Evidence of meeting #33 for Canadian Heritage in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was justice.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Ms. Harder.
As a point of clarification, I was only pointing out the difference between Mr. Zuckerberg and Minister Lametti as to why one can and one cannot.
Mr. Housefather.
2:35 p.m.
Conservative
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have a couple of things.
First of all, I am also disappointed that the justice minister is not here.
Second, the motion is not quite as people are saying it is. The motion was to invite them. It was not to not proceed if they didn't attend. Inviting is not the same as forcing someone to attend. That's compelling people to attend, which can't be done in the case of a minister.
In this case, we do have a very competent deputy minister who is here, who can answer the questions. I have heard Madame Drouin on many occasions—I used to be the chair of the justice committee—answer questions very effectively. If we do have questions on this issue, I think the first step is to ask them of Madame Drouin, which I did on my questions related to the charter statement.
We have a panel coming up on Monday. Those people have already been invited. The panel has been set up. I think we should proceed with that panel. If the committee wishes to re-invite the minister and to reiterate its invitation to the minister, I think that's totally reasonable, asking him to come on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week.
For the most part, my argument is this. What the motion said was that we were to get a charter statement. We got it. We were to invite the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Heritage, and their officials. We invited them. The Minister of Canadian Heritage and his officials came. The officials for the Minister of Justice came. Now we're at the point where we have people here who could answer questions, and we're not asking them the questions.
I think we should ask the questions. We should proceed with the panel on Monday. Again, if the committee wishes to reiterate an invitation to the Minister of Justice, I will support it, as I did on Monday of this week.
Thank you.
2:35 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm wondering if I could ask you a question. The panel, you said, is scheduled for Monday. That means we do, in fact, have four witnesses to come and speak that day? They are all confirmed?
2:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Yes. If you're asking me a direct question, yes, we do. The four are confirmed.
I was going to announce who they are. We can do that later on towards the end of the meeting. We may not get time for it.
Each party has put forward a name, and they have confirmed for Monday.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to point something out in response to Mr. Housefather's comments. With all due respect to him, point 3 of the motion, as unanimously adopted by the committee, clearly states that the committee will “[s]uspend clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-10 until the completion of both points 1 and 2.” We all agreed on the fact that the committee should meet with both ministers. The Minister of Justice has refused thus far.
I will go even further and say that, before we voted, I went to the trouble of asking for clarification. I wanted to be sure that we would hear from both ministers before hearing from the panel. Everyone nodded their head. I'm not saying that we necessarily need to cancel Monday's meeting; we can make a decision on that. However, I want to underscore the fact that I went to the trouble of seeking that clarification.
Everyone has said they want to work together in a collegial manner, but we had agreed on the motion as a way out of the impasse. Today, we find ourselves at that same impasse, which has lasted for two weeks. On Monday, the committee finally adopted the very motion that members had refused to support two weeks prior.
I want that to be clear. What's happening is truly unfortunate. I thought for sure that we would be hearing from both ministers today, that the four witnesses would be appearing on Monday of next week and that we could then move things along. That does not seem to be the case, however.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I really appreciate the conversation. I think the deputy minister who is here is a very learned person, but she made one critical statement—that whatever this document was that was provided, it was approved by the minister. The buck stops there.
That's why it's critical that the minister is the person that we meet with. I think that's why we're unanimous. He approved this document. Somebody else may have written it, but it's under his signature. That's why it's very critical that he is the person who then speaks with us and answers our questions, as we unanimously asked for. As the deputy minister said, it's under his approval.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you.
I just wanted to clarify the wording of the motion. We can have the conversation about what the committee feels about the attendance of the Minister of Justice, but as far as fulfilling the needs of the motion itself, it was to ask for the revised charter statement, which we have. It was also to invite the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Canadian Heritage, which was done.
So in terms of the wording of the motion, paragraphs (1) and (2) have in fact been fulfilled. I would just put that out there, because the argument was made that the motion in (1) and (2) had not been fulfilled.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Ms. Dabrusin.
Before we go any further, I'm kind of editing in my mind how this works. If we get to testimony, I could ask Ms. Drouin if she could put away her notes. We'd probably go directly to questions and comments, given the time constraints.
Mr. Aitchison, you have the floor.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
I have to say that Ms. Dabrusin made some very strange comments. I'm not about to cast aspersions on her social skills, but when you invite somebody somewhere, it's because you actually want them to show up. The purpose of inviting someone is not just to go through the exercise of inviting them. I think it's a little disingenuous to suggest for one second that, oh, we've invited him, so that's all we need to do; let's carry on.
That's the most ridiculous thing I think I've heard yet today.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Now that the list has been exhausted....
Before we go to that, folks, at this point there is no motion to deal with it. There's just a lively discussion about it. I will proceed with Monday, where we do have our four experts on the panel. If we want to take up this discussion again, I think we probably should. Maybe we can have a good think about it on the weekend. We can come back to it on Monday, when I'll receive your direction as to how you wish to proceed.
Yes, it is true that the motion does invite the Minister of Justice to arrive. He is not here. Now we have to measure the intent of that. I'm asking everyone to help me out to try to find a solution. In the meantime, I will proceed to invite the four witnesses on Monday, unless a motion tells me otherwise.
Mr. Waugh.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have the solution for us today.
My solution is that we propose another invitation be sent to the Minister of Justice and that we postpone the guests we have here today until Tuesday or Wednesday, when the justice minister can come to committee. I think we all agree that we'd like to hear from him. If we can do that, I'll propose that this committee sends another invitation to the justice minister, and thus we postpone the guests we have here today until they can come with the minister.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
The motion states—and I'll paraphrase here, Mr. Waugh, for the sake of time—that you extend an invitation to the Minister of Justice to appear before the committee. Did you say Tuesday, or Tuesday and Wednesday?
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK
I said Tuesday or Wednesday, along with department officials.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Correct. That's usually taken for granted, though, Mr. Waugh. When we invite a minister, officials accompany them. Does everybody understand the motion that is now on the floor? I assume you're done talking about it, Mr. Waugh?
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
—that we extend an invitation to the minister to appear either on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week, following the expert panel.
Ms. Dabrusin.