Government Operations Committee on May 15th, 2020

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that.

Unlike Mr. McCauley, I have not immersed myself in the blues of other committees to see what questions are being asked in those committees of the witnesses that we are duplicating in our own committee. I would suggest that maybe they are asking different questions than we might, from a government operations perspective. I'm not sure, though, unless somebody wants to provide me with that testimony so that I can make sure my questions are not duplications, should those witnesses appear here.

You know, years ago when I was on OGGO, when we were looking at inviting witnesses, we endeavoured to have some idea about where we wanted to go with our questioning so that they could advise us. We tried to see who might be the most appropriate witnesses to invite so that we didn't find ourselves asking questions that were being referred to another department or deferred to someone who was not in the room.

I'm not sure how that would work. Perhaps when we are looking at different witnesses and inviting them, we should be asking a department who might be best suited to come. We have in our own minds who that might be, but maybe the department could recommend someone, given the line of questioning that has been coming to them from this committee.

I'm reluctant to say that it's not worth it to have them here just because they've shown up at another committee. If we were sitting, we'd be meeting twice a week, as we are now, so I don't think there's any reason we can't just continue on the path we're on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Let me be very clear. I'm not suggesting we circumvent or truncate any of the meetings. If there's worthwhile testimony, let's meet as long as we possibly can. Again, I just want to make sure that we're trying to provide new testimony and something that is informative.

We'll go now to Mr. Drouin, then Mr. MacKinnon and then Mr. Green.

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

My only suggestion will be that we don't know what will happen after May 25. We don't know what will be potentially negotiated. We have no idea how long.... As you've mentioned, Mr. Chair, we may be back into regular sessions. Who knows?

I would keep the schedule at a two-week interval, and then reconvene this committee to have the opportunity to discuss the agenda.

The other point I'll mention is that we can blame departments for pointing fingers and blaming the other part, but there's also a responsibility that's incumbent upon us to ask the proper questions. The questions to Health Canada were with regard to licensing and who gives the licence, the authority, to sell medical devices, and it's not Public Health. It is Health Canada.

That's the point I want to make. Yes, we can be frustrated about this, but it's also incumbent on the questioner to ask the proper questions to the witnesses who are before us.

MInister Anand has already been here twice. How many more times do we want her? Do we want her every week? I'm just trying to get a sense of the committee. Are we going to invite ministers and have them come back every week?

Sometimes you may not get satisfactory answers to your questions, but if you go on a wild goose chase, sometimes you just won't find a goose there. I don't have any objections to having her appear at the 13th meeting, but we've already had her twice in the space of a month. I'm just trying to understand this situation. How many times do we want MInister Anand to appear before this committee?

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. MacKinnon.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to say that I agree with Mr. Drouin.

Ms. Block, I agree that we should listen to the suggestions of our analysts and follow the schedule that was distributed in advance.

I also want to tell Mr. McCauley that he got what he just asked for today. We gathered the most senior procurement and public health officials in the country together here today. He could have asked them questions. They were here with us today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Green is next.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes, I fully support Mr. McCauley's call. I may have been called “combative” today, but it's born from a frustration of getting information passed back and forth between departments that may not happen to be there on a particular day.

It's really about having accountability. We don't have the public accounts committee operating right now. We're in the middle of a pandemic and a crisis. I think that the ministers have a responsibility to be responsible, and that includes coming before members of this committee to provide testimony that would get to the heart of the questions that we're asking.

Therefore, I fully support it and I would encourage us to continue this work. I'm still not satisfied, quite frankly, with the answers that I'm getting. It's stonewalling. We can ask the same questions five different ways if we're not getting the answers because they're kicking it somewhere else.

Anyway, I fully support Kelly in his position here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thanks. We'll now go back to Mrs. Block.

Mrs. Block, the last time you made some comments, it sounded like you were in a bit of an echo chamber. Could you put your headset back on?

Go ahead, please, Mrs. Block.

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

I do not have another intervention that I would like to make at this time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

That's fine. It was my error.

