Government Operations Committee on Feb. 20th, 2020

[Raphaëlle Deraspe, Committee Researcher]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Raphaëlle Deraspe. I've been with the library for nine years now and on this particular committee for over five years.

We have some documentation on the variety of services that we can offer this committee.

We can provide you with assistance from the beginning to the end of your study. We even help you choose study topics. We also draft briefing notes, which you receive 24 hours before the start of the meeting.

Now I'll let my colleague, Mr. van den Berg, introduce himself and tell you a bit more about briefing notes.

[Ryan van den Berg, Analyst]

My name is Ryan van den Berg. I have been with the library for almost three years now, and this is the first time I've sat on a committee.

I would also like to add to my colleague's points that all the services we offer to the committee are impartial and confidential. You can feel free to come to us with any matters that you might have regarding the subject matter of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

[Ryan van den Berg, Analyst]

Mr. McCauley.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I'll just add for Ryan and Raphaëlle that we've had about eight other analysts over these five years, so we'll try to get to know you before you disappear like the others.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you, colleagues.

As for what I'm going to suggest since we don't have any work agenda yet, I was about to say that we will be having some business coming before this committee that we'll have to deal with immediately, most primarily the estimates, both the supplementaries and the mains. I expect we'll be dealing with those in very short order.

It has been the custom and convention of most committees, including this one, that should any government legislation be adopted in the House and referred to the appropriate committee, that takes precedence. In other words, even if we're in the middle of a study of some topic and a piece of government legislation comes forward, we drop the study and move to the government legislation immediately. Likewise, we deal with the supplementaries and main estimates with some immediacy, as opposed to other studies.

Now, the clerk has pointed out to me that pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), the supplementary estimates (B) for the fiscal year ending March 31 have been deemed referred to several standing committees, OGGO being one of them.

[The Clerk]

We have, I think, four votes that are referred to OGGO

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We have four votes on the supplementaries: Public Works, Shared Services Canada and the Treasury Board Secretariat. We'll be dealing with those immediately.

However, I would suggest that we convene a meeting of the subcommittee on agenda as quickly as possible to try to determine beyond the estimates what studies this committee may wish to engage in.

When would the supplementaries be available? Immediately?

[The Clerk]

Right now. Supplementary estimates (B) have been referred to the committee already. They're before the committee, and the committee can start its study whenever it wants.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

All right. What is the deadline for reporting back to the House on the supplementaries?

[The Clerk]

The supplementary estimates are referred to the committee until three days before the last allotted day in the period, or three days before the last sitting day in the period. The reason is that it's dependent upon when the last allotted day is decided. Unfortunately, we don't know when that will be. That's the prerogative of the government, which has not decided when that last day will be.

When that last day is designated, three days before then, the order of reference for the supplementary estimates will lapse. In the event that it's not determined, the reason we have the other caveat of three days before the last sitting day is in case the government gets to within that being the last sitting day. There has to be a deadline that kicks in.

Suffice it to say that we don't actually know the deadline on that. We know that the period ends on March 26. We know that at least three sitting days before that date, it will lapse. It may lapse earlier than that. The committee can, however, study the subject matter of it under its general mandate under the Standing Orders.

I would suggest that in the calendar time that we're dealing with now, we don't have a whole lot of time, frankly, to do this before March 26th, as there are some break weeks coming up. The committee may want to take that into consideration when considering its schedule of when it wants to do its business.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I do have a suggestion, but I'll entertain discussion first on when this committee and those members from the subcommittee on agenda would like to meet. For example, would you like to take the scheduled committee time next Tuesday to deal with the subcommittee business, or would you like a prior meeting? My suggestion is that we deal with subcommittee items at next Tuesday's meeting and try to determine a bit of a work plan for the remainder of this parliament.

