Veterans Affairs Committee on May 16th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Howdy, folks. We're back in business. I'd like to start the meeting by telling folks about some of the things that have transpired.

At the last meeting we talked about having the minister come in to either talk about budgetary estimates or kind of lay out a framework for what he's going to be busying himself with and what he thinks are the issues of the day. The minister has accepted to come to the committee.

We were originally looking at having him come this Thursday, but John Howard, the Prime Minister of Australia, is going to be kicking around, and he's going to be addressing the House at about that time. So we didn't think that would make much sense, because even though we love the minister, we would enjoy hearing from the Prime Minister of Australia--maybe even more so than hearing from the minister.

Rather than put people in that conundrum, we booked the minister for next Tuesday. He has accepted that, so that sounds good.

There's one other thing I think we should consider. This Thursday, the Prime Minister of Australia will be addressing the House at 3 o'clock, right after question period.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

No. Question period will be early, from 11 to 12, and the speech will be at 3 o'clock.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Okay. Even though question period has been moved, because he's addressing the House at 3 o'clock and our committee meeting time is usually....

Oh good, there's an all-party agreement and all meetings have been cancelled. That's excellent. We don't have to deal with that. I thought we'd have to move the committee meeting, or whatever. So there will be no committee meetings that day. We all get time off from school because the PM from Australia is speaking.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Just to clarify when the minister is coming, you mean the next Tuesday we sit, not next week?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

That is correct. We wouldn't want to hear the minister speak when we have time off. That's a very well-put point, Mr. Sweet.

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

As a matter of course, maybe we could invite all witnesses to appear when we're actually here.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

It's a good plan.

[A voice]

I'll second that motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

I like that idea.

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

It works so much better.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Absolutely.

I'll also let you know that after the conversation we had at the last meeting, and some people expressing interest in the idea of the bill of rights, I told my office today to contact the Australian High Commission and the British High Commission for people they may have who can serve as potential witnesses. This isn't set in stone; I'm just trying to explore some options here.

When I was serving on national defence and veterans affairs three or four years ago, Mr. Benoit, who was the critic for the Canadian Alliance, had the Australians come by, and they gave us an excellent presentation. I was quite impressed with their people.

That being said, I think the first order of business, after kind of giving you a heads-up there, are the motions that were put forward at the last committee meeting by Mrs. Hinton.

Mrs. Hinton, do you wish to read those into the record?

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I read them last week. I can certainly do that again, if you wish.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Does anybody wish her to do that? No? Is everybody all right with that? Okay.

Which one do you wish to deal with first?

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Whatever you wish.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Since the first one on top was time limits for witness statements and questioning, which was 10 minutes for the witness, and subsequently the time period for the parties, why don't we deal with that first?

Is there any discussion?

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I'll move the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

All right.

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, West Nova, NS]

Is this a motion for the Auditor General, or the time limits?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

It's on time limits.

Is there any discussion?

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I would like to have a discussion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Yes, Mr. Perron.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

The Bloc stands to gain nothing whatsoever from the motion. The Bloc is virtually overlooked in the second round. It only gets to ask one question. In view of the number of Bloc members in the House, I think the party representatives should be given the opportunity to ask at least one more question during the second round. You're proposing the following order: Liberal Party, Conservative Party, Bloc Québécois, Conservative Party, Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Conservative Party, Liberal Party. Haven't you somehow managed to overlook the Bloc Québécois?

[Betty Hinton, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I thought we had you covered here. I'll read it out loud:

That witnesses be given, at the discretion of the chair, ten minutes to make their opening statement, but during the questioning of the witness, the time allocated to each questioner will be as follows: on the first round of questioning, seven minutes to the representative of each party in the following order: Liberals, Bloc Québécois, NDP, and Conservatives; on the following rounds of questioning, five minutes per party, beginning with the Liberals, the Conservatives, the Bloc Québécois, the Conservatives, the Liberals, the Conservatives, and the Liberals, and in the third round the order would be the same as in the second round, with the NDP being able to ask questions at the end of the round; and that when a minister is in attendance in the first round of questioning, ten minutes be allocated to each of the opposition parties and ten minutes to the Conservative Party; and in a second round, five minutes to each party in the following order: Liberal, Conservative, Bloc Québécois, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, and Liberal, and in a third round the order would be the same as in the second round with the NDP being able to ask questions at the end of the round.

[Gilles-A. Perron, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I understand full well, Betty, but given the number of Bloc members in the House, I think that we should be allowed to ask another question during the second round. The Liberals get to ask four questions, as do the Conservatives, while the Bloc gets only one question. After the first round, we get to ask fewer questions. By the second round, the situation is totally unacceptable to us. To be fair, the Bloc should be allowed to ask at least one more question during the second round. Either the Liberal Party or the Conservative Party should lose the opportunity to ask one question.