National Defence Committee on Sept. 30th, 2010

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Jack may say it's not point and counterpoint, but in fact with Alan Williams it is. Alan Williams has a particular viewpoint and a particular agenda. If we're going to get Alan Williams for an hour and a half...we have not had the man who, for the last five years, has been responsible for military procurement, which is Dan Ross. We had him as part of another panel and his part was pretty small.

In the interest of balance and fairness, if we're going to get Alan Williams for an hour and a half, then we need to bring Dan Ross back, because it is very much point and counterpoint. The philosophy and practice of procurement under Alan Williams was pretty much 180 degrees out from the practice of Dan Ross, and that was under both governments.

So it's not an issue of Liberals and Conservatives; it's a matter of procurement practice and why did it change? People can have their own opinions about which one is better or not, that's fine, but if we're going to get one side for an hour and a half, then we need the man who's been doing it for the last five years, who I would argue is a little more current, for longer than as part of a previous panel.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I don't have a problem with that. I'm not afraid of the facts here. I don't think there was balance last time. I think if we're going to hear from Alan Williams, we should hear from him for an hour and a half. If someone wants to hear from Dan Ross for an hour and a half the next day, that's fine with me.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

In the interest of time as well as being able to sort out the issues of what went on before, what's going on now, and are there differences in practices, having them both at the same time is practical and efficient.

I know Alan likes to put on a show, bring in cameras, and everything else, but this is serious business. It is a major expenditure. It is something that our armed forces are going to rely upon for their safety and security for a generation, and I want to get to the bottom of the issues.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Okay. How about Alan Williams and Dan Ross next Thursday for one hour each?

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

At the same time?

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

On the same panel, I mean.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Yes.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Someone said no. Okay.

I will proceed now with motions. I'm going to you, Ms. Gallant.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

It's on the point.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Are we allowed to talk about anything today? We don't have a full committee here. We are missing the chair and--

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

We have quorum.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Well, we may have a quorum, but we don't have an agenda laying out what we were going to talk about today. You told me yesterday we could think about talking about it next Tuesday.

If we're going to try to sort everything out, we should have the full committee here.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Next Tuesday is resolved. We will have two panels.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Okay, let's talk about it next Tuesday.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Okay. Mrs. Findlay.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I'm not a Mrs., by the way. I understand there's a French-English translation, but--

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Madame Findlay?

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Martha works fine, thank you. Mrs. does not.

It is on exactly the point about the order of the witnesses. I think my colleague has said we want to hear as much as we can.

To Ms. Gallant's comment about the interest of time, for something of this size and this import I don't think time should be the critical thing. I think this committee should actually devote as much time as is necessary to this given the size and import of the task.

I do actually have some concern given that we know we're going to have witnesses who have very different opinions. In a legal environment, when you have a witness and then you have another witness--one for the defence and one for the prosecution--there is always a chance to come back, specifically because the order actually does matter. So I would actually want to make sure there was the opportunity either for these witnesses, who we know are going to have different opinions, to be here at the same time...and not to allow one to then come after the other. I don't care which one. In either case, if you have two witnesses who are going to have very different opinions, having one person go second without an opportunity for the first one to come back afterwards is giving a significant advantage to the testimony of the second person.

So I would recommend that since the order is important, we should accommodate that. So it may actually make sense to have them come at the same time.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Can I suggest that--and no disrespect is aimed at that side--since none of the Liberal members here today are regular members of the committee, and certainly the critic is not here, that maybe as Jack suggested we should discuss this next Tuesday? We'd have the industry panels on Tuesday and then try to set aside some time to discuss future business at that point--

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Do we agree with that?

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

--with the regular members and--

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Does everybody agree with this? We're going to be maintaining the two panels for next Tuesday, but we'll have a discussion about the panel on Thursday next Tuesday.

[Wolfgang Koerner, Committee Researcher]

That's assuming they are going to be available. You're going to give us a little wiggle room to move them around if they're not?

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Maybe we could ask for a substitute if one can't, because we also have here Paul Lindahl from NGRAIN and Tom Beach from Handling Specialty. They are on the list. And Sylvain Bédard is on the list also, from L3 Communications. So maybe if three of them can't come, we'll replace them with these three. Okay?

Everything is okay?

Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.