Evidence of meeting #32 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was family.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
The answer to the first is that I think one meeting would be sufficient, and I would be prepared to change that to before June 12.
Conservative
Conservative
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
I won't be long.
I think this is a good idea. This would be valuable work to do. I have my own questions with regard to how some of this is rolling out, the training piece particularly in my own community, and I would be very interested in hearing from officials as to how that is either happening or going to happen or how we access it. So I'm certainly in support of this.
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Chairman, before voting on this, I would like to tell you that we have two concerns.
First, this represents enough work for quite a long time. If we only hear the opinions of officials... The opinions of officials can also be verified by other evidence. In the ridings, there is a lot of evidence from people who describe situations that are not consistent with what we're being told in the House of Commons. So I very much doubt that what we might hear here would be different from what the minister tells us. It seems there's something important. We agree on substance, but we should not delude ourselves about time.
Second, my concern is that this might be a dilatory measure. I understand that this isn't what our Liberal friends want, but it could have the effect of a dilatory measure. We have work to do on two priority matters: one assigned us by the House and the other by the committee.
The first, which comes from the House, is the study of Bill C-241 concerning the waiting period, which was passed two weeks ago now. It seems to me that we have to study that first. Since the bill contains only one of the employment insurance measures, it could be the subject of one meeting.
The other matter, the one the committee assigned us, is the study on the administration of the accessibility fund, on which our Liberal friends agreed. If Mr. Savage and his colleagues are in agreement, as well as the Conservatives since they support this motion, we will vote in favour of it, but only if we study the two other matters that I think are priorities.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you very much.
I have to chair another meeting at one o'clock. I have four people on the list. I would like to have a vote on this. I have speakers on the list, but I want to indicate that I have to run momentarily.
Mr. Vellacott.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We're all agreed, then. Was there a friendly amendment in terms of one meeting? I'm not sure I'm hearing that from Mr. Lessard. Before I make my comments, was he in agreement with this “friendly amendment” for one meeting before the end of June 12?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
No, I don't believe that was the case.
We're trying to get some consensus here. Mr. Lessard indicated he would only support the motion if we study the motions he had first. We're going to have to come back. We just need unanimous consent before June 12. I will ask that question.
Do I have unanimous consent?
Mr. Lessard.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Mr. Chairman, I don't want to come up against deadlines, but I would like to make an amendment so that we can first study Bill C-241 and the administration of the accessibility fund. If we proceed in that order, we'll vote in favour of the motion. Otherwise that might constitute a dilatory measure, and I don't think that's the intention of our Liberal friends.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
I guess I'm still left at sea as much as ever in terms of what we're voting on. But I guess it requires a formal kind of...for one meeting before the end of June 12. That would be acceptable. It's a supportable kind of thing.
As well, I want us to be clear. If Mr. Lessard proposes a motion, we're going to be adding a lot more other things. With these officials, what Mr. Savage has laid out here seems to be reasonable for our officials to come and respond to. They need to be aware if there are additional things they have to prepare for. Then I think we're getting well beyond some of the things here. This is a tighter focus.
I would be in support of this kind of thing as amended, one meeting before the end of June 12. I don't know if that's what is before us at this time.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Okay. I will call the question.
All those in favour of having one meeting before June 12?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
All right.
Tony, we're going to have to get to your motion next meeting. We'll leave it on the list.
I have to chair the liaison committee right now....
Yes.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
What are we doing with my amendment, Mr. Chairman? I introduced an amendment; what are we doing about it? I moved an amendment requesting that we first study Bill C-241 and the accessibility fund on a priority basis.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
For the time being, this is what we're going to do. We're going to look at this and talk about trying to find some time.
So we will talk about trying to arrange some time for you, Mr. Lessard, but right now I have to adjourn this meeting. I have another meeting.
The meeting is adjourned.