Evidence of meeting #1 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you. In all my years on committees, I've seen that we sometimes get bumped because something big moves, and we get pushed out and the committee hearings have to go on.
Bob Zimmer did an excellent job of always trying to make sure we got a room with a TV, and I trust that you will do the same. I think it's important. If the meeting has to go on, the meeting has to go on, so if we have language such that we trust that you will do your best to make sure they're televised and recorded, then I think that is sufficient for the New Democrats.
4:25 p.m.
Don Valley North, Lib.
I just want to ask a question about what the experience has been. What if the committee travels outside of Ottawa? Would this requirement or this motion still stand if the committee were travelling?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rachael Thomas
It would be my understanding that this motion would apply only to those official committee meetings that take place here.
I'll just ask the clerk, to verify that that is correct.
At this point in time, the clerk is not 100% sure. I think by adding “if possible” to the motion, we should have our bases covered.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
My experience at the finance committee—and we try to do everything publicly—has been that when we're travelling, that's not seen as an official committee meeting but as sort of a sub.... I think we even talk about that later on, about not presenting motions when committees travel.
We'll just be adding to our costs if we're making sure that there has to be not only television but translation. I would say let's keep it to regular full committee meetings that are held here in Ottawa as opposed to adding this burden.
Does this committee travel?
4:30 p.m.
NDP
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
If we were to, I would say that we wouldn't want to increase the costs, because it's expensive to have video services and conferencing services for meetings on the road.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rachael Thomas
Fair enough.
I believe that by saying “if possible”, we're giving some room for manoeuvring.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Saying “where possible”, I believe, would be general enough language to allow the chair discretion, in terms of location, for meetings here or for committee work outside of the capital.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I actually disagree. I'm not trying to be disagreeable, and truly, Mr. Kurek, I hope you understand where I'm coming from. I think “where practical” is better language, because on the Hill it's certainly practical and it's certainly possible, and I think the default value is that we would almost always do it with the very rare exception that we got pushed for some reason. However, on the road, it is possible, but it's just not practical.
I would just stay away from that language, because otherwise we'll never get on the road because our costs will be that much higher and we won't get approval from the committee, the Board of Internal Economy or the group that evaluates which committees can travel and when.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rachael Thomas
Both of these words could be included, to say “if practical and possible”, and then the differentiation is clearly made.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
We have collaboration and consensus.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rachael Thomas
It seems to be the will of the individual who moved this motion then to accept those two words, that if it's “practical” and “possible”, then of course our committee meetings would be televised or webcast.
I will now call the question.
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Seeing no other desire to speak and having gone through the routine motions, I would now move to adjourn the committee.
With that I would ask all of you to consider possible studies for this committee, and it would be ideal for us to discuss those motions on Monday.
I would ask that you put together your respective motions for study and that you send them to the clerk by tomorrow at four o'clock, given our routine motion that says we need 48 hours or two sleeps. Also according to that motion, you are asked to have them in both official languages, French and English. Then on Monday we will come to the table ready to discuss and make decisions with regard to the studies we will be taking on, going forward.
Mr. Angus.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair, for allowing me, as the old man of this committee, having served a lifetime sentence of eight years here, to speak.
I would just suggest that, while we're going to have studies, we also have officers of Parliament who report to this committee. For everyone coming up to speed, we should send out invitations to the officers of Parliament—ethics, privacy, lobbying, information—asking them to present to our committee so that we all are brought up to speed. They're not all going to be able to come initially, but if you were tasked to do that over the next few weeks or month, it would give all of us a chance to get a much better sense of the work they do and how it relates to the work we do, because they report to us.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
It could be in the form of a motion. It would say that we would invite officers of Parliament who report to this committee, as soon as possible, to present their work to our committee so that we can be apprised of how we work together.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Just on that, isn't it normal that we have the supplementary estimates or the main estimates? I'd like to get an idea of what the agenda looks like because we will have people possibly coming already in a routine fashion. I'd like to get a sense of what that calender looks like. This is the first time I am on the ethics committee but I know that on other committees—I was on public accounts—there is a certain rhythm and cycle to the topics that get discussed. I would like to have a more fulsome discussion of that before we get going with seeing people.