Public Accounts Committee on April 29th, 2010

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

On a point of order, Mr. Kramp.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

I thought I was on the speaking list, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

We don't have you, Mr. Kramp, but I will certainly hear you.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

I would like to clarify two points.

I am offended by the comments of my colleague across. I have been on this committee only this last session, but I've served four years on this committee now. In any committee I've served on I have never taken a partisan approach. We all fall within the parameters of our respective parties and goals or aims or principles, but to suggest that I've been unduly influenced, or influenced... There's even been an inference suggesting that I was told, or persuaded, or had a thought process where there was direction on my comments, and I do take offence to that. I would hope my colleagues would recognize that from the history of the time I've spent working with them on this committee and others. I just make that one point.

On the second point, I'm not going to belabour it because we're going to have a vote on this. It's going to come to that. I'm not about to delay the vote or play any games in this, but I do also state a couple of points.

I recognize there's a huge difference between this issue, and the way it came before this committee, and the purpose of this for the Privacy Act, the concerns we had. That's one issue, but I'm also concerned with the other side of that. Any time a committee makes a decision and/or we have a legal opinion... It states right in here “cites legal precedents”. Does that legal precedent automatically then apply to each and every department, every other committee? The Speaker would make a ruling on that, as he has in the House, but I suggest that still this brings us to a matter that to me is... The door is not bolted. The door is slammed shut, but the door is not bolted yet for another two weeks. I just take that opinion--and it is my opinion on that.

I sat in the House and listened to every word, all the way through. I've read a number of articles and documentation from a number of people, and certainly not what I would call simply a columnist's appraisal. I've read as much as I could from the scholars, from the people who are students of this, people who have a lot more legal knowledge than most of us on this file. There has been, obviously, a fair bit of consensus, but it has not been a complete, 100% unanimous approach on this. Closure is going to come in 10 days or more. That's fine, and that's why I just wanted to reserve my bid until it's closed. However, if the committee decides to move forward, they decide to move forward. Two weeks from now or 10 days from now, I would possibly move in accordance with them, but I'm not going to do it at this time. That's all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thanks very much, Mr. Kramp.

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Mr. Chair, on a question of personal privilege, if it makes members feel a little better, I'm prepared to withdraw the earlier remarks that may have been perceived as imputing motive. I'm prepared to accept, on the record, that the apparent unanimity of the government members on this issue is simply a function of random mathematics.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay.

Madame Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Chair, I was wondering if you could read the letter.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Everyone has it in front of them, Madame Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Yes, but is the letter a public document?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

It's a draft letter; it's not a public letter. It will be going to the accounting officers. If they want to make it public...

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, this is a public document because we're in public session, right? The draft is a public document.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Only the members have the document. It's not a--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Chairman, the meeting is public. Is the letter considered public or not? We're at a public session and we've got documents in front of us. Are there some documents that are--

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible--Editor].

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Well, I'm asking the chair. I'm curious.

It seems to me that if it's tabled during a public meeting, that even as a draft—it's not a letter, but it is a draft of a letter—it exists. And since we're in the public domain, the draft letter now exists in the public domain. But if not, I'm curious to hear how we do that.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Can you read the whole thing again?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

If a reporter walks in and picks it up, it's public too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

We can make it public, but if somebody asks the clerk for the letter, she will not give it to them unless the committee consents.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Is now the time to ask that the document be made public?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

That's up to the committee. That would be a decision of the committee.

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Let's see if we adopt it or not. If it's not adopted--

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

It's not public.

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

--it's not worth anything.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

It's just a draft letter.

Okay. I want to put the question on the minutes of the steering committee.

I'm sorry. Mr. Saxton.