Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on June 13th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

A question, Madam Jennings.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

It's not a question, it's just to underline that in the French version we have before us, the first et, which is found between the word budgétaires and the word les should be removed and replaced by a comma. So it should in fact read, “ce qui touches les prévisions budgétaires, les finances et l'économie du”.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Does everybody agree?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're now on to page 105.1, which is a further government amendment, G-37.1.

Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes, this amendment pertains to the same subject matter, and it would change proposed paragraph 79.2(c) to read:

when requested to do so by a committee of the Senate or of the House of Commons, or a committee of both Houses, that is mandated to consider the estimates of the government, undertake research for that committee into those estimates;

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Sauvageau.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I have a little problem. With your permission, I'm going to speak to Mr. Poilievre.

If I understand correctly, we could have a favourable amendment. The bill states this: "when requested to do so by a member of either House, estimate the financial cost...". Your amendment instead states: "when requested to do so by a committee of the Senate or of the House of Commons...".

I would prefer the following: "when requested to do so by a member of either House or of a parliamentary committee..." The government's amendment G-37.1, on page 105.2, takes away—I don't know whether this is the intent—from all members and senators the opportunity to contact this new person responsible for the budget. If that is the case and if the other members of the committee are in agreement, I would ask Mr. Poilievre to use the words: " when asked by a member of either House or of a parliamentary committee...".

[Joe Wild]

Just to go through what the amendment is doing, it's creating a new category. The existing categories, which are proposed paragraphs 79.2(c) and (d), become 79.2(d) and (e). Then the new 79.2(c) is the one that talks about being requested to do so by a committee of the Senate or the House or a committee of both Houses that is mandated to consider the estimates and undertake research for that committee into those estimates.

So what currently reads as proposed paragraphs 79.2(c) and 79.2(d) remain; they just become 79.2(d) and 79.2(e), and we're inserting a new paragraph above that, which deals with the estimates.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you very much for your explanation. Parliamentarians, senators and members of the committee would thus have the same rights. So we're eliminating no one. That's very good; I understand. Thank you. Now we're going to vote in favour of the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

There's no subamendment.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Poilievre, I have a question for you.

We're on amendments G-38 and G-38.1. Does G-38.1 replace G-38? We're on pages 106 and 107.1

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes, it does.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

So you're withdrawing G-38, and we're proceeding with G-38.1, which is on page 107.1.

Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

This is amendment G-38.1, on clause 119. It pertains to proposed subsection 79.5(1) on page 95, line 20.

I gather that everything in line 36 remains the same, but the amendment adds a fourth point, which reads:

For greater certainty, section 74 and subsection 75(2) apply in respect of the exercise of the powers described in subsections (1) and (2).

I trust the amendment speaks for itself. Is there any additional commentary from the expert panel?

[Werner Heiss, Director and General Counsel, General Legal Services, Department of Finance]

The intent of the amendment essentially is to clarify that in fact the existing provisions, section 74, which already provide that it's the Speakers and the joint committees that have control of the library and its officers, apply to the parliamentary budget officer; and similarly, that the librarian, who has the control of the library per se, also has the control and direction relating to the budget officer, simply because he is part of that library.

It's simply a confirmation of that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Owen.

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

I believe Mr. Poilievre mentioned that it would be the powers described in subsections (1) and (2). The amendment actually reads “subsections (1) to (3)”.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're all clear. We're going to vote on amendment G-38.1.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're going to move to amendment G-39, on page 108.

Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

This is still on clause 119. We're replacing lines 30 to 36 on page 95 with the following:(3) The Parliamentary Budget Officer may authorize a person employed in the Library of Parliament to assist him or her to exercise any of the powers under subsection (1) or (2), subject to the conditions that the Parliamentary Budget Officer sets.

I think this is a practical amendment, allowing for the employment of Library of Parliament staff in aid of the budget officer's work. It's pretty standard.

(Amendment agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

New clause 119.1 is a government amendment, amendment G-40, on page 110.

Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Amendment G-40 deals with new clause 119.1. I'm going to invite some commentary from our panel of experts on this one.

[Werner Heiss]

The amendment is simply a consequential amendment in view of the provisions that are contemplated in the act, the amendments being made to the Access to Information Act, and the expansion of those provisions, so that they would equally apply, in this case, to the parliamentary budget officer.