Human Resources Committee on Oct. 9th, 2020

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I support Ms. Young's motion.

To answer Mr. Kent, if it does not set any prioritization for the study, you will have to then determine that, since there are a number of studies that were adopted by the committee including one from Mrs. Falk on grandparents and supportive grandparents, one on the Canada summer jobs program and a COVID-related study that the committee was in the process of undertaking.

In my view, there's no reason why we would not readopt the studies and continue to have them on the table, as well as any other studies that may be brought forward by members of the committee, and then the committee will have to prioritize what studies we actually do in this Parliament. That will at least leave all the studies that were already adopted, having been put forward by all the different parties, on the books so that the committee may indeed proceed with them, should the committee want to do so.

I will add a comment in French.

I feel it is very important to mention that studies have already been proposed by members of different parties. This does not mean that the committee will give them priority, and we may also give priority to other studies that we decide to undertake. Those studies may already have been debated, because some members felt it was important to undertake them. I have no problem with that, especially if the committee wishes to move forward. Any decision will be made by the committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Housefather.

Mr. Vis, go ahead, please.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

It's nice to see some of my colleagues back at the committee table again. I'm very pleased to be recommencing.

For the sake of our new members, at the finalization of my current comments, I would kindly ask that the clerk tell the HUMA members which studies were actually on the table.

I would also add to the comments of my colleague MP Falk that the world and the priorities of this committee need to change with what's been happening in our country. When we had those original debates, COVID wasn't really an issue. I think we need to re-examine what we're doing. We need to look very closely at the new benefits that were just announced by the Government of Canada and at some of the new housing initiatives that were just announced by the new government, and really strategically think about how our work on this committee is going to serve the well-being of Canadians, hold the government to account and ensure that we're doing the most for the people who brought us here.

I disagree with adopting all of the same studies that we had to achieve that end.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I hope that the clerk can provide us that quick update for the new members right now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you very much, Mr. Vis. I think that's a reasonable request.

I don't know whether you have that at your fingertips, Mr. Clerk, or whether anyone else might have that list of adopted substantive motions at their fingertips, but I certainly agree with Mr. Vis that it would be helpful for everyone to have it. Do you have it, Mr. Clerk?

[The Clerk]

I do in fact have it. It's up to the members what they would prefer. I can read out the motions that were adopted by the committee or I can send it as an email to everyone. I have it as a PDF document.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Can you give us the motions in English and French?

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

We would like to get them, please.

[The Clerk]

It sounds as though everyone would prefer to receive them as an email, and then we'll have them in both English and French.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

If you can send them right away, then yes, absolutely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Vis and Mr. Clerk.

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank the members.

I am also pleased to sit on the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

I say that I live in the most beautiful constituency, and I now add that we sit on the best committee.

I would like to speak about two things, starting with the motion before us.

Then, Mr. Chair, I also have some notices of motion to present to you. Please let me know when would be the best time for me to do it. It is important to me that I present them to you.

I understand the objective behind reintroducing all motions previously passed here in committee, so that we can consider them. However, our committee has a number of motions on the table. Then we became a COVID-19 committee, and we considered only issues related to that.

Now, I stand with the others. When the House was prorogued on August 20, that meant our committee no longer existed, that all motions were dropped and that the main ministers’ mandate letters no longer applied either. I also thought that the committee struck today would pick up its business on a new basis. That does not mean that certain motions could not be moved again. It is a question of passing them all together. However, it seems to me that, strategically, we should assess each motion on its merits and consider new motions that will be proposed.

Mr. Chair, can you confirm that, if we debate this motion, we will be able to present our motions afterwards?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Exactly. Ms. Young has indicated that she has a second motion. Then we will be ready to receive others.

Thank you.

Mrs. Falk, you have the floor.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

I am wondering if MP Young could repeat the words of the motion.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Yes, of course. I move, “That the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities Committee agrees that all substantive motions adopted by the committee to undertake studies or hear from witnesses in the first session of the 43rd legislature are hereby readopted by the committee without modification or amendment.”

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I would be more inclined to support this if there were something in there confirming that that isn't the prioritized list. If the point of the government of proroguing Parliament was to reset, I think the committee should follow suit as well.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

To MP Kent's point, there was already a motion last session to invite ministers to appear before the committee—I think before November 30—so MP Young's motion should reinstate that I believe.

Is that correct? I think that might allay MP Kent's concerns.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

That would be my understanding as well.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I want to again speak to the point that Ms. Falk and others have raised, that there is no prioritization set out in this motion. This motion simply sets out that all the studies and witnesses called by the committee would be reinstated without amendment.

The committee is free to set out its priorities by separate resolution, which then the committee will do. However, this motion itself doesn't do that in setting priorities; it simply reinstates what the committee has already adopted.

I'm sure that the clerk can confirm that, based on the wording of the motion, or the chair. However, as a former chair, that is certainly my understanding of how the motion reads.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

My understanding is that her next motion will deal with priorities, but not this one.

Mr. Turnbull, please.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Much to the same point as my colleague Mr. Housefather, I was just going to point out that this motion does not prioritize or limit us from prioritizing the different motions but really kind of re-enacts or reboots and retables the motions that were there before. From my recollection, many of the studies are still, and maybe even more, relevant given the COVID-19 pandemic, so we could revisit those.

Certainly the subcommittee functions to prioritize work to some degree as well. There are multiple opportunities, and I understand that the main estimates are already included in that list, so I think that deals with Mr. Kent's concern. It seems maybe we could deal with these in two separate issues, as two separate votes.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

To that point, the amendment to Ms. Kusie's original motion did provide for the main estimates. Again, I was making that point on the basis of post-prorogation and the expectation that all those original amendments would have died with the previous government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Chair, I completely understand that proposing all of our motions, studies and witness lists all over again does not necessarily mean that we are giving them priority. However, when we do so, it will all end up somewhere in our calendar, whether we prioritize it or not.

If that means that we may decide not to go ahead with one of the motions to accommodate new motions because we are a new committee, I can live with that. However, given our work resumption strategy, if we do not prioritize beforehand those motions we have already passed, we will have to do so later, and that concerns me. If reintroducing them does not necessarily mean we are going to consider them because there will be other more important ones, I can live with that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

Ms. Young, do you have a further intervention?

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I just want to reiterate that my next motion will deal with prioritization. At first, when I was considering these motions, I was thinking of doing it all in one, and then I thought it was best to keep them separate for the reasons we're hearing right now.