Evidence of meeting #7 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was companies.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
I will ask Mr. Green and Madam Vignola.
I have a thumbs-up from Madam Vignola. Thank you very much.
Mr. Green, do you have any comments or suggestions? Mr. Green, can you hear us?
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Yes, I can finally hear you, Tom.
I'm good.
Just to be clear, did I completely miss all of the rounds for today?
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Unfortunately, yes. As I had mentioned probably when you were still having computer difficulties, we have to conclude by 4 p.m. because the technicians who are assisting us in this meeting have to go then. They need about an hour to set up for the next Zoom meeting which starts at 5 p.m. We're very much restricted in discussions with them. There are two hours, and I want to make sure we have as much time as possible in the second hour since we have two presentations from the procurement people.
Unfortunately, Mr. Green, you missed out on an opportunity again.
2:50 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm magnanimous. There's no problem. My good friend Paul got to hit one out of the park.
I'm fine with whatever work plan we have.
2:50 p.m.
Green
Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Yes, Mr. McCauley has offered me an opportunity to speak and if he's open to passing it on to Mr. Green I would be happy to have him share that, to take that time.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
You're very generous and you're very kind, and I'll leave that up to Mr. McCauley when we get into the second round.
Colleagues, I'll make just one last comment before I ask Paul to suspend, and then we'll get the other witnesses lined up for the second hour.
I mentioned this earlier to Mr. Drouin, I mentioned it to Mr. McCauley I believe yesterday, and I'll say it now publicly to you, Matthew, and to Madam Vignola. As long as we have witnesses and things we need to study, that's great. I'm comfortable with having as many meetings as are required. I did say to both Mr. McCauley and Mr. Drouin that I've never been a fan of having meetings just for the sake of having meetings.
I would like to make sure that the witnesses we have—and this is reflected in the work plan—are not redundant, have not already provided to a different committee the same same testimony that we would be hearing. I'm not trying to short-circuit this committee at all. I'm just saying that when we feel collectively that we have reached the end of the road in terms of receiving testimony, I hope we'll all come to some agreement, and then we can inform our whips that our time is up.
Just keep that in mind, colleagues. We may find as we go through the next meeting or two that new issues surface and that we do want to continue to study a little longer. We can certainly do that. It is up to the committee.
Mr. Clerk, I can see that your hand is raised.
2:55 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Paul Cardegna
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to take a moment to clarify and to make sure I've understood what the committee wants to do for next week.
My understanding is that they want to have the witnesses who are identified in the work plan for meeting four next Monday, and then they want to have the witnesses identified under meeting eight next Friday, but the idea is to have the President of the Treasury Board appear next Friday, rather than next Monday.
Do I understand that correctly?
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Can I get an indication from all the speakers: Mr. McCauley, Mr. Drouin, Madam Vignola and Mr. Green? If you give a thumbs-up, Paul can proceed, but if you have any problems with his interpretation, now is the time to mention them.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Chair, we have no issue with the President of the Treasury Board appearing as long as he can also discuss more than just the allocation of benefits. As I've explained before, the role of Treasury Board in that particular instance is somewhat limited. We want to make sure we get two hours of asking proper questions, so he'd have more to say on the federal employee side. For the fourth meeting, whenever that happens, I think that would be next week at some point; I know that the schedule changed. I don't have the schedule in front of me, but we're okay with that.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Yes, I'm fine with that as well. It's just whatever will fit in for next week. I don't know if we're actually directing that, but whatever fits in....
I do have a different point, though, if you'll bear with me. I don't want to say that we're wasting time, but we are eating up time in trying to get everyone online and getting all the technology going. In light of that, can I propose, if it's the will of the committee, that any statements by witnesses are provided in advance for us to read, so that our time is not used up in having a witness like Industry did, who just sits and reads for 10 minutes? Between the time lost for the technology and the reading, it took away two steps, perhaps even three.
I would love it if you could mail it to us and we could read it. We then would have enough time with our witnesses and would be taking full advantage of our time.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Yes. As committee members will know, we've done that in the past on a number of occasions.
