Evidence of meeting #1 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
In that case, could I move an amendment to include associate members? It would include “members or associate members of the committee”.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I guess we have a broader conversation now, Mr. Hsu, because basically every member of Parliament is an associate member on most committees.
Mr. Julian.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
We may not have the wording, Mr. Chair, but I think his point is a very valid one. I certainly understand, having been a single member on committee and having often been replaced by other members of the NDP, that this access is important.
I'm not sure “associate member” is the right language, but I certainly agree with the intent. If Mr. Hsu is going to be here often, and he and Mr. Regan are subbing off, it would be very important and appropriate that he have access to those records, because on any given meeting he may well be the representative.
That's an important principle, which I think we can all agree with.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Just because we're talking about this specific situation, the clerk has mentioned some wording that might be agreeable: “designated associate member”.
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
No, “designated” associate member would mean that they would have to be designated by the member who's a member of the committee.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Right, but here's the problem we get: they could designate anybody as an associate member. Like, I could designate anybody.
Conservative
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
There's no middle ground. Everybody on our side is an associate member of this committee.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Exactly. I don't want to exclude anybody, but at the same time, I don't want to open up.... I mean, in committee we have in camera stuff, we have our own things that are moving, things that are finished, things that aren't finished, and I'm not sure whether we want to open it up to every other committee. I don't think every other committee opens up everything to us.
Liberal
Ted Hsu Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
My intent wasn't to open it up to all members of all committees. It's simply for this situation, where Geoff and I would be replacing each other on a regular basis. He'd go to two-thirds of the meetings and I'd go to one-third of them, or something like that.
Maybe we can open it up to anybody who's ever had a voting role on the committee.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
I'm going to suggest that we say it should be members of Parliament who were present at the specific meeting. That way, if Mr. Hsu had been present at a meeting and he wanted to look it up, as the official signed-in member he would have access to it.
I was trying to remember in Parliament whether or not there's ever been this situation where something happened in camera with one committee and it was really important that a member from another committee really didn't have access to it at a certain point in time. I cannot recall.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I think the only way to get around it is just to go back to “members of Parliament”. Like Cheryl, I'm trying to remember at what point that would be an important....
Brian, maybe you have a distinction where that would be important.
If the general suggested wording was going to include staff members, certainly allowing members of Parliament to have access to transcripts wouldn't be a bad thing--as long as they're current members of Parliament.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Well, on the surface, it could be; basically what we're doing is we're opening up all of our in camera discussions for any members of Parliament to digest. That's what we're doing.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
But any member of Parliament could sit on the committee, if they wanted.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Right, but they don't.
The committee functions as a body to itself, in that it has some of those contextual elements so that you can understand in camera information. If we want to keep in camera information confidential as well, it's much more complicated when you open up to 308 members of Parliament who don't actually sit on that committee. And that's what we're doing with this.
I mean, I'm okay with it, because you know what? I come from municipal politics, and I actually believe we shouldn't be going in camera for anything, really, aside from personnel issues or conflict of interest related to property. That's the way it works in the province of Ontario.
I actually don't like the fact that we go in camera so much, so you know what? I'll accept it. But what we're doing is we're providing that information basically to all members of Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I have a suggestion that might be comfortable for the committee, depending on the amount of trust you'd like to put in me.
We could say “members of the committee, or members of Parliament at the discretion of the chair”. That way, if we got into a circumstance where another member had to have access, then that could be at the discretion of the chair. It would help us to stem the tide of any unforeseen circumstance that all of us are trying to scratch our heads about right now that could happen, that would give access to information to a broader landscape of people that we wouldn't want at some future date, some consequence that's unforeseen presently.
Madam Gallant.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
So if you say “at the chair's discretion”, would that include independent members who are not included as members of committee?