Government Operations Committee on March 14th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Anthony, if you wish to turn off your mic and take a break, you may, because this will take a few minutes, and then we'll officially suspend.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

On a point of order, Chair, can I suggest that we not do the suspension and we tell Mr. Anthony he can have 10 to 15 minutes?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

No. Thank you, though.

Mrs. Vignola, go ahead, please, on the motion.

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

I would like to move a friendly amendment to add Ms. Erin O’Gorman from the Canada Border Services Agency to the list of witnesses in the main motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You would like an amendment to add the president of the CBSA on the estimates, departmental plans and the supplementary estimates.

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

Exactly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's at the same time.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Okay.

Mr. Genuis had his hand up on the original motion.

Do we have anyone who wishes to speak on the amendment?

I take it we're fine with the amendment, then. Perfect.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We're back on the amended motion.

Do you still wish to speak on that, Mr. Genuis?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I do. Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Please go ahead, sir.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Chair, I think what we've seen consistently from Liberals, frankly, across committees is that they want to really limit and constrain the amount of time we have as members to hear from ministers. This is a very significant curtailment of time.

Frankly, if this is about respecting the time of ministers, they don't need to appear side by side. We can hear from them for a longer period of time in total so that we have a chance to ask each of them questions. I don't see any logic in having two ministers appear on both the supplementary estimates and the main estimates all at once, and limiting that to such a relatively short period of time. This is just a part of Liberal efforts to limit the amount of real exposure for their ministers to have to respond to questions.

We're in the midst of this explosive scandal involving government procurement. We've been told that ministers effectively don't do very much when it comes to the actual processes of the procurement involved. I think we have a lot of questions for which we need answers. The fact that the Liberals are proposing a motion to so severely limit the opportunity that we have to ask ministers questions doesn't make any sense in the middle of another witness's testimony,

What I would propose as a starting point is a simple amendment to add the word “each” in front of the word “appear” and then “separately” after the word “appear”. That would read “to each appear separately for one hour and a half” to emphasize that if the minister is saying, “I'm so busy. I have only an hour and a half to appear before the committee,” each minister should appear on their own to answer questions so that the committee is able to get more questions answered with the same allocation of each minister's time.

That's a very reasonable amendment that reflects the parameters of time that ministers have, and it is not the kind of draconian limiting of accountability that is proposed in the original motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mr. Genuis. I'll take a speaking list on that.

I will note, however, that as chair and someone who has been on OGGO for a long time, I'm a bit concerned about this. Traditionally, we've always had one full hour for the supplementary estimates and one full hour on the main estimates. Now we're actually reducing it quite significantly. Being an estimates geek, I'm a bit concerned.

Mr. Sousa, go ahead on Mr. Genuis's amendment.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Now we're dealing with a new amendment to combine them.

We understand that the ministers are appearing and that they want to make every effort to engage with respect to what's happening, but the degree of availability and the degree of deliberation that we've had thus far have been extensive. The ministers are trying to accommodate the activity and the engagement with the committee and there are going to be other opportunities for the ministers to appear. We just want to make certain that the value and the execution of that time are productive for all of us.

Yes, this is what we're proposing. We're proposing to make them available as necessary to our committee, as they are going to be to others. I would propose to move forward in the way it was already established with the amendment provided by Mrs. Vignola, without adding “each”.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I have Mrs. Block, and then we'll go back to Mr. Genuis.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It would seem to me that there is some confusion with regard to the invitation to ministers to appear before the committee.

It is my understanding that we are inviting them to appear before the committee to answer any questions that this committee has about the supplementary estimates and the main estimates; that we are not inviting them here, at this point in time, to speak about ArriveCAN; and that, in keeping with what has been tradition, we are inviting them for an hour each to speak to us about the supplementary estimates and the main estimates.

I think Mr. Sousa is confused.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

Now we have Mr. Genuis and then Mr. Bains.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Those are excellent points by my colleague.

I'll just add something in terms of respecting the ministers' time. I understand that ministers are busy people. If we're being told that the ministers have that much time on that particular day, then let's use their time well by having them appear separately. That's all my amendment does. It doesn't, in any way, affect the amount of time that they're going to spend on that particular day; it's just that they will spend the time separately so that we can hear from both and hear answers, or at least responses, from both.

That is very reasonable in terms of balancing what, apparently, their scheduling requirements are with a legitimate expectation of democratic accountability.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

Next we have Mr. Bains and then Mr. Jowhari.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

In order to hear from the ministers....

I think Mr. Genuis indicated that they actually aren't involved, day to day, in the procurement process and that we have other staff—deputy ministers, etc.—who also can come at the same time to answer the questions that are posed.

I think that is an ample amount of time if both ministers can appear at the same time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

Before we go to Mr. Jowhari, I just want to be clear that, again, this is the ministers' opportunity to defend their supplementary estimates, which are in the billions, and to defend the main estimates, which are in the tens and tens of billions. This is not to address day-to-day procurement but to actually defend their request for Parliament to approve the billions of dollars, which is the whole reason that this committee exists and, frankly, going back to 1295 and the Model Parliament, the reason that our Parliament exists.

Mr. Jowhari, go ahead, sir.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

On that note, I believe a combined session of one and a half hours takes many aspects or many concerns into account.

First of all, each one of them made themselves available for an extra 30 minutes. If we look at the totality of it, we are looking at each one of them coming in for one hour for the main estimates as well as the supplementary estimates (C). We are really saying to use the efficiency factor. With respect to that extra 30 minutes that we are discussing, a 25-minute rotation has two spots for the Liberals, two spots for the CPC and two spots of two and a half minutes and two and a half minutes.

Really, this is not as drastic as some of our colleagues are trying to make it sound. It's just making sure that we get the ministers here as soon as possible when they're available. The commitment has been made. We have moved a motion. They are making themselves available. Coordination has gone into ensuring that they are available and they're going to spend one and a half hours with us, and their officials are also going to be here for half an hour after that to be able to answer any questions we have.

I've looked at both supplementary estimates (C) and the main estimates. I read the PBO report. I've looked at where the money is going, and yes, it is in the tens of millions of dollars, but when you look at what was voted and where it has gone and so on, one and a half hours is more than ample time to be able to ask questions on that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

Mr. Bains, is your hand up again to speak or is it just left from before?

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

It's a legacy hand.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I see no other speakers. Can we move to a vote on Mr. Genuis's amendment?

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Mr. Genuis, go ahead.