Evidence of meeting #35 for Veterans Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
First I have a suggestion, and then, just so I'm clear, do you want a motion from the committee on what we do next? I think we can have consensus, can't we?
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
I like basically what Rachel had to say, but I'd rather not see us cut into witnesses' time in the two meetings next week. I find that when we have two panels and we only have an hour, there isn't a lot of time. I hate when we cut into that time. Sometimes it has to happen and there's no option, but I think that in this case, it's not really the case.
We have the two-week break. Then we come back, and we're only here for a week, and then we have another constituency week.
Perhaps on Monday, when we come back from the two-week constituency break, what we could do is just schedule the subcommittee meeting then, and we make a plan. Hopefully, then, at the Thursday meeting, we can look at the report, because that will give you a few more days, and then we have a plan for when we come back from the next constituency break. Does that make sense?
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
At the end of next week, will we be finished with all of the witness panels on the employment study?
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
I wonder if one of those meetings in the first week back could be dedicated to drafting instructions on the employment study.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
The Clerk
I just want to fill in the witness list for the study.
The committee said six meetings, but we have more witnesses. I can send the list to the members of the committee of what we have planned for next Monday and Thursday, and after that, we still have witnesses that were suggested and other witnesses who couldn't attend. Those have been sent to you by correspondence.
Maybe I can send that to the committee, but we have more witnesses than the six meetings we have. We could continue, for example, because we do have people on the list. I can share that with the committee.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
With regard to Sean's comment, maybe what we could do, if we were to look at that Monday, is look at one hour to do committee business for planning and then one hour to do the other. We could do them both in the same meeting, right?
5:25 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I'm going to explain why the idea of extending this study concerns me.
We had scheduled six meetings, and we started the third one today. So we have three left. We wanted this study. There will be a report to be produced and instructions to be given. I'm having trouble seeing when it is going to be finished. Are we talking about May or June?
I say this because we were very invested in this study, including Mr. Casey, among others, and I am in complete agreement. However, we also heard the Assistant Deputy Minister, ten days ago, when I asked him when the national strategy would be tabled, tell us clearly that it would be in the near future. In other words, it will be in a few months. So you understand my concern. Are we working for no reason? Is the report going to come before the tabling of the national strategy, or will it come after it?
So I have a question to ask the clerk.
Can we make a clear decision on the timeline? I understand it isn't easy for you, because witnesses appear and disappear, but can we identify a point in time? In the worst case scenario, we will inform the department so it can delay tabling its strategy and look at the work we have done.
I don't know whether that is clear.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Yes.
This is what I can add at this stage, Mr. Desilets. The motion that was adopted provided for six meetings. If the members decide to take advantage of them, it would take the consent of the committee, in fact. That is why, as several people have suggested, arrangements will have to be made for a meeting of the committee to plan the work based on the best information available to us.
Before turning the floor over to Ms. Blaney, Mr. Samson wants to say something.
5:30 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Chair, that doesn't answer my question.
I don't see the point in time when our study is over. Whether there are six or seven meetings, will that take us to the third week of March? With instructions to be given and the report to review, it could take us to June. That is what concerns me.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS
Mr. Chair, we are going to do the necessary checking and come back to the next meeting with the answer to this question about the timeline.
I agree with Mr. Desilets. We prefer to submit our report before the final decisions are made. That is our objective.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
5:30 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Your wisdom is increasing every day.
I really appreciate what Luc brought up, but I think those discussions really belong with the subcommittee, where we can talk about what's next.
I think we should finish the two, have the subcommittee meeting, and then hopefully be able to present to the committee as a whole a plan that will get us through until the end of June.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Okay. Perfect.
With the clerk, my understanding is we're going to invite more witnesses for the study for next week on Monday and Thursday. After the break week, we will plan a subcommittee to maybe discuss the report, give instructions to the analysts, and deal with other topics.
Is that okay?
Go ahead, Madame Valdez.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Rechie Valdez Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
I just wanted to answer Ms. Blaney's question. I will be joining the subcommittee.