Evidence of meeting #19 for Public Accounts in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was camera.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Sorry, Mr. Byrne, and I will suspend the time.
Mr. Kramp, I think that was you.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Going around to my earlier point, Mr. Chair, Mr. Byrne is now slipping into issues that were in camera and in confidence and within the privilege of this committee.
I believe the chair actually has the motion before him, and it would be the final point in that. If the chair were to allow that, we would be breaching the privilege of the committee at that point. I ask the chair to take a look at that motion that is before this committee and to rule on that.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Here's my dilemma. It looks as though we're going to have to spend a moment at least on this, because we're into Mr. Byrne's questioning, and I know where he's about to go and I understand what you're saying.
The difficulty I have is that if I'm hearing it right, the government is maintaining that the motion they had before is before the committee--and we would pick that up when we go back, because it's unfinished business--and that also Mr. Byrne's motion is in front. Now, it can't be both. Both motions can't be in front of the committee at the same time. There is only one motion.
To the best of my knowledge, the motion was tabled as a notice of motion with the clerk. I'm not aware that we have been seized of that in camera yet. Therefore, I'm not yet convinced that it's protected by confidence, but I'm listening.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Fine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Whether or not the motion is brought by Mr. Byrne, at issue is still the motion that was presented. If the chair were to allow information to come forward or anything in a line of questioning pertaining to that motion, it would be a breach of the in camera motion that was before—
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Obviously, then, the individuals would be talking directly about the motion that was before the committee in camera, now out of camera. If that were to take place, I personally would hold both the chair and all of the people involved in this committee totally accountable for this.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
I'm accountable for everything I do anyway.
I'm far more concerned about the notion that somehow it's protected in confidence because it's committee business. It's only committee business that's held in confidence if we're....
I'm having this dialogue because I want to be clear on it. I know we're going to get into it, and I want to get it right. It's not clear to me. I want to make the right decision.
It seems to me that a notice of motion about committee business doesn't automatically make it confidential. That matter may or may not end up being discussed in camera. If it started to be discussed in camera, then I would agree--it's a slam dunk—the committee would be seized of it, and would be seized of it in camera. But right now, it's a notice of motion. I don't know where the confidence protection would come from. But as I said, I am listening.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Mr. Chair, I'm not talking about the notice of motion. I am talking about the line of questioning now that falls within the parameters of the topic presented in camera—
4:30 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Hang on, though. There's nothing to stop the committee from dealing with that notice of motion entirely in public. It will only go in camera if the committee moves to deal with it in camera. And since the member hasn't called up the motion, we can't be in camera; therefore, it can't be in confidence. That's my difficulty.
Beyond that, what we have is a member who wants to use his or her five minutes in whatever way he or she pretty much wants.
Go ahead.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Might I just say then, Mr. Chair, if that is the chair's ruling—
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
—then any issue that we discuss in camera we can take onto the floor here and put in whatever form we like, whether it's another question or whether it's a statement. But we can go ahead and do that, as long as we don't say “Oh, by the way, that pertains to something in camera”. We're pretending that didn't even exist? Well, quite frankly, Chair, then in camera is a mockery.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Don't get me going on what I think about in camera.
I'm still trying to determine.... I'm not ruling, but I am maintaining, in this give-and-take to make the right ruling, that unless it's in camera and has already been dealt with as a confidential matter, I have no mechanism to apply confidentiality to the motion. If the member wants to speak about virtually anything other than.... The member would be out of order should he start repeating something that you said, I said, or anyone else said in camera. But we haven't dealt with it yet.
So I'm trying to determine where he's out of order. This is important. I'm sorry to take the time, but it is important.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Mr. Chair, following on that logic.... I accept your logic on that. But accepting that logic then, I could take the original motion in camera, read it now, and ask our witnesses what they think of it. Now, that's according to the ruling that you're suggesting.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
4:30 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Hang on. All that has happened is Mr. Byrne has notified the clerk that he has a notice of motion. That's all. That's all he's done.