Having said that, in practical terms, as Paul has pointed out, we've got a fairly short timeline to deal with the supplementary estimates—particularly supplementary estimates (B). We'll also have the mains and other supplementary estimates coming forward. With the break weeks and the like, we'll probably have only four or five weeks left after we deal with all of the other estimates and perhaps government legislation. That's not a whole bunch of time. That's why I'd like to suggest that we have a subcommittee meeting first to try to determine what our priority items may be for studies that we can entertain in the limited time we have before we adjourn for the summer.

Mr. McCauley, please.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I mostly agree with that, but because we have limited time and it takes awhile to get the ministers, I'm wondering if maybe we should go ahead and agree on the supplementary estimates meetings right now for the three ministers we have votes for, so the chair can have time to corral them. If we wait until next Tuesday to agree, that would take away today, tomorrow, Monday and Tuesday before we can agree and then start trying to contact Minister Duclos, Minister Murray and the others to appear before us. My understanding is that we have the main estimates barrelling down towards us very soon as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Those are good points. As you know, Mr. McCauley, and again—for the benefit of our new members—when ministers are requested to appear before the committee, it is a request and we try to accommodate their schedules as best as we can. If this committee wishes, particularly for the three ministers responsible for these three votes, we will invite the respective ministers and ask them to provide their timelines for when they might be able to appear before the committee. After we get the ministers' calendars, we can schedule the times.

I think it would be folly to try to establish meetings now if we don't even know when the ministers are available to attend. We can extend the invitation to those three ministers to appear before this committee at their earliest opportunity, given the fact and letting them know that we have some timelines and deadlines in place. We can ask for their calendars and then we can schedule them appropriately.

Mrs. Block.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

When you consider the number of break weeks we have and what the clerk has outlined on the last day it needs to be reported, I would suggest that rather than leaving it open-ended by asking the ministers when they are available, we instead outline for them that we basically have three days for them to choose from. If we take next Tuesday for a subcommittee meeting, these days would be February 27, March 10 and March 12. I would suggest just being a little more definitive by saying that these are the three days, and hopefully they will be able to choose one of those days.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you.

Paul has informed me that we can certainly do that. We don't have to put that in the form of a letter. We can just transmit this directly.

Again, our normal practice when ministers appear has been to give them one hour to provide testimony. If it deals with supplementary or main estimates, the normal procedure is that the minister appears for the first hour and her or his officials stay and continue to discuss the supplementary estimates or the mains for the second hour. Given the fact, however, that we only have three days, potentially, to get all of the three ministers here, in some cases we may have to have two ministers appearing one hour apart at the same meeting. That I think will be determined once we find out the response from the respective ministers.

Mr. Weiler.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Given that there are a number of new members on this committee, I was wondering if we might also be able to schedule a briefing from the department—kind of a one-on-one—on estimates and some of the other procedures.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Just to be clear on this, Patrick, are you asking for a separate briefing on supplementary estimates (B) for new members who want to attend, as opposed to having officials appear before this committee to discuss those estimates at the same time as the minister?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I'll let Patrick speak to his own request, but I think a more general departmental briefing would be available to members if that is their wish.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We've had departmental briefings before. Quite frankly, I'm not sure how those are arranged and organized. I guess that through the clerks and the analysts we can invite the respective officials to come forward to brief committee members on the supplementary estimates (B), but I....

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I don't think it's just a briefing on the supplementary estimates (B), but a briefing on the department and everything that goes along with being a member of this committee and dealing with the operations and estimates.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Was that your intent, Patrick?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Okay. Thanks for the clarification.

We have done that before. The last time we did a briefing of that sort was in 2016. We can certainly arrange that again for those members who wish to attend.

Francis.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I can make a recommendation.

Perhaps rather than having the subcommittee meet this Tuesday, and not knowing when ministers will show up in the next four or five meetings, maybe we can request that briefing on the estimates from Treasury Board on Tuesday, for example. We will be dealing with estimates that are coming up. It would be good for members to understand how the estimates process works. I have it on pretty good authority that the Treasury Board could appear before this committee this coming Tuesday. Knowing when the ministers will appear, hopefully by next Tuesday or our next meeting, we can choose a subcommittee date when they are not appearing—for one hour, if that works.