Evidence of meeting #1 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Mr. Fergus, do you have this one last short sentence in regard to webcasting and television?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Yes, it's rather a moot point anyway because of the nature of where we're at right now, but I'll read it because I have it in front of me: “That, where practicable and possible, all meetings other than those deemed in camera will be televised or, if not possible, then webcast.”
Mr. Barrett.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Just for clarification, through you to the clerk, I recall that my colleague Mr. Kurek put forth an amendment last time we did these, and I'm just wondering if this is consistent. I feel that the ends he was seeking are achieved with the wording here.
Again, through you, Chair, does this wording achieve the same effect that we were seeking during the previous session? That is, that whenever it's possible it's going to be webcast, and when it's not possible, it's not possible.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I think that's what it's saying but I will confer with the clerk to be sure, because I have no history here.
The Clerk
It's true that it's largely dictated by resources rather than motion, but where possible, as the motion says, I can certainly endeavour to have things televised or webcast.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Clerk.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
All right, colleagues, those are all the routine motions I have in front of me.
We'll now go to those people who have motions. I am going to—
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, we are in an unprecedented situation because prorogation interrupted the study that was under way, and as part of that study we had asked for documents from the Speakers' Spotlight regarding the members of the Trudeau family who were paid, but we were never told whether we have those documents. If those documents do exist with the clerk, are we able to access them? We also need to be looking at how we access them virtually, because when we asked for them originally, we were present.
I think we can't let this issue slip, because we had our work interfered with by prorogation and these issues of documents and the security of the documents and how we handle the documents are a top-of-mind issue that we need to address.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Mr. Angus.
My understanding of procedure is that it happened in the last session, so certainly if the committee would like to bring forward what was done in the last session, then the committee can vote on that and we can bring not only the previous study but the evidence from the last session forward.
Basically the order for obtaining documents would have to be readopted by this committee.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
If I may speak, Chair, are you saying that there should be an official motion for the committee to agree to bring back those documents for collection?
Liberal
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Since a notice of motion will be filed, I want to tell you, my fellow members, that this creates quite a connection, in line with what we've experienced. I don't know whether there are any other comments. However, I think that now is the time to see how we can restructure our work to ensure efficiency and effectiveness, while making the most of what has been done in the interest of transparency and fairness.
I don't know what the other comments are, but I can see that the clock is ticking. I think that we're extremely effective, and I want us to stay this way.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Colleagues, I have two other people on the speakers list, but just for fairness I did have five names of those who wanted to move motions and I'm going to refer to the clerk to see who they were and what order they were in before we went to the routine motions. If that comes up during the motions people desire to make with regard to bringing the study and the request for documents forward, then certainly we can do that during that time. I'll just exhaust these other comments before that, and then we'll get back to that list ASAP.
Mr. Fergus.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Chair, thank you very much. I just want to seek clarification from you or the clerk.
Are we still on a point of order?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Well, Mr. Angus had a point of order for clarification, and now I'm just taking comments before I go to the list of people in the order in which they raised their hand as far as motions go. I will give that to you right now: It is Madame Gaudreau, Mr. Barrett, Mr. Dong, Madam Shanahan, Ms. Lattanzio and then Mr. Angus. That's the order I have right now.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
—my understanding from Madame Gaudreau, and I wasn't sure if she was making a statement or a motion, was that she said she wanted to bring forward the continuity of the work that had been done. To me, that is a motion that she is bringing forward to restart the work that previously had been done, so I want to clarify, because if that's the case with Madam Gaudreau, then I think we're actually on her motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Yes, I'm just exhausting comments now after the routine motions, but I'm going to go back. Madam Gaudreau is the first one on the list, and the last comment, or the last hand up was Mr. Barrett's, so I'm going to go to Mr. Barrett and then directly to Madam Gaudreau. If that's the motion she has, she can move it.
Mr. Barrett.
