Evidence of meeting #38 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question through you to the Auditor General.
Is there a proposed date for your returning to this committee, so that we can then in a public forum ask you some questions regarding the new program?
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
I believe we had established a date around February 15. We'd be glad if members would like to do it sooner than that, to see if there are dates that are available before that.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
I appreciate the comments that have been made around the table, but we went into this with the agreement that the presentation was in camera. I think given the points that were made, and the point of order by Mr. McGuinty, at this point we should not be going any further and we should wait for the next meeting. I look forward to that. If it could be done sooner, I think there's an appetite to have you back as soon as possible.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Just for the record, I didn't say that. What I said was I think we should open the doors, and for anybody who wants to join us, who wants to hear more about the structural debate, we're here. We have two hours...an hour and 15 minutes left.
If the Auditor General is available to stay with us for another hour and 15 minutes, I think we would all like to get into the substance of the debate. You're here now. Why delay it to February 15?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
I think the Auditor General has made it rather clear that she feels uncomfortable talking about it prior to this announcement. I think we have to respect that. We'll try to work with her office to set up a meeting as soon as possible. We can then get into the real meat of the structure, and so on. I think, Mr. McGuinty, it's only fair to other requests we've heard.
I believe Mr. Cullen had a comment. Then we will go to Mr. Vellacott and then Mr. Bigras.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
This is, I think, quite a challenging moment for this committee, in particular because today what we're hearing is not a consideration over a switch in somebody in your office per se, but potentially a switch in a role as well as in the person.
The reason I'm bringing this up is to go back to Mr. Bigras' point about the part of your presentation that alludes to an overstepping of the bounds by Madame Gélinas, perhaps, into the policy realm.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Well, it's difficult for me to not connect the departure of Madame Gélinas, considerations of a change of the role of the commissioner, and the statement in section 13. If they're not connected, then it's just by coincidence that these are happening at the same time and that concerns are raised here about an overstepping of bounds.
I think--through you, Mr. Chair--that the Auditor General has been picking up the value and quality of the reports we've been getting from Ms. Gélinas over the years, and the ability to use those reports to effect change in future government considerations.
I don't want to speak on behalf of this committee, but this committee has always looked forward to Madame Gélinas and encouraged Madame Gélinas to come back to our committee to influence the types of discussions we have. After reading over section 13 and seeing the circumstances of today, we then essentially have to hold our tongues, which is very difficult for a politician to do at the best of times. It is something that causes me great concern. I'm concerned reading this.
I'm concerned with what's happening right now. Mr. McGuinty has pointed out the substance of the debate around the role and the potential switching of the role and Madame Gélinas' leaving and the gap that you've alluded to between the actual mandate and expectations that exist or have been created. All these things cause me to think somebody went too far or too much was said.
Without that clarity, we have to wait until February to dive into it with your office, and the danger in this is it leaves me to suppose--and I'd rather not suppose--as to the circumstances and the questions around this gap between the mandate and the expectations. It is very difficult, particularly since, as Mr. McGuinty has said, this is such a critical issue for us right now in the country.
Conservative
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
I know there is great reluctance to get into the substance of all of this in an in camera meeting. I would just say that I have absolutely no concerns, no problems at all, with the work that has been reported by the commissioner, because it has been reported on behalf of the Auditor General. I saw all the reports that came out; I am very comfortable with the work we did, and I think it was absolutely excellent work.
But there are people who would like the commissioner to go much further than that in certain environmental groups, I would suggest. Even the initial proposal of Bill C-288 would have had us play a role much different from the role we can actually play, and so we are putting it to the committee: do you perceive a gap? If so, I will not change the role that is actually played by the commissioner, but it might be something that parliamentarians would wish to consider going forward as we are doing this review on how we conduct our practices internally, which will continue very much as they have been in the past.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
I ask members to bring this to an end if we can. We've talked about it being in camera and the concerns people have. We have an offer to come back as early as we can arrange it to see if we can discuss the issues about the position and the whole thing.
I know we have a list here. Could I ask you to be really brief? Just make your point. Let's not get into the discussion about reports and the reporting and so on. Keep it just to questions while we have the Auditor General here, knowing that she's coming back to discuss the full issue.
I would like to go very briefly to Mr. Vellacott, Mr. Bigras, and Mr. Scarpaleggia.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Let's go to Mr. Bigras. He has a point of order and I didn't realize it was a point of order.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
We need to try to find a compromise so that I can understand that the Auditor General—
Conservative
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I'd like to cede to Mr. Bigras. I didn't hear him finish his point of order. He didn't have a point of order?
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
It is not up to you to say whether it constitutes a point of order, it is up to the chair.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I don't know what we are debating or discussing with the Auditor General. If we're debating the four corners of Madame Gélinas' departure this afternoon, I think the debate is over. Madame Gélinas is leaving. We've been given this heads-up and it's very appreciated. Other than that, everything else I'm hearing and everything else we're going into should be for the public record. If we're going to talk about structures, let's get into it. Let's open the doors, turn on the tape machines, and talk to Canadians.
I can't go out in the public--nor can any other member of Parliament here, in my humble estimation--and tell the Canadian people that this is not something they should hear about.
My suggestion to the committee is that we wrap up the discussion now on Madame Gélinas, open the doors, and have a good, full-blown debate for an hour. Then we can have Madame Fraser come back and join us again on February 15.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Let's talk about the announcement that the Auditor General has made to us today. I agree with you, Mr. McGuinty.
