Government Operations Committee on March 20th, 2007

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Tell us which one it is, yes.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

The motion I'll move first is:

that the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates undertake a study of the activities of the Public Appointments Commission's Secretariat since its creation by Order in Council No. 2006-0223 on April 21, 2006; and

that the committee study whether the minister responsible has ensured that the secretariat has been in compliance with clause 227 of Bill C-2, the Federal Accountability Act; and

that the minister responsible for the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat be invited to appear before the committee to report on the activities of the secretariat.

I so move.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Is there debate?

Madam Nash.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

We've been waiting for the implementation of Bill C-2. Then we learned that this secretariat has been up and running, but we have no information about the secretariat. It's my understanding that the Prime Minister presides over the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat. That was the order in council from April 21, 2006. Possibly that's changed; I don't know. But if he's still responsible, or whoever is responsible, we would like to have them come and appear before this committee to report on the activities of the secretariat.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

All those in favour please signify.

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

Have you called for the vote, Ms. Nash?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

No, but no one had raised their hand.

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

I had, Madam Chair.

First of all, could you please tell me, Ms. Nash—I do not have a copy of the text—what clause 227 states?

Second, there is reference to the minister responsible. Is that the Prime Minister? I want things to be very clear.

Third, you are asking that we study the activities of the commission. Later, in your second motion you say you want to look at the report of the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat with respect to specific appointments. I want to make sure I understand correctly.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

First of all, clause 227 is about the appointments under the Federal Accountability Act.

The second question, I think, was around which minister is responsible. I have a copy of an order in council from April 21, 2006, which says: “Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, hereby orders that the Prime Minister shall preside over the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat.”

Now, there may be something further from that, but that was an order in council when the secretariat was established.

I'm sorry, what was your third question, Madame Thibault?

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

You answered my question about clause 227. That's good.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Yes.

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

You said that it was the Prime Minister, to the best of your knowledge.

I asked you a question about the connection between this motion and the other one. This one refers to studying the activities of the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat, and later, you want to study the Secretariat's report with respect to specific appointments.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Yes, they are two different things.

First, I would like to know what the secretariat has been up to in general, what their activities are, who's working there, and what the cost has been--all of the activities of the secretariat that we would normally have reported to this committee. Secondly, I'd like to know more specifically about appointments that they have been making.

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

May I have the floor again, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Please proceed.

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

Ms. Nash, my colleague and I will agree to a study of the commission's activities, to have someone come in—I believe they have appointed an executive director—and that we do that in good faith. However, we are not in favour of having the Minister responsible, the Prime Minister, appear before the committee. If you correct your motion to have us undertake a study, we will have no objection, but having the Prime Minister come... If you remove that part of the motion, there will be no problem; if not, we will be voting against the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

It is your turn, Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Very quickly, I would point out that we already did have ministers before the committee to discuss implementation of the Accountability Act, so I'm not sure why we would need to do it again. It doesn't particularly bother us, because we're implementing the Accountability Act at the pace that was anticipated by the action plan, and that action plan was adopted by an all-party committee during the proceedings on the act itself. So implementation, as far as we're concerned, is perfectly on track, and we're more than happy to have a discussion on that, but it's already happened, so I'm not sure it merits a lot more time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

You may have misunderstood. This is, from what I take from the motion, a study of the activities of the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat since its creation. That we haven't dealt with.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Those activities have largely been implementation, to be honest. The Public Appointments Commission is in the process of being implemented. There's a secretariat that's carrying out that implementation, so that was actually discussed when ministers came before the committee. I don't expect that a whole lot has changed, but we'll see what the committee decides.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

If there's no problem, then why are we doing it?

Is there any other debate on the motion?

Are you proposing an amendment to the motion, Madame Thibault?

Are you moving an amendment to the motion?

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

My colleague and I would agree if the motion ended after the word “2006”. That would shorten the motion considerably, of course. In both the French and English versions the motion would end after “2006”.

It is quite simple, we are suggesting that we hear from someone and that we find out what the Secretariat has been doing since it came into being. Ms. Nash, I want to be as friendly as possible; I do not want to prevent us from doing that. If, after we hear from someone, we realize that we are dissatisfied with all sorts of things and that we should pursue our study, we will do that, and we will review the various clauses. But let us start by determining whether there is something that needs to be reviewed. That is the purpose of my amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

You have the floor, Ms. Nash.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I would suggest that part of our study should be to ensure that there is compliance with Bill C-2. I understand your point about the minister responsible, but is there an objection to ensuring that there is compliance with Bill C-2, because surely that--

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

My understanding is that the amendment of Madame Thibault speaks to the fact that you would say something like, “That the committee study whether the director has ensured that the secretariat has been in compliance with clause 227”, because what we're asking is more to speak to the director, to start off with, to find out what's been going on there. Okay?

That's the nature of the amendment. Am I right, Madame Thibault?