Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 8th, 2017

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Is there any debate?

Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I don't want to keep asking the same question, but I heard it put forward and not necessarily a particular reason why. If there was testimony we could reference, it would help me understand whether I should be voting for or against. Why this, and based upon—

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

It's still related to the Commissioner's proposals. We thought it was a good idea to make this amendment, in relation to the Information Commissioner of Canada's proposal.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Some of the things she recommended we take, and some of the things we don't, but that's okay.

Thank you for that explanation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Is there any further debate on LIB-10.1?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 37 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 38)

Next is LIB-10.2.

Who would like to speak to that?

Mr. Baylis.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

We heard testimony from the judiciary about the concern they had with respect to having some of their expenses made accessible. They had suggested some changes where, instead of having it judge by judge, we could aggregate it all. That sounded like a good suggestion to me when I heard it. Then when we had the Information Commissioner come in, she corroborated and agreed with that concept, that it was the right balance to be struck.

So LIB-10.2 followed by LIB-10.3 and LIB-10.4 are in line with that change, with that suggestion from the judiciary.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Just so I have it right, through you to Mr. Baylis, this amendment would essentially compile the information on the spending rather than delineate line by line, hotel by hotel, out of concerns over safety, essentially.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

It is by court rather than by judge.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I see. I'm trying to understand what the impact would be.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

It would line itemed, but just not assigned.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Line itemed by the court rather than by the judge. The Information Commissioner, I think, had suggested something where it was given as a broader figure rather than detailing it.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Yes, an aggregated figure, that's correct.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

So this would still allow for the publication of that spending. It would detail hotel bills, restaurant bills, etc., but by court rather than by the individual judge.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Yes. It's a finding of balance. That's what the judges had suggested, and the Information Commissioner agreed with that in her last testimonies.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

So no more Trump Towers when they're travelling abroad is what you're saying.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

You'll have to ask the judges about that.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

We'll find out who stayed at the Trump Towers, won't we though?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Okay.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I don't know if we can aggregate LIB-10.2, LIB-10.3, and LIB-10.4. They go together as one objective.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

We need unanimous consent to do that.

Do we have unanimous consent to put in one block LIB-10.2, LIB-10.3, and LIB-10.4?

I'm not seeing LIB-10.4.

[A voice]

It's being circulated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Do we have unanimous consent?

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Are we going to clump them?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

We are waiting for you to read it, and then if we have unanimous consent—