Government Operations Committee on April 1st, 2008

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

No, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Holland, one more question?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Madam Chair, this will be very quick--

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Chair, I just want to be more impartial. You're giving people extended time. You're giving them an extra amount of time.

Madam Chair, I will take my time. It's my turn--

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Holland, just a moment, please.

Mr. Moore had said he didn't want to take his turn, but now he's decided he wants to take it. I asked him.

Take it. I'm not going to go past you. Go ahead and ask your question.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

As I say, as we have one minute left because the minister is out of time, I want to go back again. Charlie Angus mentioned your conversations with the City of Ottawa in the fall of 2006 and what Réjean Chartrand mentioned when he made his presentation to Ottawa city council on October 11. He said the contract was never intended to be viewed by the federal government and the fact that the federal government saw it threw him off.

I think the people who are not only your constituents but taxpayers across the country.... Taxpayers in Port Moody send money to Ottawa that goes into the federal treasury for projects the federal government has decided, through a myriad of avenues, are a priority, so my constituents and my taxpayers are on the line. Why would they be shocked and why would he be saying the federal government shouldn't even have viewed these contracts and shouldn't have had any access to how the money was going to be spent by my constituents?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I couldn't get a straight answer with respect to when the deadline was and what the penalties would be if it wasn't passed by October 1, October 4, October 5, and October 15, so I simply asked to see the contract as part of my due diligence to discover whether and what the deadline and the penalties would be.

Obviously they didn't expect me to look at the contract, because the moment I did, it was quite evident, and it was confirmed by lawyers, that my suspicions were true, that I had been misled.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Minister, we appreciate your coming to this committee and giving us the 15 extra minutes. Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Holland has one more short question.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Just one question, Minister, and thank you for your time.

It wasn't just the city that said there would be major implications to delaying the contract. Contradicting your own version and take on the contract, it was also Siemens. I'll table with this committee a document dated Tuesday, October 3, 2006, wherein Siemens details the key messages of a meeting they had with you when they detailed the major cost implications of a delay.

But I want to know specifically what rights you or the federal government had under the contract to invoke the clause 6.1.7, which is the one you use. What rights did you or the federal government have to use that clause to extend the closing dates for the contract between the City of Ottawa and Siemens?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

It explicitly stated a 60-day delay could be invoked--

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

But what rights did you or the federal government--

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I never suggested we did.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

But what rights do you or the federal government have?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I never suggested we had any rights in that respect.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

So you had no rights.

Okay, thank you.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you very much.

We'll break for five minutes and then we'll return to deal with other issues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I would like to reconvene the meeting, if the members would please take their seats as we continue on this particular....

Yes, Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

On a point of order, I want to understand what happened with the one hour. When we say “one meeting”, my understanding is that a meeting is two hours. Where did this one hour come from?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We were advised—the clerk was advised two weeks ago—that Mr. Baird might have just one hour to give, but that was the extent of it. The motion itself just said for one meeting. There was nothing on our part saying it was just one hour. We were just told it was—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Maybe what I would suggest, then, just as a point of clarification for the committee in the future, is that when we schedule these, we create a definition for what a meeting is. My understanding of a meeting would be a full two-hour meeting. I think what we have to do is have a common understanding of what language means.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Normally the understanding is that when a minister comes before the committee, it is to be for the full meeting, but many times the ministers are busy, and they'll advise us that they can only have one hour. Sometimes it stretches on, but this is—

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Yes, and I'm not trying to go back to this point. I'm just talking about going forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

That's one of the challenges.