Information & Ethics Committee on Oct. 1st, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I'm going to go to Mr. Caputo now.

Mr. Caputo, you have the floor.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I would like to move an amendment, and that would read as follows: “That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee call upon Mark Carney to testify before the committee for two hours, as well as Jenni Byrne and Gurratan Singh to testify before the committee for one hour each, within 14 calendar days of the adoption of this motion.”

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

If you guys can get two hours of questions out of Gurratan, all the power to you.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

We said one.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'm not going to support this. Bring everybody for two.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Mr. Caputo, just to be clear.... You did indicate before that you wanted to delete the preamble. I didn't hear you say that. You went to the—

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I'm sorry. That would be the extent of the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Right. The extent of the amendment that you're proposing is to, effectively, have Mr. Carney for two hours, Ms. Byrne for one hour and then Mr. Singh for one hour. Is that correct? You're looking to delete the preamble.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Yes, that's correct.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. Is that even in order?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Give me a second here. I'm going to discuss this with the clerk. Hang on a second, please.

I appreciate your question. I sought clarity from the clerk on this. It's my opinion that the amendment would be in order because he's adding another witness to the witness list, and he's dealing with the time.

In my view, the amendment as proposed by Mr. Caputo is in order.

We're on the amendment proposed by Mr. Caputo.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

To clarify, the amendment proposes that Mr. Carney appear for two hours. Ms. Byrne, who was in the amended motion, was slated to appear for two hours and will now appear for one hour. As for Mr. Singh, we don't really know where he fits within the context of this motion, but he should also appear for one hour.

I'm not really sure why there are different times assigned to the proposed witnesses. I also don't see any justification as to why Mr. Singh should appear. I don't think that any argument has been made as to how he fits within the narrative of Mr. Carney and Ms. Byrne. I think that this amendment is a little bit half-baked and a little bit suspicious, as Mr. Cooper would say, in that we don't know why there's a differentiation, and we don't know why this extra name is being added without any context for why it's being added.

Chair, I would really appreciate some clarity from the mover of the amendment.

If I can get back onto the floor once we've had clarity, that would be great.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I do have a list. I'm going to go to Mr. Cooper and then Ms. Shanahan after that.

Mr. Cooper, do you have your hand up on the amendment?

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

On the amendment, I'd like to move a subamendment. I understand your previous ruling. It would be, very simply, to remove the provision for Gurratan Singh to appear. It would leave the balance of the amendment intact in that Mr. Carney would appear for two hours and Ms. Byrne for one hour.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Again, I'm going to deal with this.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Chair, I'm listening to the interpreters, but if I don't have the text in front of me, it's quite difficult to follow.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

It's difficult for me as well, Mr. Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

We talked about an amendment and we have just received a subamendment, but we have not yet seen the text of the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I'm going to deal with the amendment.

We'll deal with the amendment first. If Mr. Cooper wants to propose another amendment afterwards, we will make a decision at that time.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

We're on the amendment proposed by Mr. Caputo.

I'm going to come back to you after, Mr. Cooper.

I'm going to go to Mrs. Shanahan now on the amendment proposed by Mr. Caputo.

Mrs. Shanahan, go ahead.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I am pleased to have a better understanding of what is going on here.

First of all, this is not at all in keeping with my amendment, which sought to have Mr. Carney and Ms. Jenni Byrne appear before us for two hours each. I don't know if they would necessarily have to appear separately or together, but that's the kind of discussion the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure can have.

The reason we want to hear from these witnesses is to study an issue, not to get into the details of each person's life or background. We want to know their point of view, how they see their work and what measures they have taken or considered, or not, to manage not only their conflicts of interest, which is important and which any professional is capable of doing, but also any appearance of conflict of interest.

This is a group of witnesses that could be quite interesting. We are asking that they appear for two hours each, but that could also be done in a two‑hour meeting with the two witnesses. They are professionals, not adversaries or competitors, as far as I know. Both serve as financial advisers to federal party leaders here in Canada.

As for Mr. Singh, again, I have no idea what his background is. There was quite a preamble for the other two people, but there is nothing about this gentleman, unless it was in Mr. Caputo's amendment. For his part, Mr. Williamson wanted to eliminate all the preambles that talked about the background of each of the witnesses we want to invite, but there is nothing about Mr. Singh. So I'm having trouble understanding what's going on.

Furthermore, I share my colleague Mr. Simard's frustration at the fact that there seems to be no end to the amendments and subamendments presented.

Mr. Chair, you are able to give us some time and perhaps even suggest that the stakeholders agree to draft a motion that makes sense. I have already seen that at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, and everyone was satisfied with the result.

That said, I will definitely not support this amendment, which proposes that we hear from one witness for two hours, but the other for only one hour, which is completely illogical.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Ms. Shanahan.

Next on the list, on the amendment, is Mr. Caputo.

Go ahead, Mr. Caputo.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Could I raise a point of order before you go to Mr. Caputo?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Go ahead on your point of order.