clarification from Mr. Komarnicki in terms of the voting status of this other proposed either parliamentary secretary or person on the committee, whether they have a vote or not, and that may do something to relieve any concerns or worries of members opposite.

Would that be appropriate to ask at this point?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Sure. The way a subcommittee works, once again, is that usually a consensus is brought forward. It has to be voted on again by, as you're aware, the committee as a whole. So regardless, if I didn't agree with them, it came back anyway to be discussed by them.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

And so you would then only have a tie-breaker vote? Is that your inference?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

No, everything came back, and even if it was unanimous, we still had to bring it back to the main committee for agreement.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

I know, exactly, and that sometimes is the frustration of these committees. For those on the committee, it's sometimes a waste of time because you rehash all the same stuff again at the main committee. So how often you even meet then becomes a bit of an issue, whether you want to waste people's time, if it's kind of testy in those situations.

I don't know if Mr. Komarnicki has a response on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

What I'll do is put him on the list. If you want to respond, I'll put you on the list.

Once again, since we're still on the amendment, I've now got Ms. Minna, Mr. Martin, Mr. Lessard, and Mr. Komarnicki.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think we're making far too much of this, for starters. It seems to me that the chair obviously is also a member of the government and would have been briefed, presumably, and would be privy to information. I doubt very much that the chair does not know what's going on within the gamut of his own government.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You'd be surprised.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Well yes, but just the same, I think--

[An hon. member]

Come on over to us.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Given that the committee is meant to be small and to have a consensus, there is no worrying about votes and what have you. The standing committee is a committee of Parliament, not an arm of the government; therefore I think having the parliamentary secretary on such a small committee that is trying to just set an agenda isn't going to be necessary.

Obviously the agenda is brought to this body in any case and is then discussed. Then of course with respect to whichever agenda we adopt and work that we do, obviously the parliamentary secretary is present at all times, so I really don't see the need for this at all. I think we're wasting a great deal of time trying to do this, given the work we have at hand. I suggest we move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'm starting to get a consensus of where we're going. I do have on the list Mr. Martin, Mr. Lessard, and Mr. Komarnicki.

Mr. Martin.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I don't want to repeat what's already been said, but I certainly agree with Ms. Minna, who has suggested that committees are a creature of Parliament and not of the government and, as such, need to be cognizant of maintaining that independence, and for there to be undue influence from a parliamentary secretary speaking on behalf of the minister might not be in the best interests of that. I would also like to say that my experience of the last Parliament was that the subcommittee as it was structured worked really well. We did work on a consensus basis, and as the chair has said, ultimately we brought it back to the larger committee anyway.

I think the measure of a subcommittee is how effective it is in getting what it brings back passed by the larger committee, and in most instances that happened. We didn't get into a big wrangle when we came back. It didn't start all over again. Not all the time, but most of the time when we came back with a recommendation, it was accepted because it was logical and well thought out and made sense, and it certainly was not a waste of time.

So I would suggest that we retain that model, and if there's a consensus being built here, I certainly want to be a part of it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

All right. I have just two people left.

Mr. Lessard.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

You know me, Mr. Chair, and I never want to complicate things that are not complicated. I do not think that this is such a complicated committee.

Mr. Vellacott's comments suggest that the fact that we have no power is a serious matter. It is not, because the subcommittee's role is to do the preliminary work before sending issues back to the main committee.

Mention was also made of the possibility of informing us. Mr. Chair, if your party did not see fit to pass information on to you, I doubt it would pass it on to us. That would merely complicate matters.

We must also remember how we work. You explained it very well a little earlier, Mr. Chair. You also have the right to speak and the right to vote. We function without a great deal of rigidity. I have been a member of this committee for four years now. I believe you were there when I started as well, Mr. Chair. In any case, we have been on this committee for some time now. The fact that we have no representative from the House has never caused a problem.

Consequently, I disagree with this amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We'll take one last comment by the presenter of the amendment, and we'll have a vote on it.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

There's no question the chair is fully capable and confident and represents us at the committee. There may be a small loss in not having the PS there, but it has worked in the past. I appreciate the comments, and I guess we should just put it to a vote and move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'm going to call the question on the amendment as proposed by Mr. Komarnicki.

(Amendment negatived)

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

All right, now we're going back to the main motion.

There's no more discussion. I'll call the question on the main motion as it was originally read out.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Let's move to the second motion. I'm going to need someone to move that the committee retain the services of one or more analysts from the Library of Parliament, as needed, to assist the committee in its work, at the discretion of the chair. Who's going to move that motion?

Mr. Lessard, thank you very much.

Is there any discussion on this? Yes, you guys realize we need their help. That is correct.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We can now welcome you back to the table out of exile there on the side.

We're now going to move to the third motion, which is that the chair or the vice-chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive and publish evidence when a quorum is present, provided that one member of the opposition is present.

Could I have someone to move that before we have some discussion?

Thank you, Ms. Minna.

Is there any discussion on this? Mr. Cannan, did you have your hand up?

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I wanted a clarification, and I might propose an amendment.

My understanding is that if no government representative is there--because it could be the vice-chair who has the meeting--it could be all opposition without government there. So I'd like to make a friendly amendment that one member of the opposition as well as the government is present.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Now we're going to speak to the amendment. What is amended is that he just added “that one member of the opposition is present, as well as one member of the government”.

(Amendment negatived)

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We're going to go back to the original routine motion number three. Is there any more discussion on number three? No, so I will call the question on number three as moved by Ms. Minna.

(Motion agreed to)