Public Accounts Committee on March 24th, 2011

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

I simply wanted to be certain of that, Mr. Chairman.

Therefore, if I have your permission to speak, I would like, first of all, to give to our clerk a document that she could distribute to all committee members, which would facilitate things.

I will wait until everyone has received a copy. I am convinced that this will simplify everyone's understanding of the issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Mr. Dreeshen, a point of order.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you. I tried to get your attention before we went into any particular motion. So may I have the floor?

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Yes.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you.

I wanted to go back to what Mr. Christopherson said when he said that in reality what we're doing is we're looking at the Office of the Auditor General. If it's somebody who's a deputy from the office, they would be the ones being presented here. I don't think specifically it's a personality conflict between the Auditor General and the former commissioner, so I think if it is two months from now or whatever, it's important that the principals from the Auditor General are the ones who are presenting their findings. I don't think it's a one-on-one situation. That was the point I wanted to bring up.

I think a lot of people, when they look at the sorts of things that have been happening, feel that it is two people butting heads here, and I don't believe this is the case. So I would suggest that we don't necessarily have to get caught up in that situation if it happens to be a month or two months from now, as your concern was whether or not Madam Fraser would be able to attend.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dreeshen.

I took great pains to refer to them both as agents, former and current. I realize that there might be some perceptions. Certainly people can take those perceptions about two individuals, two personalities in conflict. That's not our business. I don't take it that way. It's not our interest. We want to know whether the report has bearing and whether...that's all.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

We have already passed that motion, so when you're talking about the agent from the Auditor General, you're not specifically talking about Sheila Fraser.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

No. The first indication was that she would be the officer. I raised the question that assuming that the House continues its work, she may not be personally available after the end of May, but that doesn't mean necessarily that she won't be. I just threw that as a flag. Of course, if the House does not sit, then we don't have to worry about it until the House resumes, and then the committee, however it's structured, can deal with it as it wants. But from our point of view, at least we tie that knot.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Thank you, Mr. Dreeshen.

Monsieur D'Amours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Given that I have provided you with a document, I am going to read it. I am doing so in the context of committee business. It is a motion. I will read it and then I would like us to—

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

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, the motion is presented here. I don't think it is within the terms of acceptance without 48 hours, in order to go on the agenda, so I don't think we can entertain this motion at this particular point.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

However, next Tuesday we could.

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

For the next meeting, on Tuesday, it is no problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Mr. Kramp, we're in the business portion of the committee meeting and this is being raised as an item of business, so it's in order. Whether we want to deal with it is another story, but it is in order to present.

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

Fine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I had underscored the fact that I was making this presentation in the context of committee business. The motion reads as follows:

That the committee report the following to the House of Commons:

Whereas reports of the Auditor General of Canada are of critical importance to our democracy and whereas the Auditor General Act states that—section 5—each additional report of the Auditor General to the House of Commons made under subsection (1) shall be submitted to the House of Commons on the expiration of thirty days after the notice is sent pursuant to subsection (4) or any longer period that is specified in the notice and the Speaker of the House of Commons shall lay each such report before the House of Commons forthwith after receiving it or, if that House is not then sitting, on any of the first fifteen days on which that House is sitting after the Speaker receives it. And whereas the Speaker of the House of Commons continues to hold office during dissolution of Parliament, that notwithstanding the Act, the committee calls on the Speaker of the House of Commons, in the event of dissolution of Parliament, to post a copy of any report of the Auditor General on the Parliamentary website the same day that he receives it.

I believe this motion is relatively simple, Mr. Chairman. With your permission, I would like us to deal with it immediately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

Is there debate?

Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank Mr. D'Amours for this motion, for his tabling it today. I would say that it is something, obviously, everybody on this committee understands. We're not going to be dealing with it today because it requires 48 hours' notice in advance and there were other motions even ahead of this one.

So we will look at this perhaps next Tuesday, when there would be an opportunity to deal with that at the next meeting of the committee, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

I'm sorry, I was getting advice on your observation. I already did rule that it was in order and I did say that we were in the business section of the committee.

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

We need 48 hours for a notice of motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

No, you can raise a motion from the floor if you're in the business--

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

You can't do that.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Mr. Chair, I have a motion that has been on the floor of this committee since February 11. That motion takes precedence over this motion. We have discussed the issue of dealing with documents over and over again in this committee, and we need to deal with this once and for all to prevent this committee chair from constantly allowing documents to somehow be leaked to further his and their party.