Evidence of meeting #31 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cuts.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
Yes, I'd like to combine all four of these motions, if we can, and Patrick can speak to his.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Would you number the motions for us so we know what you're talking about?
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
Yes, of course. I would like to do that for you.
In my first motion, I would like to have effective and efficient spending:
That the Human Resources, Social Development, and Status of Persons with Disabilities Committee recommend the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development review existing programs and initiatives to ensure they provide effective and efficient use of taxpayers' dollars.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
What number is that, just so we are all singing on the same song sheet?
Conservative
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
It's number 10, and I would like to have a recorded vote.
Given the minister's appearance today and by listening to some of the questions she had to answer, I think this is very timely. Perhaps the motions I'm putting forward would certainly help us shed some light on some of the decisions she has come to.
I would also like the next one, which is number 11--so numbers 9, 10, and 11 on the sheet you're working with. I'm working with, first of all, the effective and efficient spending. The second one, notification--
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
On number 10, Mr. Chair, the minister has had 9 or 10 months now, and we heard from her that she's been reviewing programs and that they've been reviewing programs and so forth. She is already supposedly doing this. She hasn't consulted. I don't see anything here about consulting, frankly. That would be a better motion, it seems to me. At any rate, I don't see the point of asking her to do what she claims she's already doing. It seems to me this motion is a waste of time.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Okay.
We have a motion before us. Are there any other comments on number 10?
Mr. D'Amours.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Mr. Chairman, we were to discuss the review of existing programs and projects to ensure that taxpayers are getting value for money. This morning, the minister appeared before us for almost two hours. We asked her which projects or programs were being cut and she was not even able to answer even one of these questions. The committee asked these questions.
We are now being asked to evaluate something that we know nothing about, given that the minister has refused to answer us. I think that this motion is rather incoherent. This problem will have to be dealt with if we are to be able to work. We have not even been provided with the required documents.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Hold on for just a second.
I'm going to Mr. Lessard, and then Ms. Yelich.
Mr. Lessard.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
I too am disconcerted over this proposal. First of all, we recommended to the minister that she herself examine the program. She can do it. She doesn't need us, all the more so as she told us this morning that she could make cuts without prior consideration.
Mr. Chairman, are we going to be considering a question that has already been dealt with? There's something about that that is not logical.
Conservative
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
If you notice, all the motions are working together. We're talking about no duplication, we're talking about measurable benefits and effective and efficient spending, so that we ourselves can study it, along with the minister. We are talking about the new programs that have been in question. She has put more money into literacy spending. Let us study these. We're talking about studying, providing, and reviewing existing programs and initiatives. I just want them to understand that I think this would be a very good exercise, considering some of the questioning today.
Conservative
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
I think this is out of order. Here we have the parliamentary secretary coming forward with work that she and her ministry should be doing. We heard today that they're not out there consulting. They want to tie up this committee with their work. We have work that we want to do—work that we bring forward as individual members of the House. That's what committees are about, from what I understand. I prefer that we look at work that's being proposed by individual members of the committee, rather than work that the parliamentary secretary is trying to get us to do for the ministry.
October 31st, 2006 / 1:05 p.m.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
No, not as long as there's debate. Afterwards, I'll call the question.
Are there any other comments or debate?
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
I'd like to make the point that we're not talking about doing her work. We're talking about the way the questioning went today. They weren't satisfied with some of the answers. I would say that this committee would like to see some of her initiatives and programs, to look at how they've been cut. If we looked at these programs in depth, maybe we could satisfy some of the questions. If you watched the line of questioning, it was hardly good questioning.