Evidence of meeting #17 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 43rd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was recommendation.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Hi, everyone.
I think this is a really key recommendation. The reason we're doing this is that this is a pandemic. I think our very first recommendation should be about protecting the health and safety of all involved. I think that should move right up to the beginning. This is a public health crisis. Our job is to ensure the health and safety of everyone who works in the precinct, who works remotely and in our communities.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
First of all, I agree with this recommendation. One of the things I wanted to bring forward, though, is that it's a recommendation with nothing we can measure. I'm just wondering if anybody else has concerns about that. Should we require, in a pandemic, maybe a monthly report, something that says how things are going or if there's anything we should be concerned about, as parliamentarians. I agree that it's important to look after the workers. I'm just wondering about the accountability measures, and wondering if anyone else was thinking the same thing.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Although I don't have any trouble passing it, I kind of had the same thought as Ms. Blaney. It reads like a typical Liberal platitude more than anything else: if there is any action that can be taken, or if there are any measurable results that can come of it. I think it's a pretty obvious statement, to say that everybody would like to prioritize the health and safety of people working within the precinct.
I'm not opposed to it, obviously, because it's something we all agree with. But it does read like a platitude, there's no question. There's really nothing that it delivers.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
I want to echo the sentiments of my colleague Ms. Duncan. Moving this up to the top would certainly show its priority, but there's another recommendation much further down. It's at the very end of the report. It's one we made about having a pandemic and disaster plan. I believe it sort of fits in this section related to the health and safety of members, individuals, community members, etc. I wonder whether, if that were to be combined, it would seem less like—to quote Mr. Richards—a platitude, which I don't agree with. I think it would feel a bit more robust and substantial if we included that other recommendation in this section and moved it up to the top.
Liberal
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay, it's LIB 14: “That the House create a Pandemic and Disaster Plan, that all Parliamentarians are aware of the plan, and that it is rehearsed and updated on a regular basis.”
You would like that recommendation to be combined with LIB 8.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
It could be. That wasn't my initial suggestion, but I think that might be worth considering. I thought that LIB 8 was a stand-alone one. It is a little broad and general, but I think that having a more specific, tangible, measurable result, as Ms. Blaney was desiring, might be by adding LIB 14 to that section.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay, so we would just move LIB 14 to right after LIB 8, so that you have a broad recommendation and then a more specific recommendation that comes right after it.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Yes. I mean, it's essentially just to provide the rationale. A pandemic and disaster plan would actually help to achieve this overall prioritization of the health and safety of both members and individuals working on the parliamentary precinct and remotely, but also others.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
I'm okay with that. I do think that they can be merged, but that's just my opinion. I'm happy to hear from the rest of the committee on what they think.
I guess the one thing I'm thinking with regard to a pandemic and disaster plan is that I'm sure that there are contingency plans already in Parliament. I just don't want people to have two different plans. I don't know if there's a way to create a pandemic and disaster plan based on current contingency plans so that there aren't two different plans. I don't know if I'm making any sense, but I would assume that those things are already in place. I just don't want to add more burden, but I understand at the same time that there would have to be a specific methodology when this occurs. It's like an addition to their plans. I just want to recognize that.
Sorry. I know we're all getting tired.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
If they have a plan in place—I'm not sure, maybe they do—would they not already meet the recommendation's requirement? I don't know.
Madame Normandin was on the list to speak next, and then I think that's it. Then maybe we can resolve this.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
At initial reading, the recommendation may seem to be of little interest. However, the more I think about it and read it, the more I think it is actually important. It has been at the heart of all the debates we have held. The recommendation seeks to establish a balance between the health of parliamentarians, the health of people working on Parliament Hill and the respect of parliamentary privileges, including the privilege of coming to testify and taking a seat in Parliament. That has been the key issue in all of our debates.
Even if it was not combined with an accountability mechanism, I think it is important in itself, in a way. When we spend more time on it, we realize that it is anything but a platitude.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay. Perhaps we will look at adopting LIB 8 and LIB 14 and see if there's agreement on those. Then perhaps we'll discuss the other point that's been brought up about where this section goes if it's not to stay here.
Is there agreement on LIB 8? Okay, LIB 8 is adopted.
LIB 14 is going to be moved from the last section—whatever section that is—and brought up to section (g). Is there agreement on LIB 14?
There's a comment.
Mr. Duncan.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
It's just a comment on that, and it builds on what Ms. Blaney said, too. I agree that it does sound right, and it's something we need to discuss. However, I think it might have been the clerk in one of our first meetings.... They were talking about some of the things that are already in place. I don't think a pandemic one is as detailed as those for war, natural disasters or some of those other things.
I agree with the sentiment and wholeheartedly agree that we should take a look at it, that we should keep it on our future to-do list. I think it's something that our committee might want to get some answers on, not just dealing with pandemics but dealing, heaven forbid, with some of those other things as well.
I agree with it. I like it in the future business, but at this point, 8:39 p.m., I'm not going to put up a big fight if it moves.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Yes. Okay, I can see both points.
I think I saw agreement to adopt LIB 14 right before that comment. That is adopted.
Dr. Duncan, do you have a suggestion on where you would like to see it?
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Madam Chair, I feel this has to be right up front. The whole reason we are even doing this study is that we have a public health crisis. You have to be prepared for these things. I think it's important to have that pandemic plan and that disaster risk reduction plan as well.
Up at the front would be my suggestion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay.
Ms. Blaney has a point. Then maybe, Andre, if you have any comments on that, you could let me know.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
It's just to clarify that you want it right under Guiding Principles, part (a), “Temporary nature of procedural changes”.