I'm still—
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.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Mr. Chair, I apologize for coming back to this. I understand that there are documents in an e-binder that should correspond to what the committee had on record. I understand from your explanation following the recent suspension of this meeting that there is an ability to provide whatever was provided at the time the first session of the current Parliament was prorogued.
The question I still don't understand is whether the complete disclosure package that the government did in fact provide to members of this committee is actually included in what this committee will have.
This is not some nuanced technical point. One reason I'm concerned about it is that, upon a review of the documents that the clerk directed us to during suspension, I remain unable to locate the transmittal letters. I suspect that other things that were disclosed by the government are in fact not going to be made available.
Having incomplete disclosure, particularly....
I keep drawing your attention to the transmittal letters because those are the documents that explain why certain portions of documents were redacted. For example, they may have included information about the family members of public servants or just a list of email names of public servants who had personal information.
It seems foolhardy for us as a committee to demand production that we know or expect is incomplete not because the government chose not to disclose information but because it may not have been fully uploaded.
Is it possible to have someone do a comparison of the documents that were in fact provided to committee members directly—say, by the USB keys—and any information that would—?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
October 15th, 2020 / 1:45 p.m.
Liberal
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We can't have a point of order when there is a point of order on the floor, so I will go to you next, Ms. Jansen.
This is point of order day for sure in finance committee, I can tell you that.
Mr. Fraser.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Thank you.
To finish my point, Mr. Chair, it would be very helpful if the clerk could do a comparison to ensure that we're not on a fool's errand here, demanding production that we know will be incomplete because we know it wasn't properly uploaded.
Is it possible for the clerk, perhaps, to do a quick review of the two sets of documents to ensure that the same number of pages are in each, for example, so that we can verify that we are looking at a complete body of information?
What I would love to avoid is setting the stage for a false accusation that the government failed to meet the order or request of this committee, when in fact they did their best to but, due to a technical reason during the timing of the upload, the complete package wasn't put on the table.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. I'm going to go to Ms. Jansen's point of order, but to your point of order, this may be something to think about. You can put an amendment to the amendment to ensure that the documents include transmittal letters, if that's a huge concern.
Ms. Jansen.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Given that it has been established that everything was made public and that Mr. Fraser is talking about a fool's errand, I think most Canadians watching this—if anybody is still watching—would probably consider this committee meeting to be the fool's errand he is talking about.
It's really time to take a vote. Let's get on with it so that we can get on with business.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I can't take a vote until the committee allows me to take that vote, Ms. Jansen. That's the problem.
Mr. Fraser, you have another point of order.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Sure. It's related to a comment you just made.
My concern is not solely the presence or absence of transmittal letters. That's one concern, and it's a serious one. The bigger picture concern I am worried about, when looking at this motion, is that I know certain documents were made public. What I want to ensure is that all the documents that the government disclosed are part of the record.
No one has been able to clear up for me whether the documents that are the subject of the proposed amendment to the motion we're currently debating actually mirror the documents that the government provided. If we are not talking about the same set of documents, then of course the government will have failed to meet the request of this committee, but it wouldn't be because they chose not to disclose information.
You suggested it might be by amendment of the amendment, but is it possible to have someone, before we take a vote on the existing amendment, actually confirm that the two packages are identical?
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
The only person I could ask that is the clerk, who may be in communication with the analysts. Do you see a—
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We're talking about 5,000 pages here plus. Could the clerk and the analysts take five minutes to look into this, and we'll come back to it?
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
No, we're not going to suspend again to run on a fool's errand, as Mr. Fraser—
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
