Evidence of meeting #40 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 sauvé.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think we're asking for and trying to compel information that I'm not sure is within our purview to do. We're asking for the OPP and possibly the provincial Government of Ontario to provide us with information that they've agreed to supply to the Government of Canada. But I'm not sure we have the authority to compel a third party to provide confidential information, if they so deem, to our committee.
I'd ask that this be considered as well.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
I'll sum it up this way.
Again what you see is the opposition saying one thing here and then another thing when they get out in public.
I'll quote:
Thursday, Regan said through a spokesperson: “It's still not good enough. I'm concerned about what they are still hiding....”
That, to me, is indicative of somebody who's suggesting that the Ontario Provincial Police are trying to hide something. Of course, as somebody who's extraordinarily proud of my force, a force that was deemed to have information prepared by December 1, I would never support a motion the basis of which is trying to suggest that one of the most credible and professional forces in the country is somehow corrupt.
Again, if the opposition would simply be honest with what it is they're trying to allege, that would be one thing. But it's quite clear that what they're trying to say here is that the OPP is trying to hide something and that in so doing they are a corrupt force.
It's a shame that the Liberal Party can't, just once, stand with our men and women in law enforcement. They have to continuously try to score extraordinarily cheap political points by accusing the force of corruption simply because they lost a byelection in Vaughan, which they had held for 22 years.
It's a pretty sad day when a police force is brought into a political fight.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any other commentary?
Those in favour of the motion?
Those opposed?
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
I rule in favour of the motion. It's well within the committee's authority to ask for this document, independent of whether it has to be filed with the government, independent of any other arrangements.
Having the motion passed, I will instruct the clerk to seek to get the information tomorrow.
Thank you.
Next.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We heard, during testimony previously, from Mr. Glouberman. He said that he, and I guess Ms. Gersovitz, prepared “a list of our concerns on that bid”. He was referring to the Sauvé bid.
Mr. Glouberman, by the way, also said, talking about the nature of the cocktail that he went to, the following:
...I also saw it as an opportunity to meet with the minister and impress upon him the importance of the project and that the project remains a priority within the government.
So he was there also to talk about business and about contracts and so forth, as we see from his testimony.
But the key point for me is this. I move that we ask the Department of Public Works to provide us with the list that was prepared by Mr. Glouberman and his associate, which he referred to in testimony: his list of concerns in relation to the bid of Mr. Sauvé.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
But is it...matters that are arising out of the business that we were dealing with?
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
I think it is, actually; we actually dealt with....
I'm satisfied that the motion is properly before the committee.
Is there any debate or discussion?
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Oh, boy, we're down to two minutes to talk about all of the hard work our analyst, Édison Roy-César, has done. This was on the study with respect to budget freezes.
I don't really expect that we'll get into any substantive discussion, colleagues, but the analyst and the clerk and your chair do need some guidance as to how we're going to proceed.
I suppose we should go back in camera; I appreciate that.
[Proceedings continue in camera]