No. I think it's—
Evidence of meeting #1 for Finance 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.
Evidence of meeting #1 for Finance 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.
1:05 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
It's extremely germane to the discussion, Mr. Chair, because what Mr. Poilievre is accusing members of this committee of doing is basically of not doing the work that he deems to be so important, which apparently is predicting what his next move will be so that we can properly prepare for it.
On the contrary, I would argue that most members of this committee—and I would put my Conservative, NDP and Bloc colleagues into that as well—are working on behalf of their constituents. I have small businesses in my community that were looking for access to the wage subsidy for their small businesses—businesses that are literally about to close.
For some reason, Mr. Poilievre feels as though the most important thing for Canadians right now is to get in front of a podium and grandstand and wave around papers, as though that's the only thing Canadians care about right now.
Mr. Chair, I do sincerely apologize to him and to the other colleagues on this committee that I did not somehow anticipate what their moves were going to be so that I could magically prepare for them, because I was caught up doing other things on behalf of my constituents while we're in the second wave of a global pandemic.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Next is Mr. Fraser. Then I'll go to Ms. Jansen, and then we'll call the question, hopefully.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With respect, the accusations Mr. Poilievre is lodging don't really bother me. However, one of the things I'd like to draw attention to is that no one—including him, with his criticism of my request for clarity on this—has actually clarified the one piece that I keep repeating. The issue here is that there are different batches of documents that we are talking about.
I understand that some were disclosed on USB keys to critics of different parties. I understand that some have been uploaded to the website. I also understand that there was a very specific and unique thing that happened during the upload of the documents, which was prorogation.
This is not a matter of not having done homework. I've been able to look at many of the documents that, in fact, I expect are the subject of the proposed amendment, but I don't even know how we can consider the amendment in order if it doesn't make clear which documents we're actually looking at.
Perhaps because I was paying attention, both at the meetings and to the various pieces of correspondence that have come through to committee members, I would say that the unique piece is whether the documents that the motion is actually going to further adopt are effectively an incomplete version of the disclosure, because of the timing of prorogation. If that is the case, obviously the right approach would be to ask the government to please table the full disclosure of documents as it was asked to do. Then we would presumably have an opportunity to look at those documents, compare them to the request we've made, and make a determination at that time as to what is appropriate.
Perhaps Mr. Poilievre is choosing not to understand that particular point, but the issue at play, from my perspective, is the fact that the amendment does not make clear to me whether we're dealing with all the documents the government had intended to disclose because of the very particular nuance around the prorogation at the time they were being uploaded.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I'm good, thank you.
I just wanted to remind Mr. Gerretsen that I was doing all the same things. I was out there, got my flu shot and went to Thanksgiving dinner. All of that helped businesses. I also met with veterans at the Legion and got ready for the meeting.
That's our work. That's our job.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I guess we're ready for the question. Madam Clerk, I wonder if you could call the vote on the amendment to the motion.
October 15th, 2020 / 1:10 p.m.
Liberal
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I said that I would not bring up points of order unless—
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
—the issues were important. The point of order was recognized.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
That's not true. The clerk has not started the roll call yet, nor has the chair read out the motion, so technically it hasn't begun.
Mr. Chair, a point of order right now is completely in order.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll continue.
As a member of this committee, I do not believe—and I think my Liberal colleagues would echo my reservations—the points that Mr. Fraser and other Liberal members have brought up here have been dealt with. I understand that certain members in the opposition want to move towards a vote; it sounds as though they're unanimous in that on the opposition side. However, I still think we have not dealt with the matter that has been raised before the committee, which, as I stated in my remarks, based on what we find in House of Commons Procedure and Practice by Bosc and Gagnon, are questions that hinge on and relate to privilege—
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
This is not debate. These matters relate to privilege as well.
Mr. Chair, with all due respect, we have not dealt substantively and meaningfully with the issue at hand.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
What I can say on that is what both the clerk and I have indicated on the message, that the documents in evidence are on our public website and the link has been sent to members. You will have to determine whether that's adequate or not.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, perhaps it could offer some guidance to our decision-making and I suggest very humbly that we look at whether there's a precedent for this particular situation.
I'll turn it over to Ms. Dzerowicz.
