Yes.
Evidence of meeting #15 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clerk.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #15 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clerk.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Thank you.
The cameras have the right to be here. Nobody--nobody--invited them. I would like you to take that—
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
I think it's obvious that some people are catering to lenses. But I'll forget about that.
My point is that the original Liberal motion has been changed. The sequence has been changed. They seem to have lost interest in their original motion, which was to look at Public Works.
But the thing I wanted to say, too—
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
No, this is not. I'm just correcting you, because you're going on and on. I'd like to ensure that we have some work done today.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
It's difficult to make some comments when you're interrupted every 15 seconds.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
Do we have a chair who is going to debate every 15 seconds, or do I have the permission to speak?
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Sure. Go ahead, speak--but I am going to correct you when you say you have—
4 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
I'm just saying you're the chair of the committee, not the Liberal director.
4 p.m.
Liberal
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Go ahead, Mr. Brown. You have the floor. We'll listen to you, and hopefully you'll come up with some solid suggestions on committee business.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
If I'm given the permission to talk.
The first suggestion was on Public Works.
The second suggestion is that, for some reason, when we make suggestions in committee, it seems they're not being translated afterwards.
When Mr. Martin reads out 25 names, he shouldn't have to follow up with a written list. If he puts them on the record, we should take that and follow up on that.
The same thing today: if we're making suggestions about what the next meeting should be and we get a consensus, we shouldn't have to follow up with a written version.
I would have assumed that all 25 names would have been followed up on.
4 p.m.
An hon. member
We're masters of our own fate; I heard that.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
It's interesting; we had a number of very constructive meetings over the last little while, and certainly I hope we can move back into that type of environment. In terms of today, obviously we had some ideas as to who we could bring forward as witnesses, but we barely gave 48 hours' notice to these folks. It was less that 48 hours' notice, because by the time these folks were contacted, there was less than that much time. In this committee we can't even bring forward motions in less than 48 hours, never mind bringing whole lists of witnesses forward, so I understand why there may have been some reluctance on some folks' part.
I understand there are a number of people who have said they can show up at different times. This afternoon didn't work for them, but they can show up at different times, and we should entertain those witnesses on the dates that work for them, if, in fact, we want to hear from these folks. Let's accommodate the folks who have told us there is a timeframe in which they can show up to our committee.
We did get a response from Minister Raitt, which clearly stated that she nothing to contribute to the study, and she specified exactly why. She said that her office had searched for relevant records, and no records were found with regard to this. We are looking into an issue that actually doesn't fall inside her department. It falls into the transport department. The green fund is a specific fund, and it's not related to her department. She looked specifically for any type of engagement with this issue and found none, so certainly what we, as a committee, want to do is to find relevant witnesses who can contribute to this hearing.
Madam Chair, we do have a number of meetings that have been solidified. I would agree that if the committee determines that it wants to change what's on and what has been confirmed, we are certainly able to do that, but the 10th and the 12th have been designated for main estimates.
Mr. Snowdy has indicated that the 12th works for him to attend our meeting. So if we were to retain the 10th for main estimates, take at least half the meeting on the 12th for main estimates with the witnesses who have been secured, then if we needed an hour to speak with Mr. Snowdy, we could do that in the remainder of that meeting. I'm just thinking we may want to accommodate him when he's available. Then we have openings for witnesses on the 26th.
If we gave notice now to the witnesses who have been invited, there's a chance we'd have witnesses for that, but for the 31st we do have confirmed witnesses regarding SNC-Lavalin and Public Works. So that takes us to the end of May, and that probably gets us to a point we can work from. If things change over that period of time, we can then revisit where we're headed after that, but it looks as though we have confirmation of a significant number, with the exception of the 26th. We have Mr. Wright interested in coming that day. We could possibly fit another witness in there, but this doesn't have to be as complicated as what it seemed to have been at the beginning of the meeting.
Madam Chair, that's my suggestion. I'm hopeful that we can move through this and get some things solidified so that we don't run into the situation where we're inviting people 24 or 48 hours before we hope they'll show up. We know we'll never get witnesses if we don't give the decency of a significant lead time, especially for those people who don't live in Ottawa.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Mr. Warkentin, thank you.
I am consulting both ways, to ensure that I got everything correct.
Minister Raitt and Minister Paradis were invited on Thursday, so they were not given 48 hours. They were given more time, and they declined to come. But that's beside the point.
What we need to do is look at the calendar....
I'm sorry; go ahead, Monsieur Nadeau.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
I would love to speak, Madam Chair. Good afternoon again, everyone.
Clearly, if we look at the minutes from the last May 3 meeting, to see what we did, we notice that we submitted a long list of witnesses or potential players to meet. Twenty-two people are on the list: ministers, public servants, people in the industry, stakeholders and even the investigator. Before we left, two days ago, we suggested this list to the clerk hoping to get the best of all worlds and that important players would come to testify. Our colleague Mr. Szabo even suggested that we invite groups of witnesses. That is the first thing.
As members will recall, those who suggested the names to get the work going, are my colleagues on this side of the table, from the NDP and the Liberal Party—and I say that without partisanship, excluding myself. They suggested names so that we could do the appropriate work. Otherwise, we would be “spinning our wheels”, getting nowhere.
Today, I see that someone came prepared and provided us with a potential schedule on which we can vote. It is still up to the clerk to check the availability of those people, God bless us. Let us recognize the work that has been accomplished.
In light of this possibility, or rather with the hope of being able to adopt something to that effect—we will hear the proposals—whether it is a 24-hour notice or a three-week notice, it is better later than never. Anyway, time flies; it is almost June. In this context, someone can accept with a 24-hour notice and cancel last minute the same way they would if we gave them three weeks notice. So, I would really like us to move ahead and meet the people whose names were suggested.
Ms. Coady's comments bring nothing new to the table. We have all the names in the transcripts from the last meeting. That is where I wrote them all down; I just made a list. All that is left is to move forward with this project.
Madam Chair, I will conclude by addressing the issue of whether to have or not to have cameras here. I am referring to what Mr. Martin said, not long ago, about the fact that it is better to be always in open air than to be in camera from time to time. We must be as often as possible out in the open so that the people hear us, see us work and have access to the information that is being exchanged here between the parliamentarians they themselves have elected. It is even better if there are cameras too. We must not start to be paranoid. Paranoia would develop rather if we were always in camera and the work we do could not be seen.
So I am congratulating both Mr. Martin and Ms. Coady who brought work so that we can move forward. We should not get bogged down; time is precious.
Today, we are receiving no witnesses, but at least we get the chance to examine what kind of work we can do. We can lend our clerk a hand so that this schedule, which changes with each meeting, could finally be a little more consistent. This consistency will come as soon as we are ready to introduce clear and precise proposals. But that is what we are about to do. Everyone is having the same vision and is heading in the same direction. I do not think it is time to pull our hair out and try to find plots when there is work to be done.
Thank you, Madam Chair.