Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 9th, 2011

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

The ruling of the chair, Madame Freeman, is that we're dealing with open government. The business of the day was the continuation of the study into open government, and we had six witnesses before us. You have made a motion, which you're entitled to do, but I'm accepting it as notice. We will have the motion, if you want to move it, at any time after the 48 hours' notice has expired. That's the rule of the chair and that's not debatable.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

I wish to challenge your ruling.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

You challenge the chair. That's not debatable, so I'm going to turn that over to the clerk for a recorded decision on that challenge to the chair's ruling.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Chad Mariage]

Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 6; nays 4).

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay, the decision remains.

Now we'll go back to the witnesses, please. I'm going to give you the opportunity for any closing or final comments you want to leave the committee with. Again, thank you very much for your appearance here today and for your work on this initiative.

We'll start with you, Madame Charette.

[Corinne Charette]

I would just like to say thank you very much to the committee for showing an interest. It is an important and exciting area and we're committed to continuing our work in this regard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Gray, would you comment?

[Dr. Brian Gray]

Thank you for the opportunity to be here. It's a pleasure sharing our experience with the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Wouyld you like to add anything, Mr. Shawcross?

[Chuck Shawcross]

I'd just like to echo the same comments. It's been a pleasure to appear here and to demonstrate some of the great work that public servants have been doing on behalf of citizens. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

The only item of business we have is to deal with the motion of Mr. Calandra. For the record, I will read it:

That February 16, 2011 be reserved to commence the study on Access to Information at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, pursuant to the motion adopted on December 14, 2010; And, that the Clerk of the Committee be directed to call Mr. Hubert Lacroix, President and CEO of CBC/Radio-Canada, to appear before the Committee on February 16, 2011.

I'd like to give Mr. Calandra two minutes to speak to his motion. I'll entertain up to six interventions of one minute; then we'll go back to Mr. Calandra for the last minute, and then I'll put it to a vote.

Mr. Calandra, first of all, I'll get you to move the motion.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

I move the motion, Mr. Chair.

I thank both you and the clerk. You have been working very hard on trying to accommodate this request for the committee, and I thank you for that. I know how difficult it's been to try to get Mr. Lacroix to modify his schedule to come to meet with members of Parliament with respect to access to information.

As I said earlier, it's something that is extraordinarily important. It's what we review. It's what our committee is mandated to do. As I said, I have heard from a lot of individuals who want us to look at this. If we could do it, I would certainly appreciate the opportunity to get started with this on the 16th.

Again, I thank both of you for your hard work in attempting to have the president of the CBC come to answer parliamentarians' questions about access to information.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

As I indicated, I'll entertain up to six interventions. We don't need six interventions, but I will entertain up to six interventions of one minute each.

Go ahead, Mr. Dhaliwal, for up to one minute.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Chair, it is my understanding that the president and CEO of CBC/Radio-Canada will be appearing before us on March 16. He is not available on February 16. Is that true?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

It is on March 21.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

It is on March 21, but he's not available on February 16. Is that true? If that is the case, what is the urgency? Why can't we wait until March 21?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Go ahead,Mr. Siksay.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Chair, I did support Mr. Calandra's motion when he brought it to the committee back in December, and I believe this is an important issue.

However, I have struggled for a long time to get the issue of open government onto the agenda of the committee. I have been on the committee longer than some other members, and it kept getting bumped by other things. I am pleased that we've scheduled the study about access to information and the CBC for March 21; I really hesitate on bumping anything from our open government study. There was one witness on open government confirmed for February 16.

Unfortunately, I'm not able to support today's motion to take February 16 to begin the study on the CBC.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Are there any other speakers to this motion?

Go ahead, Dr. Bennett, for up to one minute.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

I agree with Mr. Siksay. We're doing our best to get this study done, and the clerk was trying his best to do the scheduling. I just don't agree with motions like this one. That isn't the way committees work best, which is by consensus and by a steering committee that looks at a schedule. We have been trying to work well at the steering committee to accommodate the information as it comes forward from the clerk.

I won't be supporting this motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Abbott is next.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I've been rather interested in the comments of the members of the opposition. I'm thinking that if they were to not try too hard, they probably would be able to come up with any number of topics upon which they would want a person like Mr. Lacroix, who has something to say about a problem, here sooner.

While I respect what Mr. Siksay has said, I hardly think the dent that one day of hearing is going to cause in this open government study is going to be quite as big a problem as he's saying. It's darn well time. When we have the president and CEO of a corporation that's taking over $1 billion from the Canadian taxpayer saying, “No, no, no. Well, I'll get around to it”, I don't think that's quite good enough. We need him here sooner just to exert the authority of Parliament over a crown corporation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Go ahead, Madame Freeman.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you for letting me speak, Mr. Murphy.

I would like to understand Dr. Bennett's position that here in this committee, we work by consensus and the steering committee sets the work agenda. If I've misunderstood, please explain it to me. The steering committee sets the work agenda and the other members cannot intervene at all to have that agenda changed? Is this in fact what she is saying?

Governing by consensus is rather difficult.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Just to clarify that, Madame Freeman, the steering committee is not a decision-making body. The steering committee for this particular committee meets once a week. We discuss the committee's agenda, we talk about potential witnesses, we talk about a whole host of things, and we make recommendations to the committee.

The committee is the master of its own agenda and future, and any decisions the steering committee recommends have to be ratified by the committee as a whole, so any member is within his or her rights, as Mr. Calandra is, in moving a motion to change. Obviously the recommendation of the steering committee was that it be on March 21, but committee members are within their rights to amend the decisions of the steering committee.

I think we've gone around the table. I think people have—