Information & Ethics Committee on May 6th, 2008

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

What's wrong with going directly to the courts?

[Philippa Lawson]

It's expensive, and people can't afford to do it.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Write that one down, because I'll guarantee you, it will be expensive to go through the Privacy Commissioner's proceedings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mr. Nadeau, please.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Good afternoon, Ms. Lawson.

The commissioner is asking for the authority to close down certain inquiries or to refuse them. I would like to know your opinion.

Furthermore, were the commissioner to be given this authority, what safeguards should be set out?

[Philippa Lawson]

Yes, that is the one recommendation from the Privacy Commissioner that I'm not quite ready to endorse. I would like to see more evidence that it's really not possible to handle or deal with all the complaints that come before her in an effective and efficient manner. It would seem to me that a requirement to investigate still leaves a lot of leeway, a lot of discretion, to the commissioner in how she goes about that investigation, and you could do some fairly brief investigations in those cases that don't warrant full-scale investigations. I think obviously the recommendation is worth considering. It's coming from the Privacy Commissioner, but it's not one that I feel I or the clinic can endorse at this time.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mrs. Lawson, thank you for the input and insight. There is much more work to do, but I think you've given us significant assistance in assessing the recommended areas for consideration. I'm sure members will look forward to having your input in the future. It's much appreciated.

As we have other business to move on to, you are now excused.

Colleagues, while Mrs. Lawson is leaving, maybe our other witnesses could get themselves organized and come to the table while we deal with another matter of business.

I understand that there have been some discussions. Would the committee now like to deal with the motion of Madame Lavallée, without debate, and put it to a vote?

Madame Lavallée, your motion was circulated. There is due notice. It is in order. I believe the members all have it and have read it. Should we read the motion again?

Madame Lavallée.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

For our purposes here, I will read the motion, but I will not comment upon it.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), that the adoption of the following motion be reported to the House at the earliest opportunity: The Parliamentary Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics: - deplores the fact that, at the request of Treasury Board, as of April 1, officials are no longer updating the Coordination of Access to Information Request System, a central database for all requests filed with the government under the Access to Information Act; - demands that the Conservative government reinstate this tool, which promotes transparency and accountability; and - encourages the Conservative government to make this database available online and free of charge.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Thank you.

Colleagues, you've heard the motion by Madame Lavallée.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

I'm in favour of the motion. It's carried six to five.

[An hon. member]

How is that possible, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

It's because—

[An hon. member]

It's five to five. You have to split the vote, but you have to maintain the status quo.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

He forgot that rule.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

There is no rule like that.

First, Mr. Malhi is not signed in. He does not vote. Mr. Hubbard did not vote. The vote was five to five. The chair breaks the tie, and I voted in favour of Madame Lavallée's motion. It's carried six to five.

We will now move on.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. Could we get a clarification, through you to the clerk, on what the rule is in the event of a tie? My understanding is that committees follow the conventions of the House. In the House, the convention is that if there is a tie, the Speaker votes in favour of the status quo. If we could have a clarification on that, it would be great.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mr. Malhi is not signed in. We have only four Liberals here, one of whom did not vote. Mr. Hubbard did not raise his hand to vote. We have three Liberals.

Order, please.

There are many precedents in which the chair is required to break a tie on votes in committees. I've been on both sides of it in the past, and we've done it before in this committee.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

On the same point of order, Mr. Chairman, we need to know this for the future. Are you simply going to vote the way perhaps your colleagues are voting? There's no question that's a policy of the House of Commons. The clerk will confirm that with you--he honestly will--but if you're not going to follow that policy, I'd like to know that. I think the rest of us on this side would like to know this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

First of all, Mr. Tilson, from the committee's perspective, it is a report or a resolution of this committee for the consideration of the House. It is not binding on the government; it is simply an opinion. It's not a policy issue.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

I understand that. I'm talking about the breaking of ties and what your policy is going to be as chair. If your policy is going to be different from what the policy of this place is—this committee, this House of Commons—we need to know that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Yes. I have been involved recently with another case, with Mr. Allison, at his committee—

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

I'm talking about this committee, Mr. Chairman. You're the chair of this committee, and we're entitled to know what your policy is going to be in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

My policy always has been the matters that come before this committee.... The Speaker has ruled very recently and reminded us all that the committee is the master of its own agenda. It is the practice that when the committee deals with a committee matter, if it's necessary for the disposition of it for the chair to vote, the chair is going to cast a vote using his best—

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Sir, I don't mean to be debating with you, but I just want it to be final and clear.

As I understand it, then, the policy of following the status quo will not necessarily go as to how you vote. Is that what your position is going to be?