Justice Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2009

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Chair, to answer Mr. Murphy's question, no, my goal here is not to have us not hear any other witnesses on Bill C-36; it is just to finish clause-by-clause on Bill C-36. If there are witnesses we want to hear who are already scheduled, or others we can hear that day, ultimately I'd like to see us finish Bill C-36 after we've heard from the witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Is there anybody else?

Okay, we'll go to Monsieur Lemay and then to Mr. Comartin.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I 'd like to make sure I understand correctly. Perhaps the translation of the motion is not clear. I would like Mr. Moore to explain to me fully. If I understand correctly, we still have witnesses to hear regarding Bill C-36. Once we have heard from them, whether on Wednesday or at another time, we will begin clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-36 and that consideration will have to be completed before the end of the meeting.

Have I understood correctly, because that is not what is set out in the motion.

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Yes, correct, that's what I would like to see from the motion. It says “that the meeting not adjourn until clause by clause consideration is complete”. After hearing witnesses on Bill C-36, we would then start and finish clause-by-clause on Bill C-36 by the end of the meeting on Wednesday.

If I hear what the chair is saying with regard to our schedule, it seems quite doable to me to finish Bill C-232 clause-by-clause, hear witnesses on Bill C-36, and then do clause-by-clause on Bill C-36 on Wednesday.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I do not agree. I cannot agree with that, because that means that we could be sleeping here on Wednesday evening.

What do you want to do? We will have to vote, because there are votes on Wednesday in the House of Commons.

I had understood that, on the day that we start clause-by-clause consideration, we won't stop until we finish. We could do some work on this. If you are telling us that we will start on Wednesday and we won't stop, this means that we will not be going to vote, because there are votes on Wednesday.

Then, I do not agree with the motion that Bill C-36 is much too important for us to rush through it. If there are any witnesses left, I don't want to rush anyone. I don't think there are many witnesses left, and we will take the time needed to ensure clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-36, even if another meeting is needed.

How many witnesses are left, Mr. Chair, is it two or three?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

There are two, and you may recall, Mr. Lemay, that at our last meeting both you and Mr. Comartin said you had three more witnesses each who you were going to present. None of them have been presented to the clerk.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

No, wait, we will not stay here to fight about it all afternoon. I agree with you. We tried to reach the witnesses. Some of them are unable to come, and that is par for the course.

However, I don't want to be stuck in the situation where we would have to start on Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. and finish Wednesday evening or Thursday morning. I don't want that. We can do it at a later date. On the 16th we will have clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-36. I would like us to take the time to hear from our witnesses, study Bill C-232 as required, and at the following meeting, meaning on the 16th, do clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-36.

What is the national emergency, where's the fire?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Mr. Comartin.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I'm also opposed to it. I don't know what's happened. On Wednesday I expect we'll take the better part of the first half-hour, if there are no amendments to Mr. Godin's Bill C-232. So we'll use up a half-hour then. We then have two witnesses now scheduled. I don't know of any more, but this is what I was informed as of Friday, that we have two witnesses: Mr. Head, from Corrections Canada, from whom I expect we're going to need to get a fair amount of data, and then Professor Manson from Queen's, who also has a good deal of data to give us. I expect they would take up the balance of that hour and a half.

I don't know what's happened. I think I asked for—or somebody else asked, and I would certainly support—somebody coming from the Canadian Bar Association. I don't know whether they're scheduled. Then there were either two or three witnesses, as I understood, on the list coming from the Barreau du Québec, the criminal defence lawyers for Quebec, and from Aide Juridique du Quebec. I don't know what's happened to them, if they're coming, or if there's a problem with their coming on Wednesday. I don't know what the problem is there, but I would expect that if some of them could be available, we might be able to plug one or two of them in. But that would be it, and we'd have to then finish the witnesses on the 16th, which is what I'm looking for.

A final point that I would make with regard to witnesses is that I'm still trying to get at least one and perhaps two other witnesses. It's very difficult, because of the nature of who they are, to get them to be willing to consent to come publicly with their testimony.

The final point I would make is to confirm, besides the question on the scheduling on Wednesday, that clearly we are not going to be able to go beyond 5:30, because of the votes that are scheduled. There's just no jurisdiction here, either in the chair or the committee, to prolong the meeting beyond 5:30 on Wednesday.

So I think the prudent thing to do is to vote against this motion and leave the scheduling, so that we would still have the opportunity to have witnesses on the 16th and finish clause-by-clause on the 16th. I'm not anticipating, from having talked to all parties now, any amendments. As far as I can see, there aren't going to be any amendments, so that we could deal with clause-by-clause on the 16th and finish it at that point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Mr. Murphy.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Well, I guess that was part of my question. I'll take it as a given that there really can't be any amendments to this, because this is eliminating a structure. It's not something you can tinker with, so there probably wouldn't be any amendments; therefore, you probably could deal with some of it on the....

The other point is that I have to take Mr. Comartin's word that at the Wednesday meeting, the first half hour is Yvon Godin's bill, and then, conservatively—a word I don't use much—there would be an hour for the testimony of the witnesses, including Mr. Head and Professor Manson.

So would we expect to do the clause-by-clause in a half hour, at the very best?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Do you have a response?

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I don't know what's happened to the other witnesses, including the Canadian Bar Association and then the three who were on the list from Quebec.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Well, let me respond.

There was a long list that we went through. Many of them have appeared.

Let's start with UCCO, the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers. They declined.

L'Aide juridique du Québec gave no response, despite efforts.

The CBA declined, but they did issue a brief, which we have received.

Le Barreau du Québec declined.

L'Association des avocats de la défense du Québec declined.

The Criminal Lawyers Association was here today, of course.

Victims of Violence were here today.

The John Howard Society was confirmed, and then they spoke through Ms. Pate.

Allan Manson is coming in the next meeting.

Stats Canada declined, but CORCAN is taking their place.

That is it. That's the complete list that was given to us. I trust the clerk to follow up when these requests are made, and it's pretty clear that right now we've exhausted that list, and all we have is Mr. Manson and CORCAN coming for the next meeting.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Is that for an hour and a half?

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Yes, and then for half an hour we could deal with clause-by-clause. It appears there are no amendments on either one of those two bills, so we could typically do those by way of an omnibus vote.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

So we will get to clause-by-clause, likely, on Wednesday, but are not mandated to finish it. That's the bottom line.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

That's not what the motion says. The motion said—

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

No, I'm asking you as the chair. It's expected that we'll get to clause-by-clause at about five o'clock on Wednesday.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Yes.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

And if this motion is not carried, then on Monday, November 16, we would continue clause-by-clause, if we have not finished it on November 4. If we do get to clause-by-clause....

I'm sorry, I'm speaking out of turn.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

No, I understand.

If the motion before us fails, we just continue work on Bill C-36, whatever that may entail.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Therefore, on Wednesday, we would deal with Mr. Godin's bill, I believe it is, for the first half-hour—somebody's bill for the first half-hour—and then have an hour and a half for Bill C-36. We would hear from witnesses; if we completed the witnesses prior to 5:30 in the afternoon, we would then proceed to clause-by-clause.

Now, I'm talking about the case if this motion is not carried. At 5:30, if we have not completed our clause-by-clause, then on Monday, November 16, at 3:30 in the afternoon, when our committee is regularly scheduled to come back, we would continue clause-by-clause and most likely would finish it on November 16.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

That's certainly one scenario that could play out.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

And another scenario is that we proceed to clause-by-clause on Wednesday, November 4, and actually complete it before 5:30.