It was Pat, Sean.
Evidence of meeting #5 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was documents.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #5 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was documents.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Okay. Thank you.
I will continue: ...and that the committee adopt all evidence heard in the First Session of the 43rd Parliament during the committee’s study on “Government Spending, WE and the Canada Student Service Grant”; and that the committee order that by November 24, 2020, the government provide the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel with all documents as originally requested in the July 7, 2020 motion moved by the Member for New Westminster-Burnaby, without any redaction, omission or exclusion except as would be justified in sections and subsections 69(1) through 69(3)(b)(ii) of the Access to Information Act, that the information remain in the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel and be used exclusively by him to determine the government’s compliance or non-compliance with the July 7, 2020 motion, and that the Clerk of the Privy Council and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner appear no later than November 25, 2020 to discuss “cabinet confidence” exclusions to public disclosures, and that the law clerk testify before the committee regarding documents received from the government pursuant to this motion to provide his views on the government’s compliance or non-compliance with the July 7 motion.
As I said, Mr. Chair, it is substantially similar to the version that Mr. Poilievre pitched—
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
—with some accommodations to draw a box around what the parliamentary—
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
No. The point of order is a request that he read it smoothly a second time so that we can track—
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We will get him to read it again.
We will let you finish first, Sean, and then come back to read it slowly again.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Certainly. Of course, before I finish my minor submission and read it again, I would be quite happy to give members an opportunity to review it if the clerk could circulate this version of it.
Substantially, I was going to say, it's very similar to Mr. Poilievre's motion yesterday. The only significant change from our perspective was drawing a bit of a box around what the law clerk will do with the documents, but I think the motion explains it in a rather straightforward way.
I will read it once more for the benefit of members.
It reads: That the committee temporarily set aside the motion relating to the point of privilege put forward by the Member for Carleton on October 8, 2020, and the subsequent subamendments moved by the Member for Calgary Rocky Ridge and the Member for Kingston and the Islands, and that the committee adopt all evidence heard in the First Session of the 43rd Parliament during the committee’s study on “Government Spending, WE and the Canada Student Service Grant”; and that the committee order that by November 24, 2020, the government provide the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel with all documents as originally requested in the July 7, 2020 motion moved by the Member for New Westminster-Burnaby, without any redaction, omission or exclusion except as would be justified in sections and subsections 69(1) through 69(3)(b)(ii) of the Access to Information Act, that the information remain in the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel and be used exclusively by him to determine the government’s compliance or non-compliance with the July 7, 2020 motion, and that the Clerk of the Privy Council and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner appear no later than November 25, 2020 to discuss “cabinet confidence” exclusions to public disclosures, and that the law clerk testify before the committee regarding documents received from the government pursuant to this motion to provide his views on the government’s compliance or non-compliance with the July 7 motion.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I have a point of order. It's just a quick question.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Fraser read that extremely fast again. I'm wondering how the interpreters are doing because I can hardly imagine that was easy to translate so that anybody would know what's going on in French.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Fraser, is it possible to send a copy of that text to the clerk? Then the clerk can send it to members, and we will take a few minutes to read it.
Mr. Ste-Marie, go ahead.
November 19th, 2020 / 3:40 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to make sure that the final motion will be distributed only when it has been translated into French.
3:40 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
I would like the motion to be sent to us by email when it has been translated.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Yes, I think I had the original motion and there aren't many changes to it.
Maybe we'll suspend for 10 minutes. Mr. Fraser, can you send the copy you have to the clerk?
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
I'll send a copy to the clerk of the English version that I have. I will send a copy of the nearly identical motion with the changes highlighted so both official languages are there to start.
The clerk may have to interpret just a few of the words—Pierre, it's what you've added—and then I'd suggest that we resume from this suspension as soon as the clerk circulates the text of the motion in both official languages.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
I'm sorry; I have one more point of order. I know this is extremely difficult for those who are working in French when these kinds of changes are made. The Liberals have said over and over how committed they are to ensuring that French is going to be top of mind.
I'm a bit stumped why on earth we are not coming here with proper French translation. We saw that already this morning with Mr. Thériault in the justice committee. They were trying to force him to vote on an English amendment.
I wonder if we—
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Just to interrupt, Mrs. Jansen, Mr. Fraser has sent copies of the full motion in both French and English—
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
No, it's the one that he and Mr. Poilievre were talking about. Mr. Poilievre made a couple of changes, adding “compliance or non-compliance” in a couple of areas, so it's a small amendment. I think he also added in the Ethics Commissioner in another section of the motion. Most of it is in both official languages.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Which I appreciate, yes.... But, again, we had the same thing this morning, where they say most of it is in French. “Most” is not the entire thing.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
What I'm saying is that Mr. Fraser did everything he could in both official languages, and then in the discussion that he and Mr. Poilievre had, where they made a little change, that is the only part that is not translated. I don't want the wrong opinion to go out on here. It's just a couple of minor changes that were related to the last-minute discussions.
Mr. Julian.