Evidence of meeting #1 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
That's fine, so thank you for that. You obviously understand the time constraints we have here. Can you come up with a faster way to assimilate the information we get and be able to put it back into the committee's hands so we could then present it to the minister?
Committee Researcher
It depends on the number of people who present testimony. In my experience, the more people you hear, the longer it takes to write the report. It depends on the type of report you want. If, for example, people presented testimony and you didn't want that testimony summarized, but wanted it categorized in the way we categorized the 400 briefs in the past, then that takes less time.
Liberal
Steven MacKinnon Liberal Gatineau, QC
Was that a suggestion? I know it's not your suggestion—you're not making suggestions—but limiting the number of witnesses clearly seems to be the only way to remedy the problem, Mr. McColeman.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
If I can just throw in one other problem. In March, Parliament is only sitting for two weeks. I don't know when the Minister of Finance is going to deliver his budget. But regardless of what the Library of Parliament has done, whether it's the kind of report they've done in the past or a different one, the committee will also have to review it and agree on it as well. We're meeting the weeks of March 7 to March 11 and March 21 to March 24.
After the committee meets and agrees on the report, the Library of Parliament folks have to get that printed, translated—I guess it would have to be translated beforehand—and make the changes. We have to really tighten this up on the front end, I think, to give the ability to do the work on the back end.
When we're back February 16 to February 19, if we were to meet all four days, two three-hour sessions all four days, is that enough?
Mr. Ouellette, and then Mr. McColeman.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
For me, it's a problem of here we have this capacity, and we're obviously also having to come out with something that's very credible for Canadians, so it's fantastic that we're going to spend all this effort. But if our report comes out after the budget, all our effort might have gone to waste. If the analysts are writing a report, though I trust them greatly, and if I'm going to put my name on something, I want to make sure that I have the opportunity to review it, that it reflects some of the ways that I think about the economy and its direction.
I think we're getting a little lost in the politics of this, and we need to think more long term. Maybe this is the start of long-term consultations for the next budget about the direction that the finance department should be taking in the long term. Perhaps we could have a small interim report, but I don't think it sounds like something that is possible logistically or is going to give long-term results for anyone around this table. It's not going to offer credibility to the roles of parliamentarians.
Conservative
Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON
On the same frame as you, Mr. Chair, if you do 24 witnesses, six hours a day, over four days, that's 96 witnesses. But with written briefs, it's not a three-week scenario anymore. If it's categorization only of the issues that have been brought up, perhaps we have a little bit more room for consideration of the report when we come back the week of March 7.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
What will throw our calculations off a little bit is that on the 18th we were hoping we would have a two-hour session with the minister and his staff—an hour with the minister and an hour with officials.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Yes.
Is that doable? I mean, we would have to prioritize the witnesses. I think it's doing the best we can do in the circumstances.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Perhaps I can add another thought here.
When the witnesses come, they're on the public record in saying what they have said. If the stumbling block is that report, at least we've done our part in the due diligence of trying to seek information—it's on the public record—on what various stakeholders across this country see as being important to the formulation of the budget.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay.
I think the clerk, or former clerk, has a point to make in terms of briefs.
Go ahead, Ms. Dewetering.
Committee Researcher
As you noted, the testimony will be on the public record. The committee has been very successful in the past, largely through Christine, pressuring people to get the transcripts translated in a timely manner, so everything will be translated in fairly short order.
If what you wanted was a categorization of the recommendations, then we could adopt more of the “appendix B” type of approach and just say, for example, “On this particular tax measure, this is what was heard.”
Committee Researcher
It would be a summary of the recommendations, more or less.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you.
I think this is a reasonable compromise. Everybody here wants to do budget consultations in addition to what we're doing locally and in addition to what the Minister of Finance is doing. It's important to note, too, that I think we were all willing to start in December and were not able to form, move forward with this committee, and do pre-budget consultations. As much as this will be taxing in terms of the timing, I think it is important that we do it, that we put this effort in, and that we deal with the fact that we have to take a report that is a little bit different this year. I think the point is also that it will start the focus for next year's budget and future budgets.
I think it's worthwhile to do this, even if it is fewer witnesses than normal years, but those are the restraints we have in an election year. Certainly we had difficulties forming as a committee due to some political issues in the House from the Bloc.
I think this is an important step. It shows Canadians that we all as a committee, parties aside, want to make this process happen. We're committed to doing it even if it will mean a lot of hours in a short amount of time.
Conservative
Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB
I just want to get clarity on the timing.
You said it would be a much shorter time frame. If I understand it right, we're talking about just having witnesses for the first week of our two-week sitting. Is it possible to have your work completed by the end of the second week of our sitting?
Committee Researcher
It would depend on how quickly we get the translated versions of the transcripts and how long it takes to format the document.