Evidence of meeting #35 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was e-mail.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Could I just make a suggestion? If we're going to do that anyway, why not postpone the Monday meeting and have the Industry Canada folks come on Wednesday, which makes more sense for us and gives them more time? Maybe if we get their recommendations on Monday, that gives them a little bit more time to put them together, right?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Before I take any other comments on this issue, the proposal in front of us is to have Industry Canada appear in front of this committee next Wednesday, October 7, then to go clause-by-clause on this piece of legislation on Monday, October 19.
Mr. Vincent.
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Remember that they must also forward their recommendations and any amendments to the bill before Thursday or Friday.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
When you say next Thursday or Friday, what date would that be?
Liberal
Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
I suggest we move the deadline to Monday, since we are going to receive questions on Wednesday.
Bloc
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
We would need to have the documents in hand by Thursday or Friday of this week, to be ready for the following Wednesday. There is no meeting scheduled for next Monday.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I have absolutely no problem with what's recommended, but I think it needs to be said that if we're dealing with this stuff in camera, the information that's provided to us is still in camera and is secret to committee members only. I'm assuming that's accurate.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
So just to clarify the mechanism, they would submit that information through the clerk, right?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
That's right. I've asked the analyst and I'll ask the clerk to contact Industry Canada to make sure they give us the information ahead of next Wednesday's meeting, as soon as possible, preferably by the end of the week but at the latest by Monday morning. So that will give members of this committee ample opportunity to review their suggested changes and comments ahead of next Wednesday's meeting. Then we'll have an in camera meeting on those suggested changes and amendments next week, Wednesday, October 7. Then we'll have the clause-by-clause meeting on this bill on Monday, October 19.
Mr. Masse.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I just have a question, Mr. Chair. Why would we have those amendments in camera? That would seem to me to be an appropriate discussion to have in public because that's the process when you go clause by clause—you're making a submission to those amendments. I would object to going in camera for that type of discussion because there's really nothing sensitive that I can see that we would not want to have the public record reflect.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
I am at your mercy. I will do what the committee wants me to do. Mr. Rota and Mr. Lake suggested going in camera for that one meeting with Industry Canada. So unless there's consensus on this committee not to do that, then that's what we'll do.
Mr. Vincent.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
I am somewhat confused about all of these recommendations. We want Industry Canada officials to forward any amendments to us by Thursday or Friday, so that we can be ready for the meeting the following Wednesday. I do not see the point of hearing from Industry Canada officials in camera, since they are the ones putting these amendments forward to the committee. On Wednesday October 7, we will be hearing from these same officials during a public meeting.
Conservative
Liberal
Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
Mr. Lake approached me and mentioned the recommendation and I agreed at the time, thinking it would just allow for a frank and open discussion without having to worry about what slips out, and the discussion would flow a lot freer. That was my logic in agreeing with Mr. Lake.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
How we look at this is a procedural question, I guess. When we looked at the idea of having the Industry Canada folks here ahead of the clause-by-clause meeting, the idea was really almost an extension of the clause-by-clause, which is normally held in camera. So it was an opportunity to get clarification on those amendments that we would normally be moving in camera in a clause-by-clause meeting, giving us some time to actually take them back and consider them.