Government Operations Committee on Feb. 3rd, 2009

[An hon. member]

It is a matter of principle.

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

It is always a matter of principle for me. I have no choice.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

This particular provision is pretty much bedrock around here now. The clerk is not going to act in only one language, and members will take note that if a witness happens to be here, and a witness happens to put a document on the desk of a member, that's acceptable. It's free speech, still, and witnesses can do what they want to do in distributing their documents. But the clerk must operate in both official languages.

We have had Mr. Roy move the motion.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

The next motion concerns working meals: that the clerk of the committee be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees. That's a routine motion.

Mr. Roy moves that motion.

Is there discussion?

Go ahead, Mr. Anders.

[Rob Anders, Conservative, Calgary West, AB]

I know that Mr. Brown and I share sentiments on this. If we will be working through lunches--and the committee has been set to run from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.--I would hope that we see fit to provide a lunch. I know that on some previous committees, we've actually had some discretion with regard to what we wish to see. This may not be the time to raise this point, but I just want to get that on the table, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

All right.

Let's adopt the motion, as is. Mr. Anders had some comments that pertain to quantity and quality, and we can speak to those later, as the need arises.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

The next subject is witness expenses. It looks like this motion is identical. Both columns are the same. You're meticulous in your duplication.

Mr. Anders has moved this motion.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

The next motion concerns staff at in camera meetings. Here there is a difference in the two columns. Can we have a mover?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I'd like to move the clause that was adopted in the last Parliament. We found, I think in all parties, that it helped facilitate members from our respective whips' offices coming in during those meetings, or in the event, especially with the New Democratic Party or parties with fewer members, that sometimes it was necessary to have somebody in from the whip's office. We made arrangements in the last Parliament to respect that situation. I think it's reasonable to do it in this Parliament as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Thank you. It's been moved.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

We now move to motion H, in camera meeting transcripts. It's the same in both columns. The mover is Mr. McTeague.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Next is notice of motion. The previous committee selected a 48-hour notice period, which your chair is pretty accustomed to.

Who would want to move that?

Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Chair, I don't really want to move that, in that I don't agree there should be 48 hours' notice. I'd like it to be one day.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Okay. Let's get something moved so we can debate it. Mr. Warkentin is going to move the 48 hours' notice.

Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I know that in the last Parliament this committee had 48 hours' notice, but in fact that's a change from the status quo.

I was a member of this committee when it was first structured. We reduced it to one day's notice, to 24 hours, I believe, the reason being that we found it far more conducive to meeting the mandate of the committee if we could not risk losing one meeting. I'm not explaining this well, but if one of the parties had good reason to want an issue dealt with at the Thursday meeting and it was Wednesday noon, the 48 hours' notice meant they would have to wait to the following Tuesday to have something dealt with.

Given the rapidity of events in a minority Parliament, and given the mandate of this particular committee, which may be dealing with the efficacy of public spending associated with the stimulus package, I think it would be useful for the committee to change 48 hours to 24 hours. That is an amendment I would recommend.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Okay. Without formally amending the motion, we can just continue debate.

I have Mr. Warkentin and Mr. Anders on the list.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

In this committee, we have adopted 48 hours. In the last Parliament, it seemed to work well. It usually was the case that if somebody wanted to bring a substantive motion to be debated immediately, it was on the issue currently being considered by the committee. We do have provisions within this current order stating that if it is a substantive motion relating to the business under consideration by the committee at the time, we can move with way less time.

I think 48 hours' notice provides every member of the committee some time to at least be prepared for issues that come forward. I think the 48 hours is reasonable in terms of being prepared, but we do have this special provision that if in fact something comes up in committee from a witness, or different things, we can proceed almost immediately because of the provision in this motion. But if we're going to be moving on to something that's entirely new, I think it's reasonable to have 48 hours for preparation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Mr. Anders.

[Rob Anders, Conservative, Calgary West, AB]

Mr. Chair, given the fact that this committee, as far as I understand it, meets on Tuesdays and Thursdays, 48 hours' notice is perfectly reasonable. Given the fact that we meet only every second day, that being the structure, I'm certainly of the opinion—and I've served 12 years on committees--that I like to have the business dealt with in the regular business hours. I'm not a fan of all sorts of subcommittee meetings, or steering meetings, or everything else. We've had the time set aside, and I think that's the time to deal with these things. Anything that facilitates other silliness, if I may, is extraneous to the purpose here.

I prefer the 48 hours. All the other committees go with that. It makes sense. It's the standard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Mr. McTeague.

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Mr. Chair, I find myself agreeing with Mr. Anders. I do believe we at least need two evenings. This has been the tried and the true in other committees. I've worked on committees that have had 24 hours. They're very difficult, in that you can see the production of motions ad infinitum, which can have the intended effect, I'm sure, of slowing down the work of the committee or extending it. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I do think we need a bit of time to pull back.

I would support the status quo of 48 hours.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Madame Bourgeois.

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

I would just like some clarifications, Mr. Chair. Forty-eight hours is really two days, is it not? We are not talking about hours here and there, or half days, but two real days.

I think it is a relevant question. I would like to have it explained.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

You're inquiring as to what exactly is 48 hours. I'm just going to check with the clerk to make sure there aren't any practices here. Normally the words mean what they say, but I'll just check with the clerk.

All right, so it doesn't mean what it says. The practice is, for the motion, that the deadline would be 5 o'clock on the second day. I'm sorry, it's not 5 o'clock, it's somewhere around the end of the business day, two days before the motion would come up. So it's not technically 48 hours. It could be 40 hours, it could be 39 hours, but it is, as the clerk points out to me, two sleeps, two nights.

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

I think it is extremely important to point that out.