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.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
12:25 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I would think it would be very tough for that kind of quick turnaround.
But anything is possible; I'm an optimist.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
If I might go back to my business years, let's figure out the worst-case scenario here. What's going to happen if we don't get what we're shooting for? The worst-case scenario, to answer my own question, is that we will have heard the witnesses, they will be on the public record, and there is no report from the committee. At least we'll have done what we could do and put in every effort we could as a committee, and the minister can draw on that information, or not draw on it, as much as he wishes. That's the worst case.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
It would certainly be possible, I think, to have a report by near the end of the first week back in March, which is the 7th to the 11th, I would think.
Go ahead, Mr. Sorbara.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Obviously, it seems we're dealing with a truncated process from prior committee gatherings. Just to kind of build a consensus on what Jennifer said and what Phil and Lisa have said—I can use first names on the committee?
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
This is not the House. It seems to me that we do need a credible process, a meaningful process. I do think the idea of, obviously, people coming in and being on the public record is meaningful. If it is a truncated report or a slimmed-down version of a report just because of the cards we've been dealt, I'm fine with that. But it is important that we do some work, as a committee.
If I can use the private sector experience, if I need to be here eight hours, or if I need to be here twelve hours or six hours, I'm ready to do that. We have a week's break next week, our riding week, but we'll come back the Tuesday morning and start the committee's work. I do think the economic conditions warrant it. I think Canadians want us to get down to work as a committee as well. We have had an extensive pre-budget consultation process that's been ongoing. We've heard from our ridings, independent of party, and the finance minister, along with the parliamentary secretary, has been doing great work on that front, but we also need to start the committee process up here. It is truncated unfortunately, but so be it. Let's get down to work.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Before I go to the question, Steve, Ms. Raitt mentioned that we wouldn't receive briefs. There have been some briefs already forwarded in. Is it possible for those briefs to be presented on the website, separate from our hearings?
Go ahead.
12:25 p.m.
The Clerk
At its last meeting, the committee adopted a motion to undertake the pre-budget consultation process during the summer. The public had until August 7 to submit their briefs. As of August 2, we had received around 50 briefs. After that date, the committee no longer existed, so we couldn't accept any more briefs and had to reject the ones people tried to send us.
As June said, the pre-budget consultation process usually has two components. On the one hand, the committee receives briefs from the public; usually, it's around 400. On the other hand, the committee hears from witnesses that it chooses in light of specific subjects.
So here is the question, Mr. Chair. What do we do with the 50 briefs that are currently in limbo? Does the committee wish to receive those briefs or just invite witnesses?
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
We were aware that these briefs existed. One thought on this would be to get an immediate letter back to the people who submitted these to ask them if they would like to revise them. It would have to be within a certain time frame—a very fast time frame, obviously—but I think the committee would be wise in accepting those as part of the process here. Because of the change in government and the results of the election, I think they should have an opportunity to revise them if they wish.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I'll go to Mr. MacKinnon, but what are the implications on the analysts, then, doing their work? They're going to have to analyze each of those briefs, which would be another problem.
Go ahead, Mr. MacKinnon.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Steven MacKinnon Liberal Gatineau, QC
Look, it just strikes me that we're trying to do in six or seven committee days what is usually done in six or seven or eight months. Not to reiterate, but this cannot be deemed.... As I think my friend Mr. Ouellette said, we cannot ask Canadians to come before us and then assert that these are the kinds of consultations that this committee has held and will hold again in the future.
Again, let's get down to work as quickly as possible. If we are able to ask these folks if they would like to refresh or somehow modify their submissions, and if it is possible for the committee staff to get working on analyzing those submissions, I know that on this side we'd be happy to receive them. I do think we need to move on here, Mr. Chair, and get our calendars out, get some scheduling done, and then move on with the work.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Liepert is next.
I think it's been noted that the briefs could be put on the web, but to simplify the process, given what we're up against, for the committee's presentation to Parliament we would deal with the witnesses heard at committee. That's just to sum up where we're at.
I'm sorry, Mr. Liepert.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB
I do think, though, that before they go up on the web, the people should be informed, to see if they want them refreshed before they go up on the web.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. I think we can do that. We can issue a news release and ask them to do that. That will be done.
I'll just sum up where we're at, then, to make sure that we're all on the same wavelength. Basically, we're agreed that we would meet on the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th, and the 19th is a Friday; that we would meet for two three-hour sessions each day; and that there would be 12 witnesses per meeting. The exception there would be the two hours on the 18th when, if possible, the Minister of Finance and/or officials would come. I don't know whether Mr. Champagne wants to say anything on this or not. That would be the process.
Parties would need to get their potential witnesses in very quickly. Also, do we decide on that witness list as a steering committee? It could be done by conference call next week or something.
Is that where we're at? Do we have basic agreement on that? I think we can sort it out from there.
Mr. Caron.
12:30 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
I have something to add, but I think everyone will agree. I would just like it specified that our meeting on Thursday with the minister will be televised.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Yes, it would be televised as well. I think most finance committee meetings are televised, are they not?
Mr. Liepert.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB
I think we should put a timeline on when these lists get to the subcommittee, because we need to have that decision on the ranking of the witnesses fairly quickly. If we want people to appear as early as the 18th, we have to let them know early next week, I would say. I think we need to add a timeline to get the lists in.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We're having trouble here with the.... We can't have a conference call. The lists could be sent to the clerk.
You mention it. Go ahead. There is no sense in my interpreting your work.