Human Resources Committee on March 29th, 2010

[The Chair (Ms. Candice Hoeppner (Portage—Lisgar, CPC)), Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Order.

I call to order meeting number seven of the Standing committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

We have committee business to look at today. We are going to begin with a motion from Mr. Savage.

Mr. Savage, do you have a motion that you want to put forward?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes, Madam Chair, I have.

It would be nice if all the members were here for this. I see a couple of them coming in.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

If you'd like, perhaps you could slowly start reading.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Let me read it into the record.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

That's a good idea; read it into the record.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you, Madam Chair, I will read it into the record.

The French begins, “...with the agreement of the Ministers responsible...”

That the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, with the agreement of the ministers responsible for the estimates, provide to the committee on the day they are scheduled to appear to defend their estimates an electronic version of their remarks to be distributed one hour before the start of the scheduled meeting; and that, notwithstanding the duration of ministerial opening remarks, the committee allocate ninety minutes for questions by members.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you, Mr. Savage. Did you want to begin our discussion by defending your motion?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes, that would be my pleasure.

We've had a number of occasions on which ministers have appeared before the committee. Quite often when they appear, there's been a lot of confusion about where the copies are of their presentation. I think it was the last time they were here—it was on either Bill C-50 or Bill C-56—that we were told that they were waiting for their comments to come, and it took quite a while.

When ministers come to defend their estimates at committee, one of the most important functions of this committee occurs, which is to ask questions. Human Resources is a big department. I can't speak on behalf of Labour, but Human Resources is one of the largest departments in the government. There are a lot of questions that come out of these estimates. I think it's very important for the ministers, as well as for the committee, that we have as much time as possible to have questions and that we have a sense of what they're going to say before they come here to say it. It's very difficult to ask questions when we don't know the content of the remarks they'll make in opening them up.

This is simply a motion that puts something in place to try to assist the ministers and make their lives easier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you.

Mr. Martin.

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

I would like to support that motion, in that some of us do a fair bit of preparation before we come, in order to be able to ask the minister and officials some relevant and good questions. The more we're able to access exactly what the minister and her officials are going to say, the better we can do that job. So in the interests of our being able to do our job well, I think this motion makes sense.

Before I continue, I'd like to tell the committee—I suppose everybody knows this—that the chair's family is here, and in the interests of the family I want to say that you are doing an excellent job, and particularly from the standpoint of this end of the table, in protecting the right of all of the members to have a chance to ask questions. So far in your tenure, we've gotten to the fourth party every time for the last round, and that didn't happen very often previously. I want to thank you for that. I think it's important to recognize that we have a right, as well as everybody else, to ask our questions. We have an order of asking that I think needs to be respected, and you do that.

Getting back to this motion, asking for 90 minutes to be allocated after the minister makes his or her presentation would ensure that this in fact continues to happen, and if for some unfortunate reason you should be replaced by somebody else, the next chair would do equally as fair a job in making sure that everybody gets their chance to ask questions.

Those would be the reasons behind my supporting the resolution the member has presented this afternoon.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you very much. I appreciate your comments, Mr. Martin.

Madame Folco.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I don't want to propose an amendment, but I do want to make some comments and I want them to be understood. We have already had a few small problems, not necessarily with this minister, but with others. Obviously, the notes must be in both official languages. It is very important to put that on the record. I don't want to propose an amendment for that; I just want to make a suggestions. I think it is sad that I have to point it out. I am not throwing stones at any minister or committee. However, I have sat on committees where the minister appeared and spoke without notes. It is the usual, normal practice for any witness, minister or not, to submit notes in both official languages, even before the meeting. Mr. Savage has made this motion, and I want to know what he thinks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

I just want to make one comment. I think that traditionally ministers are extremely busy, and we appreciate the time they take to come to committees. Whether it's thirty minutes or an hour, I think we appreciate it. I want to make sure that's on the record.

But you're asking Mr. Savage a question.

Did you want to respond to that, Mr. Savage?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Sure.

