Evidence of meeting #55 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was political.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
Well, if you look at a calendar, you'll see that the information she said she sent out in an e-mail to many of her funding partners was in the public sphere. The decision was made. The speech wasn't made for almost two weeks later, Monsieur Proulx.
If we're going to start putting in rumours, we're going to have very fulsome reports.
Conservative
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
We could have invited Minister Kenney to come before this committee. We could have established in greater detail this information. Putting something in that reflects not hard evidence but merely what members were speculating during the course of the hearings.... One member speculated that we'd get better information if we brought back torture. I suspect--but given the environment around here, I only suspect and I'm not certain of this--that he was saying this in a rhetorical sense. We weren't going to put that in the report either, I assume. So I think this is a good example--
Conservative
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I think the inappropriateness of putting things in that are based on what was going on among the membership of the committee as opposed to what was going on in the testimony presented to the committee is significant, and on that basis I would say that it makes sense to simply remove this.
Has an actual motion to remove paragraph 34 been put before us or are we just debating this in the abstract?
Conservative
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I was thinking of actually proposing such a motion. I think Mr. Young is suggesting that just the first sentence be dropped. Is that right?
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
So the paragraph would now read:
The Minister stated that no discussions had occurred between herself and the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister's Office, or any other Minister regarding KAIROS' application to CIDA. She also stated that this issue had not been raised in any meeting of the Cabinet or any subcommittee of Cabinet.
You see, that's the actual evidence. That's the motion. Can I speak to the motion?
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Okay.
That's the evidence that was presented before us. It may be the case that some members of this committee don't believe she was telling the truth. If that's the case, then it would be appropriate to add speculation in saying that they don't believe that's the truth. What would be appropriate is for the report back to the House of Commons to be something like this: We've collected evidence; however, we need more time to collect more evidence because we can't complete our work given the amount of evidence that is necessary to collect. We need, for example, to have someone go through and check the cabinet records to see whether or not this ever came up. That would be the kind of thing that would be done, and that would make the most sense.
There was nothing in the Speaker's ruling that said we must come back to him with an absolute, final report and we must consider absolutely everything. Given the importance of this matter, he was going to give us until the 25th to produce an initial report. It happens all the time that committees come along and issue what amounts to interim reports, and royal commissions do this too, of course. So that would be appropriate.
Of course, we all understand that there's a confidence vote today and that the 40th Parliament is likely to come to an end, be prorogued, but.... Sorry, not prorogued. That's--
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Dissolved. Thank you.
I've spent so much time in this committee debating the word “prorogued” that it's beaten into my head.
Conservative
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
A point of order.
Could you specify the nature of the Speaker's request concerning this report? Mr. Reid is telling us that we were given until October 25. Mr. Chair, you are familiar with the Speaker's request. What is your position?
Excuse me. I heard October 25 through the translation.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I may have said October, but unintentionally. If I did, I meant March; I meant today.
For the sake of argument, in the event the confidence motion had been yesterday, we would not have failed in our duty for failing to have submitted a report by that time. It's just that the clock would have run out. By the same token, if we are unable to report that we need more time, and then get more time and produce a final report, that is not the fault of this committee. We are not failing to be in compliance with the Speaker's ruling. What's happening is simply that the clock will have run out on us, a really important point to make, that this is the situation here. So you can't get around this by saying we'll throw in what people were speculating on in the course of these hearings. For one thing, we aren't always right. People had trouble even recalling what they themselves had said.
