Public Accounts Committee on June 13th, 2007

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

I believe that the Standing Orders say all reports of the Auditor General are tabled in Parliament and deemed to be automatically referred to the public accounts committee. I think that is the wording, and anyone can check that out if they want. Therefore, if that is the wording, special investigations, while delivered to the government, would therefore be tabled in the House as well.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Then the question becomes.... Under that wording, it's not precise, but one would assume it should get tabled with the government and with us at the same time.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Well, it's given to the Speaker. I think if I quote the words correctly it says “deemed automatically referred to”.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

We have the law clerk here, so maybe we could have Mr. Walsh take a chair at the table.

Mr. Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I think we are just going around in a circle. People are trying to postpone the discussion, but we have not yet discussed the substance of the motion. In my opinion, whether or not the report is tabled in Parliament and at the committee or just at the committee, the question remains—and we are all aware of this—that this is a public report. From the moment this concerns the Public Accounts Committee, it is up to the committee to make sure that people appear, if there are questions to be asked.

Regardless of the debate that we are having on procedure, for example whether or not it was truly tabled here, I believe that we have to discuss the substance of the question. I call on the Chair to move the debate to the substance of the motion. In fact, I would like the motion to be unanimously passed.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

I'm inclined to agree with Mr. Laforest. This is a good debate—the point of order about how the Auditor General reports to Parliament and our committee and so on—but when I look at the motion itself, the motion looks to me to be a valid motion before this committee. I don't think the point of order should derail that motion, unless I'm missing something.

[An hon. member]

It's not a matter of derailing--

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

But isn't that the point of order, that we shouldn't proceed with this because...? Okay. Well, it's a point of clarification, I guess.

Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Are we off the point of order now and on to the regular motion?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

I'd like to see us get off it.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I probably would like to call on Mr. Walsh, if possible, to answer a question on the constitutionality. Do we have the authority as the public accounts committee, under the Constitution, to call a representative of the Queen to appear before the committee? Perhaps Mr. Walsh could help us answer that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Mr. Walsh, are you able to take the table? We have constitutional questions now.

[An hon. member]

Point of order.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Well, we have this point of order. He was raising the constitutionality of calling a witness before this, and--

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Well, I guess mine would be a point of order, right?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

I interpret that as a point of order.

[An hon. member]

Well, you're wrong.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Whether a witness can be called before this committee on a matter of the Constitution isn't a point of order?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I don't think it's a point of order. He was just asking if he would come forward.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Okay, what's your point of order, Mr. Christopherson? You had one; let's have another one.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I almost forgot.

You're not going to believe it. All I wanted to ask was that given that we're about to receive legal advice, and based on that advice, sometimes we go in one direction, sometimes we go in another, should we be taking the legal advice in camera, or is this matter perfectly legitimate in public?

That's all.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Brian Fitzpatrick]

Mr. Williams.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Just on that question of getting legal advice.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

No, we're not into something.... We're not suing anybody here. I've always taken the position that it has to be serious for the public accounts committee to do its business in public. Things like its own administration, the steering committee, and how it's going to deal with issues we can deal with in camera, but when we are dealing with the business of the public accounts committee, I will fight as much as I can to have it all in public unless there is a very serious reason why it should be in camera. To get legal advice on the Auditor General's reports and the former Lieutenant Governor of Quebec and so on--to me, that's public business.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's fine. I accept that. Implied would be the suggestion that maybe somebody else doesn't care quite as much about that.

I would say to the honourable member with great respect that that holds until the day comes when there is a constitutional interpretation or advice given by the law clerk of Parliament, and we go down one road, maybe based on that advice or maybe not, and then possibly that same advice, because it's in the public domain, is used against Parliament in front of the courts.

That was my only reason for raising it--to protect the ability of this committee and Parliament to defend its actions when it takes a course. But if nobody else is concerned about that, then I'm perfectly fine with our doing this in public.