Mr. Clerk, do you want to add to that?
2:55 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes. We did send out the speaking notes before today's meeting. In some cases, when we get bilingual notes, we can send them out. However, we don't always receive them in both official languages, unfortunately. If we do, definitely we can send them out.
There's no obligation for the committee to actually have the person read out their speaking notes if they've been distributed; however, we can't append them to the evidence as we would normally do. The committee is not empowered to deal with that motion. The only alternative is that we could possibly consider is this. If the Chair wants me to, I can ask that witnesses not speak for as long, that we reduce the amount of time they have for their opening statements.
On the subject of technology, we are certainly doing everything we can, and we definitely appreciate your patience on that.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
I'm not blaming the technology as much as just acknowledging that it's taking time. Also, then, for someone to sit and read from a form that we already have in front of us takes away from the useful time to question witnesses.
3 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Mr. McCauley, I think your point is well taken. I will consult with our clerk and we'll see if we can come up with a solution to that.
Mr. Jowhari, please.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just as a clarification, on Monday we are going forward with the fourth meeting as planned, which is on the allocation of emergency benefits. We're inviting the President of the Treasury Board. The focus of the president, aside from the allocation of benefits, is going to be on employees.
Now, going to Friday, the clerk indicated that we are moving to the eighth meeting as planned, rather than the fifth meeting. It will be on the delivery of emergency benefits. I just want a clarification whether, on Friday, we are focusing on the delivery of emergency benefits or on federal employees. If I'm looking at the wrong plan, just let me know.
3 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Before I do, perhaps we'll take all of the comments and we'll end up, at the conclusion, with some resolution. We're rapidly running out of time for the second hour as well, but I do have three speakers on my list.
Madam Vignola, you were first, followed by Mrs. Block and Mr. Kusmierczyk.
Madam Vignola. No, you're good.
Mrs. Block.
3 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much.
You may have already covered this. I did want to ensure that we will be able to provide new lists of witnesses that we would like to hear from going forward, given the stories that are breaking, especially in the last few days, about counterfeit supplies coming into Canada, including the Global News story today. I just want to make sure that we can react nimbly when there are these breaking stories that definitely fall within the purview of this committee and the subject we are dealing with.
3 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Yes, certainly, Mrs. Block, we can be as fluid and as nimble as you wish. As I mentioned in my remarks, if we find additional witnesses as we move along in this study that we wish to bring forward, we have the ability to do so. It's at the will of the committee.
Mr. Kusmierczyk, please.
April 30th, 2020 / 3 p.m.
Liberal
Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Thank you very much, Chair.
With regard to the concern about eliminating introductory remarks, I just want to ask for a point of clarification on whether that would extend to the introductory remarks of ministers as well. Is it just limited to officials?
I say so because we need to to keep in mind that there are folks who actually tune in to the committees. The introductory remarks are not just for the benefit of the members of this committee, but also for the folks out there who are paying attention and listening to this committee.
I would raise those two concerns about truncating the introductory remarks of the ministers, and then also just make a point that there are folks out there who are listening to this committee. They benefit from the introductory remarks by both officials and ministers.
3 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Thank you all for your comments.
As I mentioned, the clerk and I will get together and see if we can come up with some compromise or resolution to accommodate both the concerns of those of you who wish to see comments at the outset and also additional time, or as much time as possible, for questions by committee members.
Mr. Clerk.
3 p.m.
The Clerk
Just to be entirely sure, as I must contact witnesses for Monday, for Monday we're going to be contacting the witnesses for meeting number four. For Friday, we're going to be contacting the witnesses for, I understood, meeting five, but at one point it was meeting eight.
I just want to make sure that I understand what is being agreed to by the committee now.
3 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
I may be wrong, and please correct me, committee members, if I am, but my understanding is that next Friday would be for the witnesses who were originally scheduled for meeting number eight. Is that correct?
3 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
What witnesses are coming for meeting number eight, please?