Government Operations Committee on May 31st, 2010

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

Actually we would kind of like to make a plea.

I think that renewable energy, and in our particular case solar, is such an important tool that the government can use it to solve a lot of tough problems that we have today, all the way from sustainable jobs to environmental problems to energy problems. I would really almost be sick to think an event like this could cause there to be difficulties in continuing good projects, good cooperation between industry and government.

I firmly believe that the only way we can solve some of these problems is to work together between industry and government. Every day on the television, when you see what's going on in the Gulf of Mexico, it reminds me of how important our job is.

I'd just like to leave with that. I hope everyone understands what we're trying to do is a good thing here. Don't let a few bad apples here spoil a very good idea.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you very much.

We are the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates and our job is to look at things from the terms of accountability and transparency. The programs are with a different department, and I'm sure they're paying attention to it as well.

So thank you very much for your intervention.

[Milfred Hammerbacher]

Thank you, Madam.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I'll suspend for 30 seconds, and we can go into business in public, and then there's a portion of it that has to go in camera.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Committee members, we are continuing our meeting in public.

Yes, Ms. Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Let me know when we get to my motion, so I--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Sure. Your notice of motion is on committee business, so go ahead, Ms. Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you very much. This has been around for a little while, and I'd like to have it dealt with.

This is similar to the other motions we've had. I didn't realize that when we talked about the ministry of industry we'd have to do a separate motion for Western Economic Diversification Canada and the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario. We've been dealing with a number of these issues, and I thought Industry covered that whole spectrum.

We did hear today about one particular program that may have gone through another one of these agencies, and I'd like to have it dealt with so we cover all our bases. So I'd ask that we deal with that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Committee members, if you were paying attention, this is a continuation of the production of documents. It's a clarification because Industry did not include that.

Are there any questions or concerns?

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I just want to.... Never mind. I found my clarification. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

If you have no arguments or debates, can we have a vote on this?

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

The second thing is we had asked for production of documents, and Mr. Gillani has produced a humongous amount of documents. I would like the committee's approval to let the analyst take that material, sift through it, and find the relevant documents; otherwise, this will take forever. There are 725 pages.

So if we could please get the committee to approve--

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

This is my wording. I would like the committee to give instructions to the analyst to look at the documents, to pick out the relevant documents, and then have them translated; otherwise it's going to be a humongous cost to the government.

Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I understand the issue when it comes to translation, and I appreciate that fully. What I would propose is an alternative, or maybe an additional clarification.

I believe it's important that every member who wants to have access to those documents has access to the documents. I understand the issue as it relates to translation; I think it's important that translation is done of the documents that the analysts deem necessary. But for the sake of full transparency, I believe it's important that every committee member has access to the full documentation. Even though it won't be available in both official languages because of the cost of translation, I would request that we make some accommodations for the translation, that we circulate those that are translated but give access to all members to the full compilation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I'll hear Ms. Mendes and then Monsieur Nadeau.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

After consultation, I would complement that with the fact that if we see a document we deem appropriate for the full committee to see, we ask for translation of that document. It's important that it is translated if necessary.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Chair, you will remember a story that started in this committee and ended up in the House of Commons. At one point, the Bloc wanted to be accommodating and it all blew up in our face. The government called us almost every possible name because we had accepted documents that were, for the most part, in English only. The moral of the story is that, if the documents are not translated, they are not sent to the committee. We will stick to that since it cannot be done in any other way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I will just clarify what I said. There are 725 pages of information that I have taken a look at, and some of it is not relevant to us at all. He has taken his kitchen sink and dumped it on us to go through. What I was seeking is the committee's approval to have the analyst look at the documents, pick out the relevant documents, and then have them translated.

However, if anybody wants to have access to the documents--and it has been done in the past--they are unilingual, and you can access them at the clerk's office only. There will be no official distribution of documents. I hope everybody understands that.

Does that help clarify...?

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

My understanding is that we are in Canada, not in Montana, and the official languages are French and English. In that case, if members can have access to it in the clerk's office, it still has to be translated because it serves the committee. Otherwise, in my opinion, we are violating the act and the very principle we have here.

At one point, as you will remember, we wanted to play nice and show our team spirit on the matter. But that made it to the news when the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services made a big deal in the House of Commons because we wanted to be accommodating. Perhaps it was not he who made the decision, but more likely his party. The fact is that no means no for us now. Everything has to be translated; otherwise, it cannot be made available to the committee, whether at the clerk's office, here or somewhere else.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Before this conversation gets out of hand, I want to clarify something. According to the rules and procedures, documents that come as exhibits and that have to be taken to the clerk's office do not have to be translated. We can choose what is relevant. Anything that is relevant will definitely be translated. There are no ifs or buts. If when you are reviewing it you think a document is relevant, it will be translated, but an exhibit does not have to be translated. That's what the clerk tells me.

So do we need to...?

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

It is either translated or it is not. If it is not translated, you have no right to accept it, period.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Okay. Ms. Mendes, and then Mr. Warkentin, and then Mr. Nadeau.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Madam Chair, let me address my colleagues. I don't think the point is not to have the documents in French; on the contrary, we want to have them translated in French. But, to avoid translating pages that are completely worthless and would be useless to the committee, we must let the analysts determine what is relevant. Not everything will be relevant in that pile of documents.

But it's a whole different kettle of fish if you say that no one can have access to the documents that are not translated.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

A point of order.