Government Operations Committee on Oct. 19th, 2006

[Voices]

Oh, oh.

[Meredith Egan]

I'll certainly provide you with that information.

It's important to know things seem to be getting better, as the other gentlemen noted. The announcement yesterday was a good sign for us. If the dialogue opens up again and it is true consultation, which I think it should be, then we can head in the right direction. We're seeing some very positive signs coming out of the ministries.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you very much.

Now to the committee, we have the report of the subcommittee on agenda and procedure of this committee, and we'd like to know whether you're prepared to accept this.

I'll ask Mr. Kramp to say a few words. Mr. Kramp.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

I'd like to seek unanimous consent from my colleagues to not have this, and I'll give you a couple of reasons why.

This committee's time is precious, and my concern is duplication, duplication due to a number of events that have happened and are happening. On four occasions we've done the same thing all over again, albeit it in different situations.

On this matter to come before the committee on the second report, number one, we've already had the Treasury Board president here, who left with time left and no further questions for him. Number two, we've had significant--

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

[Inaudible--Editor].

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

He's talking about...

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

The President of the Treasury Board left--

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Madam Chair, I don't mean to cut you off, but I think that...

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Can I finish my statement, please?

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

A motion was agreed to that referred to two meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Okay, finish your statement.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you.

There are three other reasons, Madame Thibault, other than the fact that we left the Treasury Board president with no questions, and he was still sitting here, and I'm going, “Is there not more?”

The second point is that there has been significant discussion in the House on this issue.

The third point is that there is now a supply day on this issue in the House, going through the same thing again.

The fourth point is that we have this same issue before the other affected committees, all dealing with the same issue. We are simply duplicating what other committees are doing, what other time in the House is being spent, and I suggest we get back to our original purpose.

Why keep on flogging a horse? I recognize people want to make some political hay on a situation like this. Let's deal with the reality, think that over, and I would have hoped you'd have suggested that. If there is more pertinent direct information you honestly feel can be beneficial, I could understand that, but when it's already coming before the House now, on a full supply day with ample hours, what are we doing wasting our time at this point? That's my thought.

Why didn't we just...? Let's get on to the next and do our jobs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Ms. Thibault.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I listened to my colleague's argument. If we have an opposition day on this subject today, I think that shows how important it is, regardless of the party.

Mr. Kramp said that he had no further questions for the President of the Treasury Board. I would have had 25 more for Mr. Moloney or Mr. Baird. The latter obviously could decide to answer himself: he is the President of the Treasury Board and he is entitled to decide how he intends to testify before this committee. However, when he spoke, I felt it was a show. First, he criticized the previous government and then patted himself on the back saying how good his government was. It was entirely normal for him to do that; we could have expected it, but I would have liked to ask technical questions and to go into greater depth — as we will be able to do next week — in order to determine how that was done.

I'm going to talk about that today in my speech. We have one item concerning some $20 million in efficiency gains at Health Canada, which were targeted not by Health Canada, but by the Department of Finance or Treasury Board, I don't really know. Having regard to the problems that we've had with the Public Health Agency of Canada concerning things that have been cut, that were not done, regardless of the government in power...

Today we have the opportunity, since we've made the decision to hold two meetings... This afternoon, I'll go and listen to my colleagues as soon as I leave this committee meeting. I'm sure I won't get all the answers to my questions, but I'll nevertheless make my speech. If other colleagues are present, whether it be the parliamentary secretary or a Treasury Board representative, I'll be pleased to ask them questions. If that assists us in our work next week, when we study this matter in detail, well, so much the better.

We've tried to study it in a broad manner, but it's a fundamental subject, because it more particularly affects vulnerable people, minorities in Canada and services to the public, as well as the failure to cut fat from the federal administration.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Okay, can I call the question on this report?

(Motion agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I declare the meeting adjourned.