Keep in mind that when we have the ministers come here, we often have two ministers who come. At times in the past, most of the questions have revolved around one minister or the other, usually on the human resource side. At this committee in the last few years, since I've been on it—and Mr. Lessard has been on this committee since I think before the Second World War, and I know that Madame Folco was on this previously—

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

I even chaired the committee.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

—and has chaired this committee as well.... So there are people who have been around before, and different ministers have different styles.

But when we look at the last couple of times that the minister has come before the committee—this committee was a busy committee last year—there were a number of EI initiatives, and we didn't feel that they addressed some of the key issues we thought should have been addressed, issues of access in particular, and of some kind of national standard for EI. But we had a number of bills: in the budget a year ago there was the extension of EI benefits, which required some discussion, and the minister came before the committee on that; then we had a busy fall with Bill C-50 and Bill C-56, and it was in debating these two pieces of legislation that this committee dug up a lot of questions about the legislation, such as on the issue of the self-employed, for example, Madam Chair.

The reason we need to make sure that the minister gives us as much time as she possibly can is that it was at this committee that a lot of the questions about that bill came forward. For example, the question of how much of a draw this would be on the EI fund came about in discussion with either officials or the minister. There was also the issue of whether the rate was fair for the people in Quebec. I recall that the rate was $1.73 for everybody, and I think it was $1.37 or $1.38 in Quebec, keeping in mind that Quebec was already largely covered for maternal and parental benefits.

So this committee has done some significant work with the ministers here.

It has also just crystallized in my head right now that I think I've made my point. I'm ready to have a vote.

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

I feel a bit the same as Madame Folco. It's not really normal practice, but I think there could be a friendly amendment at the end, where it says “before the start of the scheduled meeting”, that would add “and subject to the minister's availability”, because as all ministers do, they try to accommodate the requests of each committee. The committee is the master of its own destiny, as we all know, but in each situation we have to do the best we can.

So I'm offering a friendly amendment to add after “meeting” the words “and subject to the minister's availability”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Savage, would you be open to a friendly amendment?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Well, I consider the member friendly, but not the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

So you reject it?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Komarnicki.

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

First of all, I don't recall when an electronic version of the minister's remarks has been released contemporaneously with a written version of remarks. Even when Madame Folco was the chair, that never happened. It doesn't happen with respect to any witnesses, and perhaps for good reason.

And to suggest that it should be at least an hour prior to the meeting.... Perhaps the member would want to amend that to say, “and some questions and answers be prepared for the member as well”, which he might ask the minister. It's just not done.

I don't think it would be wise for this committee to consider having an electronic version or any version distributed an hour or so in advance. All witnesses give their evidence as they speak, and if they provide a written statement at that point, that seems to be reasonable. But to suggest it be done any time in advance would be inappropriate, and certainly for that reason I couldn't support it.

I haven't seen it done and I don't think it's good practice, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that members would then obviously use the statements for whatever purpose they deem appropriate, which may not necessarily be acceptable to the person releasing the statement. I'm sure others who are here.... I know Mr. Casson has been a chair, and I think he'll vouch for the fact that it has just not been done, ever.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Lessard.

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

Madam Chair, I am particularly put out that the minister does not agree with us, but we are used to that.

We must remember that this department is responsible for a wide range of activities. If I am not mistaken, no other department is responsible for so many activities. I believe one-third of Canada's budget goes through this department. When ministers appear here they make a 10 or 15-minute presentation and we learn about the contents as we go, so we have to form an opinion very quickly about what they are telling us. I think that even one hour ahead of time is very short. I don't know if there is a formal protocol that requires ministers to make presentations in this format, but I think this format does not respect our responsibilities. We are just here for the symbolism, every time.

We had the minister here, and we were able to ask her a few very quick questions, based roughly on the notion of what we had been told, without a little time to think about it. That is why I think this is a useful motion and quite respectful of the duties of the various ministers who appear here. We say we will set aside at least 90 minutes, perhaps twice a year, in this committee whose ostensible purpose is to advise the department. That does not seem very restrictive. This motion seems quite obvious. It even seems a little timid compared to what we really should be asking for.