Evidence of meeting #48 for National Defence in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Remember that name, in case the cops stop you. The name could come in handy. Put it in your BlackBerry.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
We have to remember that name in Ontario, because in the Atlantic provinces, it's your name we have to remember.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Yes, but we have other ways to solve problems like that. We don't always need lawyers.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Bachand spoke to me about it and we agree if the objective is to do the study as soon as possible or rather to do the study without delaying the case. I have no objection to inviting the ombudsman for an hour if that saves us from having another meeting later. If we want to hear from witnesses who have something to say and do it properly, let's not drag the bill on. If we could add an hour on Wednesday, we would be happy to do it.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maxime Bernier
I would just like to remind the members that the committee decided to schedule three days for hearing witnesses. So Wednesday will be an extra day for that.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
First of all, we didn't get that information. I don't know whether you got it. You didn't either?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Okay. And obviously that's something we discussed, but as far as I know, the CDS is being given the financial authority; that is part of the process that's going on now.
But I have a question. When is Michel Drapeau coming?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Okay.
What we're talking about is amending the Federal Accountability Act, not the National Defence Act, with respect to giving the CDS the authority to--not the Accountability Act. Wrong terminology. The Financial Accountability Act.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
The Financial Administration Act. Thank you.
So it's not the National Defence Act that he's going to be discussing; it's the FAA. Pick whichever FAA you want.
The principle is fine. The principle is relevant, but it's not in relation to C-41 and the NDA. It's in relation to another act.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Do you recommend that the government give consideration to recommend FAA?
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
I don't understand. An ombudsman sends us a letter and tells us that he wants to come and testify about Bill C-41 and the grievance process. Are you trying to tell me that it is not in his mandate or in our mandate? That's not what he says in his letter. He says that he wants to come and share his expertise based on a report he already did on Bill C-41. I don't see why we couldn't invite him to appear. I don't understand.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
Let me just read what...because I just had a chance to glance over it.
He's talking about the grievance process as it relates to the authority to provide financial compensation to fully resolve unfairness, which is a legitimate enough statement. But that's under the FAA, not the National Defence Act. C-41 deals with the National Defence Act, not the financial act.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Let me read it.
He says the following: “My understanding is that the Standing Committee on National Defence is currently studying Bill C-41, An Act to amend the National Defence Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.
I think that an aspect of the grievance process of the Canadian Forces should be included in the draft bill, since it would make it possible to correct a significant injustice that the members of the Canadian Forces are currently facing.”
I find that he is referring to Bill C-41 and his presence as a witness is perfectly acceptable.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maxime Bernier
The title of Bill C-41 reads as follows:
an act to amend the National Defence Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts. Mr. Hawn is right, because that will have an effect on other acts. But it's also a global vision, so the discussion is--
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
We're not violently opposed to him coming. I'm just pointing out that now you could read into “make consequential amendments to other acts” that one of those acts is the FAA, I guess. So we're not violently opposed. I just want to make sure we're clear that this is not specifically a C-41 question. It's another question.