Evidence of meeting #44 for Public Accounts in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Very briefly, Mr. Chair.
My last point is that when we discussed Mr. Walsh's appearance, we simply set aside the motion I submitted Tuesday and we said that we were going to invite him. I don't understand why this should be in the main motion. We will invite him to appear before the committee and this person will explain what should or should not be done. I don't know why this is included in this motion. I thank Mr. Christopherson who is willing to deal with the amended motion separately, but I still wonder why we are doing that when we said Tuesday that we would invite Mr. Walsh. We did not introduce a motion on that and we did not say that we would include it in my motion, which will be going to the House. We simply said that we would invite him.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I just don't understand why we have a dilemma. I would love to support Madame Faille's motion.
Let's get the witnesses here, add an amendment that puts in a layer of protection for the committee and adds to the integrity of where we're going, and support Madame Faille's motion with that amendment. Over. Done. Bring in the witnesses.
What is the problem with that?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joe Volpe
Yes, we're just talking about documents.
Okay. Those in favour of Mr. Kramp's amendment, please say yea.
5:15 p.m.
Some hon. members
Yea.
5:15 p.m.
Some hon. members
Nay.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joe Volpe
Okay. Just one second.
Colleagues, I'm going to vote nay.
(Amendment negatived)
I'm not going to explain the vote, but I think all of the intentions of Mr. Kramp and his colleagues on that side of the table are ones that members on this side of the table have already agreed that we should accomplish. One of the very first things--
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Are you voting against the Privacy Commissioner coming in?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
I'm interested in your rationale, but it sounded you were talking about the merits as opposed to what is status quo. I just wanted to be clear on that.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joe Volpe
No, I didn't say anything. I just said that I think colleagues have already made an accommodation for the intentions that Mr. Kramp outlined, and so--
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Can you explain those accommodations, Mr. Chair? Because you just made a comment and we'd like you to back it up.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
No, just back up. You said there was an accommodation--
