Evidence of meeting #2 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 questions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
I would like to move the question at this point.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Move the previous question? Okay. It's in order to move the previous question.
3:55 p.m.
A voice
No, it's not.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Pardon?
Okay, I'm going to have to get polished on these. I'm advised that it's out of order and that as long as you have someone on the list, you just keep on going. I do have someone on the list and no other first-time speakers.
Mr. Byrne.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Am I to understand, then, since the government members are now suggesting it's redundant and not required, that in order to receive this additional documentation, no further motions would have to be adopted by the committee? We could either do this now or do it later. What I'm asking for is to actually establish a policy, through this motion, that the committee retain the right to summon these documents. And I'm assuming we would not require a motion to that effect down the road. If a certain line item in public accounts were to deserve a little more introspection and retrospection, we could ask for that information and have it received and maybe not even require a committee meeting over it.
I don't understand why committee members would, if it is a legitimate exercise, something the Comptroller General himself is suggesting the committee should retain the right to do.... I'll paraphrase some of the words of my colleague opposite. Either we think the Comptroller General is doing the right job or we think he is not. And if he's not, we should fire him. What the Comptroller General is advising this committee is to retain the right to review this information on an in camera basis. So either the Comptroller General is right or he's wrong.
All I'm asking for is something very straightforward and something very simple, something that is completely in the spirit of what the Comptroller General himself has proposed to us, which is, for the sake of clarity, that we simply add it to the motion and be done with it.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Since my honourable colleague keeps talking about in camera, I would like to propose that we go in camera at this time.
4 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
Is there a seconder?
All right. All in favour of going in camera?
4 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
We're in the middle of a vote. I'll take your point when I'm done.
All those in favour, please indicate. Those opposed?
Before I declare, I'll take your point of order.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Having put a motion on the table, a motion that began debate in an open forum, is it in order to actually go in camera after a motion has been...?
4 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
The clerk is going to double-check to make sure the motion is in order. So just bear with us a moment.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP David Christopherson
The motion is in order. The vote was in order.
(Motion agreed to)
And the motion carried. Therefore, we will move in camera.
Anyone here who is not a member of the committee, a member of Parliament or their staff, support staff of the committee, a translator, or our guests, please leave.
[Proceedings continue in camera]