Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 6th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

The committee is now in session.

We're going to start with the first item of committee business, which is Ms. Duncan's motion.

Ms. Duncan, would you like to present your motion?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

If I—

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair. What happened with the business we were dealing with at the last meeting? Has someone decided not to deal with that any longer?

I thought that would be the first thing to come up, since it was the thing we were dealing with last.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

There should have been a list.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Since debate was adjourned on that, if anyone on the committee wishes to restart debate on that issue, we definitely can do so, but we're going to move on with the next item.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I think we should.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

We can.

Let's move on with this motion now, and then we can definitely bring that back up.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

That's a little odd, but okay.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me begin by congratulating you on your new position, and to say to my colleagues that I'm really looking forward to working with all of you.

I would like to bring forward the following motion:

That the Procedure and House Affairs committee invite officials from the Department of Public Works and Government Services and the House of Commons for briefings on the Centre Block Rehabilitation Project and the Block 2 redevelopment as part of the Long Term Vision and Plan (LTVP) for the Parliamentary Precinct.

I don't think this is controversial. There hasn't been an update on this since the spring. We're dealing with iconic buildings, buildings of historical and archaeological significance. It is an enormous project, at least 10 years and billions of dollars. It is the first full renovation since 1927. Budgets and timelines have yet to be fully determined.

We want to make sure that this building is seismically sound, that it is brought up to modern codes—the removal of asbestos, the updating of electrical and plumbing systems. We want to ensure that the requirements meet the needs of the House of Commons, the Senate and the Library of Parliament. We want to really make sure that it's set up for everyone who works within the House, the Senate, and the Library, and to know whether approvals are required by Parliament. We want to ensure that it's fully accessible. I have heard that the senators are receiving regular briefings.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Ms. Duncan.

Would anyone like to speak to this motion?

We'll have Mr. Richards, and then Ms. Blaney.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I think it's a fine idea, certainly for all the reasons that Ms. Duncan has very eloquently laid out. It would be wise to hear from the officials about the Centre Block rehabilitation.

However, I will move an amendment because I believe that ultimately there's ministerial accountability for everything. I would move the following amendment to add, “and that the Minister of Public Services and Procurement be invited to appear for two hours at a subsequent meeting”, so that we can hear from the minister and ask any questions that there might be on that as well.

I fully support the motion but would suggest that amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay.

Regarding debate on the amendment, go ahead, Ms. Blaney.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

First of all, I appreciate the amendment to the motion and I think that's an important part of the discussion. There's some clarity that I will be seeking around the initial motion as well.

I guess at this point we're debating the amendment. It would be interesting to hear about the rationale for bringing the minister in for the two hours. Do ministers usually come for two hours? I thought sometimes it's their.... I would like some clarity from the member on whether he's expecting the minister to come for two hours, or for the first hour, as I've seen at other committees, and then have staff and bureaucrats come for the second session.

I'm wondering if I could get some clarification on the amendment, please.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

The amendment is inviting the minister for two hours at a subsequent meeting.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Obviously the rationale here is that this is a pretty significant project. We as members would have an opportunity to then ask questions to the person responsible, and members may have suggestions. It will take some time, I would think. Yes, ministers in some cases have chosen to come for only one hour rather than two. Usually they're invited for two. In this case, I would hope the minister would provide two. I think it's not just asking some questions. Members may also have suggestions as well. She is ultimately the person responsible.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you for that clarity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Gerretsen.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I was going to suggest on that topic that in the four years I sat on two other committees I've only ever seen a minister come for one hour, but if the language is “invite for two hours”, I assume the minister can say she's only available for an hour.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

That would be unfortunate, but she could.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you for the commentary on that.

We can definitely ask, but I would suggest that it's probably better to indicate it would be one hour.

The other thing is that our subcommittee will determine the individual witnesses. Isn't that how it normally happens?

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

That's not what's been suggested by the motion, so we're just adding to that. The motion itself is—

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

The motion suggests, if we're going to have a back-and-forth on it—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I wanted to discuss with the committee, after we got through this motion, the scheduling of other meetings, witnesses and how we're going to deal with some of that work here at PROC. I think different committees have done it differently.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I want to be absolutely clear. Let's call a spade a spade. In my experience over the last four years, Conservatives typically, or opposition members, rightfully so—I'm sure that it would be the same if it were the other way around—like to get ministers at the end of the table so they can start asking them any kind of question they want. I think it really comes down to respect for the intent of the motion and the intent of the study, which is to study Centre Block.

If we want to invite a minister here because we want to ask them questions that genuinely relate to Centre Block, I think that's fair game and that's something we should be doing. If we want to invite a minister here to ask about another part of their department that has absolutely nothing to do with Centre Block, I just want to get it out on the table right now. Is that the intent?

You want to stick to that. Then I think that's fair game. I think we need to establish from the outset exactly what that will be.