Justice Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2006

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I am respectful of Mr. Petit and of the team sitting across from me. I do not know how they work, but personally, I have to prepare for the meetings.

Take for example, Bill C-10, because we just finished our study of Bill C-9. Many people have sent us briefs on Bill C-10; we have a lot of documents to read. Moreover, some of us do not only sit on the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. I also sit on the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, and I replace Mrs. Freeman, who is ill.

I felt that three meetings per week to study Bill C-9 was acceptable, but if we went back to two meetings per week that would suit me, because it would give me the time to prepare and to study the documents. I do not know what you think of this, Mr. Chairman, but there is a great deal of material. Also, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights is overwhelming us; they sent us pile of papers for Bill C-27 alone. We have to read everything we are sent, just to prepare ourselves. We just received the list of witnesses we want to hear on Bill C-10. Looking at the list of witnesses, I thought to myself it would be nice to have the time to make enquiries, to find out what this or that person has to do with this file.

It is not that we want to work less, it is that we would like to be able to work properly. If we meet on Monday afternoon, Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday afternoon, we will not have the time to prepare. That is why I agree with the motion. It is not that we do not want to work, because reading does not bother me, but it is getting difficult.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Mr. Murphy.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Yes, very briefly. The government's driving the ship here, and if their interest was really getting this legislation through, they could have done a lot of things more efficiently. The bills could have been drafted a little tighter and they could have been drafted in the same bill.

I really deeply suspect that the politicization of the justice issues lies at their feet, particularly when you have a press conference every week on a new justice initiative. So this is more about politics than a good working committee. We're going to have almost all the same witnesses for Bill C-10 as we had for Bill C-9. We're going to hear almost the same people all over again. Why couldn't it have been one bill? I know why, because there are another two months' or three months' news stories on a different bill in a different area.

You're hoisted by your own petard here, folks. I'm going to support the Bloc.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Such a suspicious mind, Mr. Murphy.

Mr. Petit.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

I would like to add something. When I worked with Mr. Murphy, on the legislative committee on charge of Bill C-2, we sometimes worked, he and I, until 11:30. at night or midnight for almost three months in order to study Bill C-2. We had time to read the documents, to prepare ourselves and to ask questions of the various witnesses.

Today, we are trying to organize a mere three extra hours, on top of the six we already have, in order to work. I have seen Mr. Murphy work as hard as me. I can tell you he is a hard worker, like myself and like Mr. Moore. I think we have to recognize that our committee is not an easy one. I sit on two or even three committees, in some cases. I sit on the committee full time. I am able to take my time, to work and to read, but I understand Mr. Lemay's difficulties.

On the other hand, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights deals with justice, and so of course there are several bills. People can criticize us much as they want for not combining them all in one bill. However, it is extremely important for the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, given what we now know, to be able to meet three times a week. As I was saying a little earlier, if some of you cannot always be present for personal reasons—and I understand that—they can be replaced by someone else on occasion. Furthermore, that is useful to us because we hear other points of view. That is all I have to say.

That is why Mr. Ménard's amendment bothers me. Contrary to what I had hoped, this would create a slowdown. This tendency to always reduce the amount of work I find worrisome. Benoît Sauvageau had tabled the same kind of motion; Mr. Murphy was present and he remembers it. I am not aware of the story involving the whips. Perhaps they had their reasons, but I would like to emphasize that six hours is not very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Ms. Barnes.

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

I'm just going to take two seconds.

This is the operation of the government and how they do their bills. When all the critics came here, and people on this justice committee, to prepare for today, it was amendments on one bill; it was two bills listed on the order paper, one of which was introduced just a week ago, and everybody who has to talk on those bills has to understand them. Maybe some other people, when you're sitting in government.... I've been on that other side, where you don't have to understand the depth to be able to lead your caucus through them. So to suggest that we're not working is wrong. We're working flat out. Most of us are here seven days a week doing this work.

So I think we should take that into consideration. If you put bills up on the order paper with just the minimal amount of notice on complex bills, this is what you're going to get, because we do need time to do our work and prepare.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Is the vote on points one and two, or on the entire motion?

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

We just basically both debated one and two.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

We will deal with the third afterwards. That is fine. We can vote. I will come back to the third point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Is there any further discussion? Mr. Moore.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Are we going to leave discussion of number three? Because our time has expired.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

We have not debated number three.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

So we'll debate that at a later time? Okay. Let's vote on one and two then.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

All those in favour of points one and two of Mr. Ménard's motion?

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Points one and two are carried.

The meeting is adjourned.