Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 17th, 2022

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Mr. Chair, could I just make a suggestion?

On that, she's extremely influential in human rights areas as well as in relation to refugees. I'm wondering if we could include the members of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights who are not part of this committee and formally invite them. You might even consider talking to the chair of the immigration committee, as she may be meeting with the immigration committee informally as well.

I tend to think that if we have four or five of us here, we'll be doing well. People are so busy. If we considered opening it up to those two groups, it may be a good conversation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

It's an excellent point, Mr. Oliphant.

I'm not aware of whether she has reached out to those committees as well or whether she would prefer to have separate meetings with separate committees. If not, that's certainly something we would encourage to make sure we maximize and leverage the time we have with her.

Mr. Bergeron.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Mr. Chair, first, I agree completely with Mr. Oliphant's comment.

Second, I know that we've already been sent the information. However, I assume that you'll confirm the time for us, so that we can let the clerk know whether we'll be there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Yes, absolutely, I will. Thank you.

Finally, colleagues, the clerk has received confirmation that Ministers Joly and Sajjan are available to appear before the committee on March 3. The clerk is currently working out the details with the department, and as a result of these appearances, I would propose that the first meeting on vaccine equity be shifted to February 28.

I think there was interest on the part of the committee to start this study before the March recess. The briefing on the situation in Xinjiang will then shift to after the break weeks in March.

Are there any views on this?

Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Chair, did you say Ministers Joly and Sajjan are both to appear on the 3rd? That's not what the committee had requested. We had requested to hear from each minister for a period of two hours separately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Understood.

I'm just receiving information that they are both available on the 3rd.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I see. Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Of course, it's in the hands of the committee to act on that information.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Okay.

I'll defer to Marty.

I am underlining that it's important that we hear from each minister separately for two hours.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Madam Clerk, on the logistics of this, is there anything you wish to add at the moment?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Erica Pereira]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The department has confirmed that Minister Joly would be available for the first hour and Minister Sajjan for the second hour. I did put out the request as instructed by the committee, and that is what was given back to me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Okay.

Is there any other discussion on this?

Mr. Morantz, go ahead, please.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

It was the agreement of the committee that we wanted to meet for two hours.

Can we get back to them? Are we stuck with this or how does this work?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Procedurally, Madam Clerk, I believe it's the will of the committee to respond to this information and to make other preferences known. There is also a coordination task that has to happen and it's usually done through the office of the clerk.

Procedurally, what options are at the committee's disposal?

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If the committee wishes, I can certainly go back to the department.

Procedurally, there is nothing that the committee can do to compel a minister to appear. We are largely at the mercy of their schedule.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

I think you should get back to them and re-express the committee's desire to have each of them separately for two hours and see if they can make time available in their busy schedules.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Morantz.

Are there any other comments from members?

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would say that the precedent has been, often, to have the two ministers at the same meeting. In HUMA, you can have as many as five or six ministers in two hours, so I don't think it's unreasonable. I don't think there's consensus necessarily that we want to push that.

If the clerk would go back and say that the committee is interested in having each of them for two hours, we can do that, but I am quite happy to have each of them for one hour, which would be normal. Often, for estimates you have a minister for one hour and officials for the second hour. I have been doing this for nine years, and it is normal procedure to have a minister for one hour followed by officials for any given visit. Having a minister for two hours is highly unusual.

I would say that this is within the norms of how parliamentary committees have worked over the last nine years that I've been involved with them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Mr. Oliphant.

I'm not sure if there are other hands from the room.

I have Mr. Genuis, whose hand is raised virtually.

Are there any interventions from the floor and the room in addition to Mr. Oliphant's?

Okay.

Mr. Genuis, go ahead, please.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Respectfully, I would say that the parliamentary secretary naturally has more access to the ministers than other members of the committee do, but the preference to have the ministers for two hours each was expressed clearly, especially by those of us who don't have the same access he does.

This has been the past practice of this committee and it certainly has been the practice of this committee for as long as I've been a member of it. I think this reflects the fact that foreign affairs and international development are critically important and distinct areas, and each of them, given the breadth of issues we're dealing with on the table, requires a fulsome examination.

This was the agreement of the committee previously. There was no objection when this issue was previously raised. It was already agreed to by the committee.

My suggestion would be that we continue to advance what was the unanimous position of the committee as was agreed upon at the time. Again, that aligns with past practice.

I don't think we need to remake the decision, because we already made that decision previously. We continue to be of that mind, and want to see that continue to go forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Mr. Genuis, thank you.

Just for guidance, the committee then potentially faces the question of whether they would want to reject the availability of one hour altogether or ask for a second hour. It's clear what the committee decided in the form of its previous motion, but let's hear from Dr. Fry and then Mr. Bergeron.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

We've heard from the clerk that we do not have any instruments or tools to compel a minister to come at a particular time or for two hours. I like to believe that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I think we should send back a letter saying that we would really prefer—the committee unanimously would prefer—two hours with each minister, but if it's not possible, I think a bird in the hand is going to be something we should go with, which is one hour with the minister and one hour with the bureaucrats of that minister in two separate meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Dr. Fry.

Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Then it will be Mr. Ehsassi's turn.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

On that note, Mr. Chair, I think that the proposal is quite reasonable. It's a matter of approaching the ministers again and reminding them of what the committee wanted, and then making adjustments based on their response. I think that the ministers are showing signs of openness, but it isn't enough for us. It's a matter of expressing it to them and seeing how they respond, quite simply.

That said, I understand that this may not be customary, at least not in the Ottawa Parliament. I sat in a parliament where ministers appeared before committees much more often and for longer periods in some cases. I still have some difficulty adjusting to this practice, in Ottawa, where ministers aren't available to parliamentarians. I understand that we must ultimately defer to their schedule. However, I think that it's only fair that we let them know what we wanted in the first place and adjust accordingly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

Mr. Ehsassi, you have the floor.

I have Mr. Ehsassi, please.