Public Accounts Committee on March 8th, 2011

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Mr. Chair, I don't have any difficulty with that; however, I have some concerns. Are we asking for something that is doable and reasonable? I don't know. I'm wondering, should we hear from Treasury Board prior to asking for that?

I'm throwing this on the floor. I have no problem with receiving information, but once again, is there a time and a place for it? Is it the time for that motion, or is the time after we have had a request? If we have heard from Treasury Board and we're not satisfied with what we hear, then I think that motion would be in order—if we're not satisfied, but in a sequence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Mr. Kramp, it's in order to ask for information. Whether we get it or get it in a digestible fashion is something we can deal with later. Our decision is whether we want to accept an expansion of the motion first or not. Let's not pre-judge anything else.

Do we want to accept the expansion or not? You're saying yes; you don't have a problem with that, but you'd like to discuss other things later.

In the interest of moving forward, since....

I don't know whether I should take it that you speak for people on that side of the table or not.

No, you don't? All right.

Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think what is really important, when this motion goes forward, is that we have already dealt with the issue of documents—how they're going to be treated, the kind of confidentiality, the process we're going to be using, and whether there will be an in camera meeting with numbered hard copies given to each member of the committee and collected at the end of each meeting.

I think it's important that before we proceed we actually discuss how we deal with documents. Our experience, obviously, is not a good experience; there have been some serious leaks. We simply lose credibility as a committee if we continue to allow this to happen. I think it's of utmost importance that all of us—not just the steering committee, but every single member of this committee—have a vested interest in the integrity of the committee. Therefore, I think it's up to every member of this committee—as a whole, not as a steering committee—to decide how the documentation is going to be handled. It's very important that the decision be made, that this question be discussed, before anything else goes forward, because there is a risk that confidential—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

So you want to say no to the enlarging of the motion? That's all we're talking about right now.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

What I'm talking about is emphasizing the importance of dealing with the issue of confidentiality with the documentation. I'm saying that we should deal with that question at our first possible opportunity, which I see as being right now. I don't think it should be decided—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

If we can get it done in about a minute and a half, then it would be right now. So if you don't mind my—

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

I think it should be discussed in the committee as a whole.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Mr. Saxton, you do have an objection to widening the scope of the motion.

Mr. D'Amours.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, I'll get right to the point.

This involves deciding whether we are expanding the motion or not. It doesn't involve knowing what we are going to do with the documents. Can we agree on expanding the motion or not, nothing more? If not, we will reach a decision on the main motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Mr. Bains.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

I suggest that you call the vote. We have already discussed the process of how to deal with the documents. I would suggest, keeping in mind that we have a vote as well, that you call the vote, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Mr. Young.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Mr. Chair, I would like, one more time, to emphasize how important it is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

I have Mr. Young, then Mr. Saxton.

Are you in favour of enlarging the scope or not?

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

Yes. In fact, I'm profoundly concerned about this motion without conditions, because of what happened—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

What does it say, Mr. Young? Are you in favour of widening the motion so that we can deal with the motion or not? That's all we're asking—yes or no.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

Let me tell you what my concern is, Chair. I missed the last meeting, and I'm sorry I missed the last meeting, but I had important work that took me out of Parliament.

There is a shadow on everybody in this committee right now because of the leak of private information, which really belonged to one primary individual but to others as well, confidential information that should have never gone beyond the membership of this committee.

I have to answer for that in my riding, and every person has to answer for that in their riding and explain how it could happen. There are some people, I guess, who take great joy in it. It makes me think of WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks all of a sudden are exposing everything to the world, and everybody thinks there will be freer information everywhere, when in fact it does the exact opposite. What's going to happen with information with WikiLeaks is that it will be driven down further—

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Thank you, Mr. Young. You had an opportunity. You weren't here.

I think I have a longer list now to discuss this. It's clear that the committee is not seized with the opportunity to deal with Mr. Bains' motion. We are being called to a vote as well. I guess we'll deal with this at another meeting.

Meanwhile, we have already established a sitting of the steering committee, and the issue will again be dealt with there.

Thank you, colleagues.

The meeting is adjourned.