Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 21st, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Right: “extracted what was necessary to maintain cabinet confidences”. I understand what you're saying.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

We extracted the information that would still allow cabinet confidences and gave the rest to the finance committee.

So we have to “de-insert” the word “not”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Okay: de-insert the word “not” and change “parliamentary secretary” to “Minister of State”.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

That's correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Are those two amendments from Mr. Lukiwski fine with the group?

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Read it in French.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I was hoping I would hear that.

In French, apparently it does say Minister of State.

Is the word “not”...or is it written in the negative there?

[Nicolas Auclair]

That's correct, Mr. Chair.

First, Mr. Menzies's title is in the right place. In paragraph 33, in the fourth line from the bottom, where it says “la divulgation ne risquait pas”, we would have to take out the negation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

What are we supposed to do?

[Nicolas Auclair]

We would take out the negative form.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Take out the words “ne” and “pas”.

“ Il a précisé, à cet égard, que le gouvernement avait même extrait de documents confidentiels du Cabinet des passages dont la divulgation risquait de porter atteinte ...”. Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I guess you can read this either way. If you're suggesting the government extracted the information that excluded cabinet confidence, it reads right. The other way is if you....

Monsieur Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

That's right, Mr. Chair. If we read it that way, with the words removed, “cela ne portait pas atteinte”...

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Right. One way or the other it--

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

That's it.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

It does not work if it's taken out.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I can see how it reads both ways.

Which way do we want it to read, without being wordsmiths too much?

Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

My understanding from the French version is that the Minister of State “ a précisé ... que le gouvernement avait même extrait de documents confidentiels du Cabinet des passages dont la divulgation ne risquait pas de porter atteinte au secret du Cabinet”. If you take out “ne” and “pas”, that ruins the whole meaning.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Right.

I think even in English it could be read the way you just read it in French. I think it leaves itself open to interpretation.

I'll ask the analysts to speak to this.

[Nicolas Auclair]

Yes, I'm sorry, you are absolutely right. The negative form has to stay.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Are you talking about the French version?

[Nicolas Auclair]

Ignore my last comment. Yes, in French, of course.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Okay.

Mr. Albrecht.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I'm just wondering, in the English version, Mr. Chair, if we did exclude the “not” and then added the words “in order to maintain” it might just clarify that fuzzy language. I would like the analysts to respond to that.