Mr. McCauley, do you have another intervention?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Yes, it's just somewhat to follow up on Mr. MacKinnon's comments. They were fair comments by him and Mr. Drouin, and today was a perfect example. How many times did we ask PHAC valid questions and hear, “Well, that's Health Canada” or “Maybe it's Health Canada”?

I saw answers to Mr. Green and Mrs. Block about the MDEL, and the answer was “Health Canada”. When we had Minister Anand here, we were asking very valid questions about the national stockpile, and we were told, “Well, that's Health Canada” or “That's PHAC”. PHAC shows up and says, “Oh, that's someone else.” Yes, I understand that we can't continue this forever, but we have to continue until we get answers, so I suspect we might have to continue a bit.

Mr. Drouin and Mr. MacKinnon, I certainly take your points and I understand them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thanks, Mr. McCauley.

What we have before us, colleagues, is a suggested work plan that Raphaëlle sent out. I have not heard any specific suggestions about either adding or deleting any witnesses from that work plan, except for Mr. McCauley's suggestion that perhaps we should attempt to get both Minister Hajdu and Minister Anand in the same meeting.

Mr. Clerk, please add to this.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, at a previous meeting the committee adopted a motion that Minister Hajdu, the Minister of Health, be invited to appear on May 22, and the invitation has been issued. However, we also have other witnesses who were invited to appear and who would be in the second hour, notably Canada Post Corporation, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers and somebody from Amazon Canada.

Part of the reason that I share the concern about bringing Minister Anand with Minister Hajdu would be that you would only have one hour to question both witnesses. I can extend the invitation, if the committee wishes me to, to add Minister Anand, but it might only leave the committee with one hour to question two ministers.

The alternative is to stick with the plan the way it is, which would be Minister Anand being invited for the 13th meeting. We could change the invitation to Minister Hajdu, but I do want to point out that you may only have an hour if we add Minister Hajdu on with Minister Anand on May 22.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I would also point out the obvious to all committee members. Ministers can be invited, but that does not compel them to appear. Their schedules may be such that they cannot appear on a date requested, and it's strictly up to the ministers whether they want to accommodate our invitation and accept our invitation or not. I add that just for your consideration when we're trying to set a schedule.

[The Clerk]

I would also like to say, Mr. Chair, if I could, that I believe Mr. McCauley and Madam Vignola both wish to intervene, but I think Madam Vignola was first.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Madam Vignola, go ahead, please.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I understand that we do not have much time and that Ms. Anand already testified. However, even though people are supposed to talk to each other, I get the impression that everyone is working in silos, in their own little worlds. If we really want to come up with a report with recommendations so that things go more smoothly during the next pandemic, because there will be one, we need to try to break down those walls and call multiple ministers at the same time. Yes, that will mean that we will have less time to ask them questions and that they may have to come back, but we need to break down those walls to get complete answers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you for that.

Paul, did you say we have someone else on our speakers list?

[The Clerk]

It's Mr. McCauley.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. McCauley, go ahead.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Maybe we can bring Minister Anand in with, as I think the NDP has asked for, Canada Post and Amazon. Maybe she can appear in that one, and then PHAC can come back at the same time that Minister Hajdu is here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Well, of course, as a committee we can request any minister within our schedule as we see fit.

Mr. MacKinnon, I see you, and then I'm going to try to ring-fence this in a little bit.

Mr. MacKinnon, go ahead.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I'm having trouble following the bouncing ball now. I mean, first of all, we wanted the the minister of PSPC with PHAC, and then it was Health and now it's Canada Post.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

It's just a suggestion, Steve.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I get it, but I think we have a schedule. Raphaëlle gave us a schedule that was well thought out. We've been over this several times now. It involves a comprehensive level of accountability from the entire spectrum of government departments. What Madam Vignola calls “silos” I call people doing their jobs, and I would conclude in saying that. People are doing their jobs right now, and repeated calls to testify before multiple—it must be said, not just this one—parliamentary committees in a given week are hardly enabling the kind of work that I think Canadians expect.

I don't speak for Madam Anand, but I certainly work with her, and she has shown herself to be more than available to this committee. She is scheduled in the current proposal that the analysts gave us.

My submission, humbly, Mr. Chair, is that we stick to the program as outlined.