Evidence of meeting #11 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was poverty.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
The Parliamentary Budget Officer does typically report to the finance committee.
NDP
Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
So that gives us the authority to pass something of this nature?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
The argument is that it's consistent with his mandate. His mandate is actually quite broad in terms of legislation.
NDP
Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
I assumed that's what it was. I have no problem supporting the amendment, because again, we're very concerned on this side as to the resourcing of that department, of the importance of that independence. With that in mind, I certainly would support the amendment.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you.
I have Ms. Glover, Mr. Hoback, and Mr. Brison on the amendment.
September 29th, 2011 / 1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I haven't spoken on this issue yet, but I'm quite concerned about some of the language being used by other committee members. I'm not going to take that tactic. I'm going to do what's right for the House of Commons and for parliamentarians and remind the committee that the PBO position was actually created by this government to help us make decisions that are in the interests of Canadians. It is very difficult to make decisions when we don't have costed documents and details.
Mr. Brison is acting, frankly, in an irresponsible manner by trying to talk about things that are misleading to Canadians. We are in fact trying to make this a better system. When members like Randy Hoback come forward with motions that we think make it better for everyone, I'm happy to support that as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance.
I do have to say that 45 days would be problematic, if extended, simply because quite a few of our private members' bills can jump the queue, so to speak. They can trade them up, and they could be finished before the 45 days are done. So I do want to remind members of that.
I know Mr. Nicholls is new. There have been private members' bills—in fact just last session—that have reached royal assent. Unfortunately, you're misinformed as a new member. They are very important to Parliament. They can create some advantages and some benefits to Canadians that we respect and support.
I have a problem with the fact that we're over time. I'm wondering if we just continue and set another meeting to—
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
As the chair, I'm going to say that the issue is this: does this committee wish to have the Parliamentary Budget Officer provide costing for private members' bills? As the chair, I found his costing very helpful for private members' bills. It certainly helped me in terms of analyzing private members' bills. That's one issue. There seems to be agreement on that, but then there's a concern with respect to whether he has the budget to do so. That's tough to say because it varies according to what kinds of bills are on the order of precedence.
My suggestion is that there's an amendment that clearly states something and there's a motion that clearly states something. We can debate this until four o'clock. I sort of know where everybody is and everybody else knows where everybody is, so I'm recommending, as the chair, that we move to a vote on the amendment and then a vote on the motion. I'm not sure whether the opposition is okay with the second motion by Mr. Hoback or whether that has to be introduced as an amendment, but that is my recommendation.
Again, the committee members can put their names on a list and speak until whenever. I still have Mr. Hoback and Mr. Brison.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Chair, actually, that's where I'm going to go here, the 45 days. I can understand your problem with that and I can also understand what Ms. Glover is saying.
Maybe “before second reading” might be a better way of putting it, because second reading is when it goes to committee out of the House. If he has the information to the committee members before second reading, that might be a compromise I could possibly live with.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay, that's an amendment to the amendment.
Mr. Brison, do you want to speak to that?
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
In terms of the NDP amendment, the issue of resources is important. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has been drowning without resources, and what this motion effectively does is instead of trying to rescue the PBO with more resources, it actually puts a firehose in its mouth to completely drown the work of the PBO. I support the amendment's intention of increasing resources for the PBO. I'm not sure how that can be done legislatively by this committee when the PBO currently reports to the Library of Parliament for its funding.
In terms of Ms. Glover's comments on doing what is right for Canadians, we have, as members of Parliament, regardless of party, regardless of government—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Mr. Hoback, you have a point of order?
Sorry, Mr. Brison, but Mr. Hoback has a point of order.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Chair, I believe that I was seeking agreement on the second reading, and I think I have agreement on a friendly amendment to the amendment on that point.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
It's on the subamendment and Mr. Brison is speaking to this issue.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay, so let's come back to you.
Let's do the subamendment. The subamendment is to say “before the start of the second reading”.
I don't see any speakers on that, so we will vote on “before the start of the second reading”.
It's unanimous.
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
So now the debate is on the amendment.
Mr. Brison.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
If the amendment is seeking to address the resource issue, I think all members of the committee would want to do that, because we don't want to increase the mandate of an agency that is already starved of resources. In keeping with Ms. Glover's assertion that committees and members of Parliament have a responsibility to do what is right, we are constitutionally obligated as members of Parliament, regardless of party, government or opposition, to scrutinize the cost of all legislation and to ensure that the resources are there to achieve it. That does not simply mean private members' legislation; it includes government legislation. That is paramount to our jobs as members of Parliament. That is why the Speaker ruled in the last House that the government was in contempt of Parliament.
Ms. Glover referred to the government's having appointed the Parliamentary Budget Officer. She didn't report that the government then refused to provide the Parliamentary Budget Officer with the information and the resources to do his job. What the government is doing now is simply using this committee as a branch plant of government, not of individual members of Parliament but as a branch plant of the government's partisan agenda to quash any dissension from any public servant or any agency within the public service. This committee is being manipulated and is part of the government's ongoing attack on the independent advice of the public service.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Just to correct my colleague, it is not government who controls that. It is in fact members of Parliament, through the Library of Parliament and other means. So it is not government that controls that, just to correct the record.
Unfortunately, he is wrong on that.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay, that's a point of debate, not a point of order.
I'm going to move to—