The motion recorded in the minutes of the June 17 meeting does not reflect the testimony given at the April 10 meeting. Here's what I said on April 10:
My amendment will allow us to do an analysis before we undertake a much more in-depth study, which would probably require a lot more documents than the ones I'm going to suggest. Nevertheless, it will allow us to do an analysis, which will then help determine whether there is a widespread problem. If so, we'll have to carry out a much more in-depth, much more comprehensive analysis, including a number of meetings. Without further ado, here is the amendment I'm proposing. All that would be left of Mr. Genuis' motion are the substantive ideas. The wording would be different. It would read as follows: “That, in accordance with Standing Orders 108(1), 108(2) and 108(3)(c) of the House of Commons, the committee order the production of the Government of Canada's list of qualified aboriginal businesses in both official languages; the list include (a) any summary of the key details about each company in the government's PSAB database, (b) the number and value of contracts received by each enterprise and (c) the list of subcontractors used for each contract; the information be provided to the committee by May 20, 2024”. … “committee members will conduct an analysis of the list and, further to that analysis, decide whether it is necessary to conduct a longitudinal study of the matter in committee or subcommittee, as they so choose, provided that this decision is made before June 20, 2024”.
This was the response from Mr. Genuis:
Thank you, Chair. We're hopefully coming towards a consensus. I think this is an important area to study. If it gives members greater confidence in the process, requesting documents as an initial step is very reasonable, and then the committee can evaluate next steps after that. I'm supportive of the amendment as well.
There was a consensus, both in terms of understanding what I was bringing and on the substance and content. The June 17 minutes do not reflect the consensus on the motion as amended on April 10.