Human Resources Committee on Oct. 19th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

We had some discussions ahead of the meeting. Do you want to see this report before we vote on it? Is that right?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

No. I thought Mr. Watson had said he wanted to see a copy. Am I mistaken?

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

That was the nature of my intervention. I appreciate that a subcommittee may have looked at this in some amount of detail, but my only difficulty--and I guess we can work through it today, if we have to, in order to get to a vote--is that I'm trying to scribble down a lengthy motion, trying to encapsulate it into the report without having some...I'm visual. I have to be able to see it rather than hearing it. It's the only part I struggle with.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Right. Each one of the parties has a representative who is on this executive committee--

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

I appreciate that, but I have my own rights, Madam Chair, as an individual member.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

You absolutely do, so I guess you have to take it up with your PS, Mr. Watson.

Mr. Martin.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I simply wanted to say that we had a very good meeting this morning. We had a good discussion, as we have in the past at the subcommittee meetings. We came forward with a recommendation. Actually, the recommendation was laid out very nicely for us by your PS, Mr. Komarnicki, and we all agreed that it was a good way forward. There was enough flexibility in it so that if we needed to do so we could make some decisions as we moved along.

The meeting happened this morning. To get a report written and back out and translated and everything would have been really difficult. So I'd like to see us move on this. We have a lot of important work to get done at this committee and I'd like to see us move on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

We have to get to this, yes.

All right. Thank you.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

For the purpose of the committee, I'm not trying to stall the committee's work--

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you, Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Let it be instructive for the future. I'm hoping, then, to see something in writing, if possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Watson, we'll see, but as a committee there's really no sense having these executive committee meetings where you actually...I talked to the government side, Mr. Watson. We didn't merely come up with this plan on our own. I talked to everybody, actually, throughout this past week. I do appreciate what you're saying, but a lot of it was agreed to. You absolutely do have a right if you want to ask for that. I guess we'll have to decide if we want to continue with these executive meetings and if we have to produce reports from them before we can move ahead.

Would you be okay...? Are we going to go ahead and vote on it, or do you want to wait?

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

It's a very fine point, but the committee still has to adopt what the subcommittee does and I have to be able to cast a vote on whether or not I agree with the agenda presented. So my rights very much are at stake in this. I'm not trying to be a goof about this. It's not a minor technical point. I have to have some understanding before I cast a vote. I appreciate that I have a parliamentary secretary, but he doesn't benevolently vote for me. My own privileges are at stake here.

So for the future, I'm hoping that whatever report.... Since the committee has to adopt the subcommittee's report, I'd actually like to see it. It's a practice at so many committees, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Do you have a report, Monsieur Lessard?

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

It's not undone before--

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

The problem is perhaps due to the fact that after our hearings, we went straight into committee business. Usually, when a small committee like this one meets, it holds its meeting, and then each party has the time to meet with its members. I imagine that if Mr. Komarnicki had had the time to do this, Mr. Watson would not have had to raise the issue this morning.

From now on when we meet, we should ideally have some time between the official meeting and committee business.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Komarnicki.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I think it's an absolutely fair point. When a subcommittee reports to the committee, I think without question the committee of the whole can look at it, accept it, not accept it, vary it, because that's the right of the committee. You would think that in most cases what the subcommittee puts forward would be accepted, because that's why you have them, but I think there is an important right there for the committee. I think it would be appropriate this morning for Mr. Watson to read through the written submission portion and make whatever representation he would like as a result of that. We're not likely to have another subcommittee meeting for a very long time if that proposal is followed, because there are a number of studies and so on.

In fairness, the written report was crafted by Madame Folco, and I know there was an issue that was raised by Mr. Lessard about government bills and private members' bills. I think the intent of the subcommittee was that those would be interjected in and amongst the studies as they came up. In fairness, I wouldn't mind having a look at the written one myself to see that that principle is not somehow taken away from by what's written. So I think it's fair to circulate that and take a few moments to be sure we're on the same page.

That would be my view.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Might I suggest something then? Could we at least agree on the motion to ask for an extension on the private member's bill, and then as far as the report as to what the subcommittee decided on and the agenda, we could wait, circulate it to everybody, then discuss it at our next meeting? We can take 15 minutes.

Would I have agreement for that, or is that really not...?

Mr. Savage.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I understand Jeff's point, but he can look at it and read it. He can take 30 seconds, if he wants to read it a second time, and let's vote on it. You can always reconsider at a later point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Would you be in agreement to voting on it now? Or do you want an actual copy of it?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Madam Chair, this is not that complicated a matter. I think Mr. Watson would certainly be capable of making a decision based on what he sees.

I would like to raise one point that I see here. It says that time will be made for any private member's bill. It doesn't include government bills; it probably should. I'm not sure whether that was an oversight. Was it?

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Yes.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Okay. So I would say, if we added government bills, that it then would reflect what we've said. I think there's nothing complicated and that we could then vote on it.

Would that be fair?

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Madam Chair, I wasn't suggesting putting off until later. In point of fact, probably a two-minute suspension would have solved it. I could have read the report.