Evidence of meeting #34 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was documents.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
The chair is providing a lot of support to the witnesses on fairly simple questions. They're not trick questions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Excuse me, Mr. Genuis.
The order is important, and the chair has the responsibility of scheduling meetings and ensuring that the time is used. There was, as you pointed out, an extensive discussion at the committee. The committee suspended and was scheduled to resume today at the point where it left off, which it did.
You are skilled in parliamentary procedure. You knew that the floor would go back to the speaker, and the speaker had the floor at that stage. The speaker moved a dilatory motion, which you understand as well. That motion was adopted by the majority of this committee—obviously, you did not support that—so we're pursuing Bill C-20, which, if the witnesses were not here, then I will not speculate....
When I review the timing with the clerk, it is to set an agenda that utilizes committee time. Does every committee follow the agenda that's set out? No, but it's why we're here, and the witnesses who are here were invited by the clerk on my instructions.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Chair, thank you for providing that context. I understand what your view is in this regard. I'm not questioning that this is your view, nor that you are sincere in holding it.
My view is that it is pretty fundamental, as a matter of public accountability, that when you're doing something as important as clause-by-clause consideration of a bill that is relevant to many people.... A lot of people are following the debates on this, whether they agree or disagree, because of the pressing challenge that housing is in this country, but frankly, that's not the point. It could be any bill. If the committee were to proceed to committee business to discuss some item that was in private or to hear from witnesses who had already been scheduled....
We had an agreement as a committee that four meetings would occur, and then, in what is the middle of the meeting of April 23, the committee proceeded to clause-by-clause study. I'm trying to understand how that decision came about and why there wasn't any public communication around it.
It is not an appropriate way for committees to function, and more fundamentally, I don't think it's fair to the public in the context of the input that members of the public would like to have, and have a right to have, as it relates to housing issues.
I also haven't received a simple answer from the witnesses on a simple question.
Chair, you told the committee—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
On a clarification point, Mr. Genuis, you have the right as a committee member to ask a question. You do not have the right to dictate what the answer from the witness would be. The witness answered the questions.
If we could keep relevance to what the committee agreed to proceed with, which is clause-by-clause study of Bill C-20, it would be helpful.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Chair, what you just said is sort of true and sort of not true. I don't have a right to dictate a particular answer, but the established rules of committees are that witnesses have to provide an answer to the questions that are asked.
I don't want to go here, but it is the right of committee members to ask questions of those who are here as witnesses, and they have to provide an answer. This is a matter that has been considered and affirmed by various Speakers.
That's an important caveat around the rules. I don't think we're going to get all the way there, but I want to clarify in terms of the principle of questions and answers, because sometimes things get said that.... I don't want to create a precedent that when something is said, it could be correct and could be not, depending on how the statement is interpreted.
Through the chair, my question for the witnesses is this: When did you receive the invitation through parliamentary affairs to be here this morning?
Director General, Housing Policy Branch, Department of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities
It was confirmed yesterday afternoon that we should be prepared, should the meeting go into clause-by-clause study, to attend this morning.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
You said it was confirmed. To me, that would seem to imply that a provisional invitation was sent earlier.
When were you initially invited or initially told that there was a possibility or a likelihood of being needed here to testify?
Director General, Housing Policy Branch, Department of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities
Definitely, on the departmental side, we have been looking at the sequencing of the review that was set out. That's the sequencing the committee initially set with proposed potential dates. It was confirmed yesterday afternoon, through messages with parliamentary affairs and the clerk, that departmental officials should be ready as witnesses if today was indeed when clause-by-clause was meant to take place.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Very respectfully, do you understand that's not an answer to my question?
My question wasn't when it was confirmed. My question was, when were you invited?
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Through the chair, my question for the witness—
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
You're getting an answer. You may not be happy with the answer, but you're getting an answer.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Would you bring your comments to the clause-by-clause of Bill C-20?
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Chair, we are on the item of clause-by-clause on Bill C-20.
I am asking the witnesses who are here when they were invited to appear on the clause-by-clause of Bill C-20. That is not only relevant; it is, in a way, the most relevant thing. It is precisely on the point of how we are here and how we got to an item that was not on the agenda.
You're right. I have asked the same question over and over. It's not a matter of not liking the answer. If someone said “Tuesday” and I would have preferred to get an answer of “Wednesday”, that's not the issue here. The issue is that I haven't been told when the invitation was issued.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
I can't really hear what you're saying, Ms. Desrochers. You don't have the floor, but if you want to raise a point of order, you're entitled to do that. I can't hear what you're saying.
I will ask one more time and I won't repeat it again, but I want to underline that we have witnesses here. Maybe there wasn't time to brief them on the process, but the process is that they're supposed to answer the questions. It's a matter of parliamentary privilege that they're supposed to answer the questions that are put to them.
It's a simple, factual question—