Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 13th, 2007

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chairman, I would think if Mr. Obhrai can get beyond his initial reaction, that referring to “responsible minister” with an “s” after it allows a lot of latitude for whoever it is who is the most appropriate person to come before the committee, and if the contention of Mr. Obhrai is that nobody less than the Prime Minister can account for this because it was a cabinet decision, then we'll act accordingly. We'll interpret that the intention of your objection is that there are no ministers, plural, who can be asked to account for this, so by deduction then the Prime Minister could be invited, but I don't really think that's your point, is it?

We want to get at how and why the decision was made and the possibility that some alternate views could actually change a decision that has enormous impact on the lives of a lot of people.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I don't want to take away from the spirit of the motion, but would it answer the problem if we say “That the committee invite senior officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade to explain” — or something to that effect — the decision or the rationale or whatever else?

We're saying here who's responsible. Maybe we're worrying —

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I have no problem with this. My intent is to explain the rationale, to look at the cost implications and the implications generally. So if in fact Mr. Obhrai in the spirit of cooperation is willing to accept that, I have no difficulty with it. I simply want to know what led to this decision. Clearly someone provided advice. With all due respect to members of the cabinet or to the minister, I don't think somebody woke up one morning and said we're going to close four consulates. They obviously received advice. I'd like to know what the rationale was and we can go from there. And I don't expect it to take a lot of time, but I would like to have the appropriate information.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Obhrai.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

On a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Point of order.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Chairman, the committee can invite who they want.

There was a call by a member that this motion is not in order. Everyone else seems to disagree. I think you should rule whether it's in order or not, and we should get on with it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We're trying. We've already made one friendly amendment.

[Raymond Bonin, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

You can't amend it unless you accept it as an acceptable motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We would do that. What we're trying to do is find the right people to invite. At the present time we're saying the people responsible for the decision come to the committee, and then they say this was a cabinet decision or this was a government decision and this is why we're carrying it out — this is the rationale. Maybe that's acceptable.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

No. The problem is very simple. The way the motion is amended, it says now “the department officials”. They can come over here and make one statement and say we were not responsible for the decision, end of story, because your motion is saying “those responsible”. That's why I'm saying this is out of order, you see, one statement--

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

The motion is in order, and whether or not it's the best wordsmithing that could have been done is beside the point.

I'm sure we can give an invitation to someone and see whether or not they are willing to appear before the committee.

Mr. Goldring.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

I can give you all the rationale you want. I have the rationale right here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll come back to it.

Mr. Goldring.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

I'm sure there are many reasons that could be the rationale, such as cost savings, among other things. But could we not take an alternative step and ask for a written rationale from them on the reasoning for it?

We do this time and again with many ministers on many other issues and situations. Would it not be an alternate thing to go for a written reason on why they made this change?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Wilfert, have you made a request to the minister? Have you asked the department for the rationale?

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes. We even asked the department if they could provide us with the appropriate individuals to call to the committee. We were refused. We were refused the names.

Therefore, given the implications for Canada in this field, I think it's incumbent that we call them before the committee. This is not going to be a two-day or three-day operation. There will be one day to get the information, and members of committee can then decide what they'd like to do, if anything.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

You were refused.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes, I was refused. I could give you a litany of the times, as a critic, I've been refused by the foreign affairs department in terms of getting information from the department, but that's a different story.

If you want to say it's the person responsible for the decision or the person who was involved in the process of coming to this conclusion, I don't care. I think essentially it's simply to get these people here and to get the information before committee.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

Mr. Chairman, as a follow-up, could we as a committee not have a request from the committee for a written response to the request one more time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, we could, but the motion is here today and that's not what the motion is asking for. It certainly would have been another alternative.

[Peter Goldring, Conservative, Edmonton East, AB]

We have to look at the best use of our resources.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Each member has the opportunity to bring forward a motion. He has obviously thought about that, but it's not what he's asking for. It's why we have a motion here.

Mr. Obhrai, do you have a comment?

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Yes, I certainly do.

You want to rule the motion in order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

The motion is in order.