Declaration of Emergency Committee on Oct. 20th, 2022

[The Joint Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

Could the clerk read us the motion mentioned by Senator Carignan? I'm not sure I understood what was involved and I don't have the motion in front of me.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

I'm sorry. At this time, Mr. Virani has the floor.

I can come back to you, but he put a question specifically to the analysts. I would like for Mr. Virani to have that question answered. If there are further questions for the committee, we can address them at the appropriate time.

Colin, please.

[Colin Sawatzky, Committee Researcher]

We were aware of the motion and we have discussed it internally. As has been mentioned, it's mostly a question of resources. I guess the main point is that we aren't certain how long this would take us to get out there. Given that it's an ongoing process, the amount builds up. We are working on it; it's just that we can't give a very certain deadline at this point.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

As a chair's note, for the consideration of committee, there may be a possibility of our having the analysts report back with the feasibility. Otherwise, we are essentially debating something that we don't even quite know or fully understand whether we have the capacity for.

I'll just put that there for your consideration—it's not a motion—that they may be able to report back to this committee on the feasibility of this.

Just so I'm clear, Mr. Virani, is your intervention complete with that question?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I don't find the answer to be as robust as I would have liked, perhaps, but I feel as if the analyst was being a bit diplomatic there. I know they are working pretty hard, all the time. We know that if there are nine hours of evidence in a day, that's a lot of evidence to go through.

Thank you for having my question answered, Mr. Chair.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

We will now proceed to Senator Harder, followed by Mr. Motz.

Senator Harder, the floor is yours.

[Peter Harder]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was going to propose that we adjourn this discussion and invite the analysts to consult as to whether or not it would be possible for an analyst to be dedicated to performing this task. I think it's an important piece.

When we have heard that, I would hope the analyst can speak to all of the joint chairs and come up with a solution that would enable the committee to receive a report on the work being done at the commission.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

Just so we're clear, adjournments on discussions are not debatable motions, procedurally, so we have a motion on the floor.

I'd like to test the committee—

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

I'd like to speak to that, if I could.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

It's not debatable.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

I'm not really debating. I want to add to it that—

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

You can add to it after it's passed or defeated. That would be the essence of “not debatable”.

I will test the committee's will to see whether we have the infinite wisdom, provided by the senator, to adjourn debate on this discussion.

Is there unanimous consent for that, or would you prefer to proceed to a recorded vote?

(Motion agreed to)

We are still in the general business of considering your questions and comments.

Feel free, at this time, Mr. Motz, to make any...followed by Ms. Bendayan.

Mr. Motz, the floor is yours.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you.

I'll add to what Senator Harder proposed.

I'm not opposed to that, but I think I would have preferred a bit of a parameter around what we're asking the analyst to do. If our analyst goes back and has the conversation, it might be appropriate if we, as a committee, say.... We have eight, nine or 10 hours a day in commission hearings, and sometimes 400-plus pages and documents.

What is our expectation? The analysts have to know what we expect before they can give us an informed comment back. I was hoping we could give them that and say, “Listen, we don't have to have it the day of; it can be a week later”, or whatever that looks like. I'm suggesting that if we have some of those parameters around what we expect the analysts to provide us, we're going to get a better, more fulsome response back, which may be more favourable to the committee. That's all.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

Thank you for that intervention—that comment on the proceedings of the previous undebatable motion.

They do have, at their disposal.... Just so we're clear, our analysts are here. They are privy to our discussions, and they understand the spirit and intent, I believe, of the discussions. They also have the ability to reference transcripts—as does the Library of Parliament—so they are able to come up with recommendations pursuant to the spirit of the motion at hand.

With that being said, are there any other motions in this...?

Oh, I'm sorry. We have Ms. Bendayan, then Senator Harder.

My apologies, Ms. Bendayan. The floor is yours.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to see clarification from the clerk, further to the exchange that occurred with Senator Carignan.

Senator Carignan was referring back to a motion adopted by this committee on September 22. I'll read the beginning, because it seems quite clear to me: “That the Committee deem the evidence, including testimony and documents, received by, and published on the websites of, [other] standing committees of the House of Commons and the Public Order Emergency Commission”. It's the inquiry Senator Carignan was just asking about, in relation to the invocation of the Emergencies Act.

For me, the plain reading of the motion would indicate that the testimony heard every day, which Senator Carignan referred to, is indeed deemed part of our record.

Can you perhaps give us a bit more clarification?

[The Joint Clerk, Mr. Mark Palmer]

That is correct. I misspoke earlier. I reread the motion and agree that by that motion it would be deemed to us.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

You can thank me later, Senator Carignan, if you feel the urge.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. That is very helpful.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

We'll now have Senator Harder followed by Senator Carignan.

[Peter Harder]

In the event that anybody is still watching, I would propose that the committee move in camera for the purpose of discussing witnesses and the committee's work plan.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

Do we have unanimous consent? Are any opposed?

[The Joint Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

I understand, Mr. Chair, and I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but as a matter of principle, I'm going to oppose the idea of sitting in camera.

Our work should be as public as possible. With respect, I am unfortunately going to have to oppose Senator Harder's proposal.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

Would you be okay with this being passed on division, or...?

(Motion agreed to on division)

This committee meeting will now go in camera. We're going to take a 10-minute break.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Point of clarification, Mr. Chair.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

You're going to be sent out a new link that will provide you with a secure Zoom connection to the committee meeting. We'll give you 10 minutes to receive that information, to log out and to log back on. I assure members that we will provide as much time and technical support as possible to make sure the transition is smooth.

This meeting is now suspended until we come back in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]