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.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
--and if they have a plan of action that is not a repetition of the budget document, then they can present that plan of action to us. If it's repeating the same old, same old, we do not need it. Then PCO will stick with one hour on estimates and PWGSC can stick with one hour on estimates.
Linda did a good job of teaching us how estimates are read. If we want to go through a refresher course on that, I can keep an extra day, half an hour, for everybody to come to see the estimates so you can ask legitimate questions if that's required. We can do that.
So are we in agreement with PCO and PWGSC coming on May 10?
4:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
4:30 p.m.
The Clerk
I just want to mention you have Minister Ambrose for Wednesday. I will try to have her for Monday, but.... I'm such a modest servant, I don't know if it's going to be possible.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
We will try that.
On the 26th, we had agreed to get Mr. Jim Wright, and we can have one more witness that day.
Ms. Coady, you had suggested the PBO and Corrections.
Are there any problems there?
Yes, Mr. Martin.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I think if we're on the green infrastructure program study--which is really the Jaffer study, let's face it--we should have another witness, another one of Mr. Jaffer's clients, perhaps Mr. Harvey. I think Mr. Harvey from HD Retail is probably the most interesting one to us. He's the one who says that Jaffer said he could get him a $5-million loan at 2% interest payable only if the company returns to profit.
I think we should keep it in the thematic. It would be very difficult for us to change hats after an hour of questioning on the Jaffer affair with Mr. Wright and then go into the PBO. I think we should use that second hour for another witness dealing with the Jaffer affair, and I think it should be Mr. Harvey.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
I'm certainly in concurrence with my colleague on that, as long as we can then move PBO and Corrections to the 31st so we can conclude that.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Okay.
Mr. Wright has agreed to come on the 26th, and we can ask the clerk to call Mr. Ian Harvey for the 26th.
Is everybody in agreement?
4:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Yes.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I'd like to ask who it is that wants PBO and Corrections. I can't remember who asked for that study.
Madame Bourgeois? I see.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Yes.
I'm not as interested in that, frankly. With all due respect, if there was anything that I could see us pushing back, I think that would be it.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Just on that point, I think Madam Hall Findlay also had some requests in that area as well. It's mostly because we know that Corrections has gone up in terms of costs quite significantly—I think, if memory serves me correctly, from $200 million to billions. And I think there were a lot of questions and concerns around the budget freeze and the impact of some of these changes to legislation that we are doing and the costs and that the Parliamentary Budget Officer was going to bring forward a report on this. And I know that Madame Bourgeois was quite concerned about this as well.
That was what we were discussing prior to.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
May I give some inside information? The report of the PBO is not out yet, and Mr. Martin is right in his suggestion that if we are going through this green technology study and if we could just finish it off, it would be better to get them.
If, Mr. Nadeau, you are in agreement, we could go that route.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Madam Chair, those really are two important topics. The Parliamentary Budget Officer could come later, when he has all the tools in hand. That could be at the end of June or when Parliament resumes, at the end of September—if there is no prorogation. We could also address the Correctional Service issue at some other time.
We talked a little earlier about the maintenance work of buildings. Since an engineer has already come to talk to us, we should close this file soon. We saw one side of the coin; we could see the other. It would be the right balance.
To come back to what Mr. Martin and Ms. Coady were saying, we can use their points another time, for other studies. Let us think of the green energy issue and the scandal that has hit and has so tarnished politicians. We could then finish working on the issue of contracts, in organizing potential meetings.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I just wanted to ask the clerk about the 31st. Do we have confirmation that SNC-Lavalin will be attending as well as Public Works? As of yet, were you able to confirm that? I think that was what we had learned through the last meeting.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
We had confirmation from Public Works and Government Services and SNC-Lavalin, but they can be moved at the committee's will. They can be moved because it is the committee that discusses—
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I appreciate that. I just wanted to fully understand if they had confirmed that they were available. So that is helpful.
I'm just looking here, and if they are confirmed for the 31st, my fear is that we'll come back to the next meeting and all of a sudden there will be several people who can't come. When we have confirmed witnesses, I think it's sometimes better to leave them confirmed and then schedule other people into times when we don't have people confirmed already.
So I am happy either way, but the one thing that I do know--I am just making a helpful suggestion--is that when I look at the number of meetings in the month of June, we have one, two, three, four, possibly five or maybe six meetings, and several issues that still have to be addressed.
There were two things that we had left in terms of the case studies for the budget freeze. One was the PBO and the Correctional Services. We also had Public Works, and I believe maybe the Information Commissioner. I am wondering if there is a possibility that we could couple up on a couple of those meetings, making them one-hour meetings, to address each of those departments so that we might be able to get through that study before the end of June and be able to bring forward a report.
My fear is that if we don't put forward some type of a report by the end of June, this becomes old and it becomes outdated, and before we know, we are in a situation where we have reports that are left dragging. So I am just wondering if there is a possibility that we can couple up similar types of studies at the same one-hour or two-hour meeting and give one hour to each witness or case study.