Afghanistan Committee on April 15th, 2008

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

I agree with Mr. Hawn's statement, especially the fact that we'll be meeting once a week—at least in the beginning. The only thing I would add to that is, “whenever possible”, because there may be times when it won't be possible to get the material 24 hours in advance. This would give the clerk and our assistants a bit of leeway.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Good. Thank you, Mr. Keddy.

Monsieur Patry.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I fully agree with Mr. Keddy, in the sense that if it's a department, they know the rules and they need to come out right away with their material in both official languages. They know the rules, whether it's Foreign Affairs or Defence.

But if you already have a witness in town who is coming here with prepared text, we cannot ask him to come up with bilingual text at the time. He's going to read his text, and we're going to deliver the text as translated, as we usually do.

I agree with the words “whenever possible”, because it's not always possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Right.

Ms. Black.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

I'm just a little bit worried that it will be like a Greyhound bus loophole in not asking that it be provided in translated form, because people will say, well, sorry, it's not possible.

I know it was routinely done 10 or 12 years ago in Parliament, when you always got witness testimony or a précis of what they were going to say the day before the meeting. So it can be done; it was done in the past.

Perhaps instead of saying “whenever possible”, we could put in some other phrase. But if we don't ask for this in a serious way, I don't think it's going to happen.

[An hon. member]

It's an obligation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Okay. I'll just make one final comment that there is no obligation for witnesses to provide written materials, which means that if it's onerous to do so, they may just decide not to distribute written material, which might be to our disadvantage.

To bring this discussion to a conclusion, we have a routine motion on the floor concerning the distribution of documents. Would anyone like to propose an amendment to that motion?

If yes, fine; if not, we'll just move on to the vote on the routine motion.

Ms. Black.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

I would move an amendment that unless there are exceptional circumstances, we should receive the witness testimony 24 hours in advance.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

I'd like to say, “in practice”—

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Okay.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

It would not tie anybody down. If we just say “in practice”, it would mean that it is the practice of the committee to have documents in advance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

So that's a friendly amendment you're proposing, Mr. Obhrai.

The motion is that the practice of the committee will be that unless there are exceptional circumstances, written materials will be distributed to members at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting.

(Motion as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Thank you very much, colleagues.

Next is the motion on working meals.

We will now deal with the motion on working meals. It reads:

That the clerks of the committee be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.

Indeed, we will meet at dinner time. This will be the case on a regular basis. I will have a personal talk with the chef.

First I need someone to move the motion.

Thank you, Mrs. Boucher.

Do we need to discuss it? Who is in favour? Who is against?

(Motion agreed to)

Merci beaucoup.

On witnesses' expenses, the motion reads:

That, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses, not exceeding two (2) representatives per organization; and that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the Chair.

I need someone to move this, please.

Mr. MacKenzie, thank you.

Is there any discussion on this routine motion?

(Motion agreed to)

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Is there anything here we object to? Why don't we just move the whole gamut?

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

I think we should just go through it quickly. We have three more to go through. It'll take us a few minutes.

Concerning staff at in camera meetings, the motion would be:

That, unless otherwise ordered, each Committee member be allowed to be accompanied by one staff person at in camera meetings; and, that a representative of the Whip's office of each party be allowed to attend in camera meetings.

We have Monsieur Bachand.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

I'm just proposing it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Merci, Monsieur Bachand.

Is there any discussion?

Mr. Obhrai.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Because of the fact that I hold two positions, both for CIDA and for Foreign Affairs, I would propose that I have two staff come; otherwise, one staff will have too much work.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

It's not a bad idea.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Is that a serious amendment, Mr. Obhrai?

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Yes, because otherwise I would have a problem with one staffer being overburdened.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

You're not serious.

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

We're going to vote him down.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Do you want to propose that amendment or not?