Agriculture Committee on Feb. 26th, 2013

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

We're not.

I know that he's engaged in trade issues—

[An hon. member]

Is that going to change what you were going to say?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Sorry?

[An hon. member]

Is that going to change what you were going to say?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

No. I just want to know if we're in camera or not.

I know that he is engaged in trade issues and I know that he spends a lot of time working for farmers on international trade.

[An hon. member]

Hear, hear! I agree with that.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I know that. I acknowledge that. I've always acknowledged that.

However, he is also a minister of the crown, and he is accountable to us as parliamentarians. I don't think that it should be just at his convenience that he come before this committee. The committee needs time, or at least members of this committee need time, to look at the estimates, properly prepare questions, and assess what's being said.

In my own opinion, given the millions and millions and tens of millions of dollars that are now being cut, I think we deserve more time to prepare so we can ask probing, proper questions in the little time that we get to have him before this committee. I think Thursday is too soon.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Allen.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I would question the comment first, I think. Mr. Lemieux should be congratulated, I suppose, for the effective and efficient manner in which he managed to get the minister here. Obviously he was listening to us when we asked that a couple of years ago, because the minister didn't necessarily always get to hear....

The other comment is, if we don't have the minister here to do the estimates, the estimates are deemed to have been done regardless, and that's happened to us before, by the way. So it's not as if it's a must-do. It's something that should happen, obviously, but it's not an absolute.

The question is, when do they need to be reported? Mr. Chair, through you to the clerk, when do they have to be reported, if I could get that decision?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes, please, Chad.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Chad Mariage]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For the supplementary estimates and the main estimates, there are two different reporting dates.

For the supplementary estimates, it's either three sitting days before the final sitting day in the current period—March 26 is the final sitting day—or three sitting days before the last allotted day. We don't know what the last supply day is going to be. So depending on when the government designates the last supply day, it's three sitting days prior to that.

For the main estimates, it's before May 31.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

So based on what the clerk has told us—unless of course the House leader from the government side is going to tell us when the last supply day is, which is hardly likely to happen next week—we've been given no notice, and supply days really imply that we actually have opposition days. So there are a number of them left, unless we're going to have opposition days all next week, which is highly unlikely. There is still time, recognizing that the minister is out of the country next week, I believe. Then it's the constituency week. There is still time after that to call him.

The estimates got dropped yesterday afternoon after question period, some time about 3:15 or 3:20, which basically didn't give those of us who actually like to look through them any amount of time. I think at this point calling the minister is slightly premature, if our side is going to be given the time for due diligence in looking through the estimates.

I guess the only other comment I would make is, if the government side is willing to waive the procedure that they try to enforce all the time, that we must only ask questions of the minister pertaining to the estimates, and it can be a free-for-all, and they want to commit to that, then I'd be happy to just do a free-for-all and do the estimates at some other time. If they want to bring the minister in and say, “Go ahead, take your time and go at him,” rather than the estimates, maybe that would be an opportunity to take up.

But beyond that, it would seem a reasonable amount of time should be given to at least look at the estimates, since it is indeed the primary piece that parliamentarians are actually supposed to do, to figure out where the money is going. That would be an important piece for us to do. So I would look to the government to say, “All right, we'll try to pick another date.” That would be my sense of it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Just before I recognize Mr. Lemieux, we are running a little bit tight on time, as other people have other commitments.

My experience has been, as a chair, that estimates pretty much are an open field. I've never seen anybody shy away from taking the minister on when they have him there. But we also know the difficulty, and you both alluded to it: it's tough to get ministers without a schedule, and with the ministers' schedules, again in my experience, they book a long way into the future.

Mr. Lemieux.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Chair, I won't take very long. I just want to say first of all that I'm trying to be proactive. In fact, early on in the life of this committee in this Parliament we had supplementary estimates come in front of committee, and the opposition didn't ask for the minister until it was almost time to have them deemed reported back to the House. We got the minister in, but it took a lot to clear his schedule and have him come in, etc.

I'm trying to be proactive here and say we have the supplementaries, so why don't I look at the minister's schedule, find out when he is available, and get him in here so that it works well for us and it works well for him. He's not obligated to be here, but I think it's nice for him to come, and he has come in the past. I think it's important that he come. So if we can synchronize schedules, why not?

The second thing I want to say is that, contrary to what Malcolm said, it is an open field when it comes to asking questions of the minister or of the department when they're here to study the estimates. I cannot think of a single case where there has ever been an objection to a question posed to the minister or the department when they were here for estimates.

The third thing I want to say is that I'm impressed that the opposition actually wants to look at the estimates themselves when the minister is here, because Chair, that is not generally the way it's done. Normally it is a wide open field.

Chair, what I would propose is the following. Unless the opposition says, “No, we do not want the minister, we absolutely do not want him Thursday morning”—in which case I cannot guarantee that he'll be able to come back at a time that aligns with the committee—my proposal would be that we have the minister come on Thursday morning, because that's when he's available to come. So why not have him come in front of committee, and then we'll see after that. But if the opposition says, “Absolutely not on Thursday morning”, then okay, absolutely not on Thursday morning. But there are no guarantees either, because now we have to go back and find other dates that align with the committee and with us.

My recommendation, Chair, is to have the minister come, have the department come. There is no harm in that at all. It gives the opposition an opportunity and it gives Canadians an opportunity to hear directly from the minister and the department, and that's just a good thing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Okay.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Let the minister know that he's here at the pleasure of all constituents—Canadians and this committee—and not just his own.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Of course.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

So I'm going to suggest that the minister will be here on Thursday, and we'll ask for a future date, if he's available, to attend again on the same estimates. It's the best I can offer.

Do we have a motion or not?

Do we want the minister on Thursday or not?

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Yes, we do. We'd better take him while he's here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Okay, so we'll invite the minister, and I'll ask Chad to follow through on this.

The meeting is adjourned.