Human Resources Committee on June 4th, 2020

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I've already dealt with the issue of why I believe the word “emails” should be removed.

I just want to explain “and dated”, because we haven't discussed that. I just think those are missing words. That's just a technical cleanup, because it doesn't explain in the motion. It just says documents “between March 1, 2020 and May 28,” but it doesn't say “sent”, “received” or “dated”. I am just cleaning up the wording to use the word “dated”. I don't consider that to be substantive.

The only substantive change is the issue to remove “emails”. I just want to clarify why I added the words “and dated”. I just think there are words missing from the resolution to specify that when they search the documents, they can figure out what documents to actually go to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Housefather.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

Seeing none, we will proceed with the question by way of recorded vote. This is on the amendment that I just read to further amend the motion.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I'm sorry, Chair. Is that the amendment to exclude the word “emails”?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Yes.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Then my vote is yes.

[The Clerk]

Thank you.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Now that we have passed the two amendments, we need to vote on the main motion as amended. If you wish to speak on the main motion, please use the “Raise Hand” function.

Seeing none...oh, I see one.

Go ahead, Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Can I just clarify that the friendly amendment that Ms. Kwan made includes emails from the ministers and senior officials, but it is “from” ministers and senior officials and not “to” ministers and senior officials?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Ms. Kwan, do you care to respond to that?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

I would assume that it is “from” and “to”, actually. I don't have the original motion in front of me. The intent of my amendment is to limit the scope so that it's not involving every single individual within the ministry, but rather for it to be limited to the minister and the senior officials.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Does that help?

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Yes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Albas is next, please.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One of the reasons we'd like to have “to” and “from”—and I appreciate MP Kwan for her interventions today—is that we've had officials and the minister talk about “guidance” that was given. Hopefully, we can find out in what shape or form that guidance was given to officials. I hope that all members, in the pursuit of open and transparent government, particularly right now since Parliament is closed, will support this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

Is there any further debate on the motion as amended? Seeing none, we're ready for the question.

Madam Clerk, please proceed with a recorded vote.

[The Clerk]

Thank you.

Mr. Dong—

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

I'm sorry. Could you repeat the vote again?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Dong, this is a vote on the motion as amended.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk.

To our witnesses, thank you very much for your patience. Thank you very much for your statements. I sincerely regret—

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

I have a point of order.

In the future, when we invite Canadians to take time out of their lives and their busy schedules to provide us with advice and more information to deepen our understanding of the perspectives advanced, is it possible for us to, as a matter of practice, especially in this time of Zoom calls, delay these procedural housekeeping motions, especially when we have broad consensus? That way we don't waste the time of advocates and experts and can hear from them and, in an open Parliament, do our work as parliamentarians.

I would like to apologize personally to the two guests.

I think that we have a way of managing this better, a way that doesn't put the lives of the Canadians we ask to contribute to our work in a position that I find quite uncomfortable and in fact a little discourteous to their time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Vaughan, there are three others who want to speak on your point of order.

The point that you raise is one that I believe would be appropriately dealt with at the subcommittee on agenda and procedure. I would be happy to raise it there, but there are others who want to speak on your point of order.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

I find that acceptable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Go ahead, Ms. Kwan, please.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wonder whether or not the committee would be able to invite our two guests to come back to a committee meeting so that we can proceed with the questioning component.

I would love to ask questions of our witnesses. They presented very thoughtful, informative and important information to us today, and we missed the opportunity to engage in that dialogue with them. Can we endeavour to make that arrangement somehow, Mr. Chair?

I hope that all the committee members would agree that this is something we should do if the witnesses are amenable.

I do apologize that we will have to make you come back, but I think that the points you made are very important for us to have a discussion on.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I think I see at least two thumbs up on my screen. Ms. Senior likes the idea, and it appears that Mr. Vis does.

I do think that it would be appropriate to raise it at the subcommittee, so thank you for that suggestion.

Go ahead, Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes, I would just like to thank the witnesses for their testimonies. I too would like to have an opportunity to ask questions at some point.

Let's be mindful here that the committee does have a mandate, and we all take our roles as parliamentarians very seriously. If there is an issue on which we believe is in the public interest for us to get a production of papers.... We saw all parties participate in that debate, and we did see that ultimately everyone voted in favour of it.

While I understand Mr. Vaughan's concerns, I will also point out that I too have been concerned when, due to technological issues, we have not been able, as members of Parliament, to ask questions of our expert witnesses. That is unfortunate, but that is also part and parcel of parliamentary life, particularly on Zoom.

I ask Mr. Vaughan to understand that we all have a role to play here. He may not like the timing, and I may not like it either, but I believe that there is a public interest that was supported by all parties.