Government Operations Committee on Sept. 23rd, 2025

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

Can I clarify something? I'm sorry. I know I'm not on the committee, but—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Yes.

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

—Ms. Sudds is not here, and she was part of it.

The Canada Lands Company is really not part of PSPC, so I'm not sure if you want housing as a result, because housing is the one it's overseeing. It's item 4. It's not a major issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Canada Lands Company does come to OGGO. We haven't had them in about eight years. It's not definite. It's just one of the ones to consider, but probably not. The priority is the Public Service Integrity Commissioner and the procurement ombudsman. It's not a necessary type of thing, if that makes sense.

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

Can I just clarify? I wasn't there. Item 1 was with regard to the consul general's new official residence. Was that discussed? Was that something that was...?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Yes, it was discussed in the subcommittee.

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

It was the subcommittee, I know, and I think Marie was in the subcommittee. I would say that I wasn't there, but was that..? I wasn't sure what.... I've been getting a reference from Ms. Jansen that possibly it wasn't something that she had understood.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

No, it was to move forward to the report, and she was there.

Marie-Hélène, did you wish...?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

What I understand, Mr. Chair, is that we have to get started. We began this morning and are in the process of setting the agenda. Obviously, this will depend as usual on availability. We have given ourselves some leeway to ensure we have a good agenda. At the same time, there are some dates that we can already confirm. I am thinking in particular of the two meetings. We are talking about a report. We decided that we should at least finish all the reports related to the previous Parliament without reopening them.

It is absolutely certain that we need to establish what we will do over the next few weeks. We are recommending this for good reason.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Yes, that is correct. Thanks very much.

We'll move forward.

Let's see, what else do we have? It's to adopt a budget.

From time to time, colleagues—

I'm sorry, Madame. Please go ahead.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Time is flying by, but I would like to move a notice of motion. I don't want it debated today. I have it in both official languages. I will read it to you, and then I will send it to you right after I read it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

May I interrupt?

I'm going to go through my stuff first. Then Ms. Block had her hand up for a motion, and then we'll get to yours.

From time to time, we get ATIP requests for committee business. We had a request from DND. I'm going to bore everybody and read out something. This is the first time this has come up in about a year.

On August 25, 2025, the Department of National Defence identified our committee as a third party with regard to records that are now subject to a request made under the Act.

This was sent October 15.

Committees receive such requests from time to time, and OGGO is no exception. Usually, they are straightforward, and we have a well-established process for them. Since this is the first time most of you are encountering such a procedure, please let me give you more detailed explanations for context.

I'm just going to read it verbatim from our clerk.

The Access to Information Act gives the public the right to access records held by various government institutions, subject to certain exceptions. Even if the House of Commons, including its standing committees, is constitutionally and legally independent from the federal government and is not subject to the Act, it may receive third party notices from government institutions when the requested materials contain information relating to the business of the House or a committee.

On December 2, 2013, the House of Commons adopted the Forty-Second Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs (PROC) regarding parliamentary privilege and access to information. The report established the process to be followed by committees when they receive third party notices under the Act.

The records at issue here consist of email exchanges between the clerk of OGGO to the Department inviting the Minister and other officials to appear during the ArriveCAN application....

It wasn't on any other information. It was solely the clerk sending out an email inviting someone.

It is up to us whether we wish to release it. I'm going to suggest we do so, because there is nothing there except the clerk inviting the minister to attend, but we do need the committee's approval to release that information.

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

Do you need a motion to that effect?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

No.

We're all fine? That's perfect.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a lot of respect for our interpreters. I think the committee has been sitting for two hours. Even my brain is starting to get tired.

I just want to make sure of one thing. When we talk about access to information…. I need to hear it again, because I want to be sure I understand correctly. I was on the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. We received an email asking for a witness to come…. Please explain that to me again.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

It was an ATIP request that came to National Defence. Part of what it covers is with regard to ArriveCAN. They are requesting information under the Access to Information Act. We are just asking if it's okay to release the information that pertains to OGGO.

In this case, it's solely the email inviting people to the committee. If it was something more sensitive, chances are that we would say no, but in this case, it's solely the email invitation. Rather than saying no and raising flags, I suggest that we just release the email. Are we agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's perfect. I will remember to speak more slowly for the interpretation.

This is the last item, I believe.

Mr. Gill is what we consider an associate member. I'm just seeking the committee's approval to include him on the email distribution list, give him access to our digital binder going forward and allow him to attend in camera sessions.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I had Mrs. Block, and then I'll go to you, Madame Gaudreau—

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Chair, I just want to make sure that any of our associate members will also be extended a similar courtesy, if that's okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

If you're bringing someone on, it's kind of unusual. If they're a regular permanent associate member.... For the sake of argument, if Mr. Sousa is going to be with us each and every time but is not an official member and needs to be subbed in, then yes, but it's not for every parliamentarian, if that makes sense.

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Yes, that makes sense.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

It's not that we wouldn't dearly love to have Mr. Sousa back. It's wonderful to have you back, Mr. Sousa. I tease you.

We'll go to Mrs. Block and then Ms. Gaudreau.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm actually going to retract my request.