Public Accounts Committee on April 19th, 2012

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Okay. I'll look to our analyst for assistance. You're leaving the April 24 meeting in.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Perhaps after the word “study” there could be “and to begin on April 26”.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Point of order.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I don't know about a point of order. I'll give you the floor, though.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Mr. Chair, there is a definite point of order. The friendly amendment, as it's being termed, is not in order because the mover of the primary motion cannot move a friendly amendment to his own motion unless he has unanimous consent—

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I know, exactly.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

—so there has to be a mover of an amendment, and that could only be done when that particular member has the floor.

I have asked to be on the speakers list. We cannot, at this point in time, consider what has to be considered the Shipley amendment because it has not been moved.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Agreed. You just said what I said in different words.

If there's not unanimous consent, then it does not automatically form part of the original motion. If someone wants to amend it, they have to go through the formal motion; however, if somebody throws out an idea in their suggestion, as Mr. Shipley did, and the mover says he's okay with that, and everybody else says okay, then we'll amend the main motion very quickly, and then it's done.

We're not there yet, so I would ask you to hold your fire. I want to get us back to where we are.

Mr. Shipley, I see your hand. What would you like, sir?

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

It's about the amendment.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I don't have an amendment yet.

I'll come back to you in a minute. I know you're not leaving.

Mr. Saxton, we last left it that you were looking for language that you might suggest as a friendly amendment. Do we have that language?

Go ahead.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

I have two amendments, actually, that I would like to table.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Let me test the floor on this one. If it collapses quickly, then.... You have the floor next anyway.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

That's correct.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Mr. Chair, if it helps the chair—

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

That's what I'm waiting for. I don't have anything right now, so if you want me to move forward, give me something.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

I would be happy to assist the chair in finding that wording. After the word “study,” it would be “and that the first meeting to hear witness testimony be April 26”. That is, after the word “that”, which already exists, it would say “the first meeting to hear witness testimony be April 26, when the study is completed”, etc., as it already reads.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Are you putting that out as what we call a friendly amendment? Are you trying that out?

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

I'm trying that out.

I'd just like to add, though, that I find it very confusing why Mr. Byrne would oppose Mr. Shipley's suggestion of putting in a start date to hear witnesses. The whole purpose of putting this in is to expedite the process, so why is he trying to hold up the process?

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Hold on. I don't want to “over-technicalize” things, if that's a word, and it's probably not, but I don't yet have a full motion. We're kind of in flux right now. You have your main motion. You have the right to have it in front of the committee, and that's where it is, and now you're playing with language that may amount to a friendly amendment.

Let me just do a quick look-around.

I'm seeing a no right there, so that means we cannot do it that way, which means that someone else needs to move an amendment after they have the floor.

I see Mr. Shipley would like the floor. Mr. Shipley goes on the list.

The motion stands as originally read in, and you still have the floor, Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I certainly hope that my colleagues in the opposition would recognize that this motion is consistent with everything they would like to do, and that is to get going as quickly as possible on the study of the AG's report on replacing Canada's fighter jets. I certainly hope they will support this motion so that we can move ahead.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Again, I remind members that we are on the motion as you have it in front of you—no more, no less. It is not amended. It is as printed. That's what's in front of us. It is deemed to be moved. Mr. Saxton, the mover of that motion, has spoken to it, and I'm now moving to my speakers list.

At the top of the speakers list is Mr. Byrne. You have the floor, sir.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate all members stating that there is a need to move expeditiously on this.

Mr. Chair, I would like to move two amendments to the motion that is currently before us. The motion currently before us reads as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Standing Committee on Public Accounts begin a study of the Spring 2012 Report of the Auditor General, beginning with Chapter 2 (Replacing Canada’s Fighter Jets)....

My amendment would be to delete all words after that. The first amendment would replace those words with the following:

and that the Committee hold a planning session at the meeting of April 19, 2012,

—that's today—

and that the witness list include but not be limited to:

- François Guimont, Deputy Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada;

- Craig Morris, Deputy Director, F-35 Industrial Participation, Industry Canada;

- Richard Dicerni, Deputy Minister, Industry Canada;

- Johanne Provencher, Director General, Defence and Major Projects Directorate, Public Works and Government Services Canada;

- Tom Ring, Assistant Deputy Minister, Acquisitions Branch, Public Works and Government Services Canada;

- Col D.C. Burt, Director, New Generation Fighter Capability, National Defence;

- Michael J. Slack, F-35 Project Manager, Director of Continental Materiel Cooperation, National Defence;

- LGen J.P.A. Deschamps, Chief of the Air Staff, National Defence;

- Dan Ross, Assistant Deputy Minister (Materiel), National Defence;

- Kevin Page, Parliamentary Budget Officer;

- Michael Ferguson, Auditor General of Canada; and

The second amendment would read as follows, Mr. Chair:

That witnesses appear as panels, with no more than two witnesses per panel, and each panel appear for a minimum of one hour; and that the Committee report its findings to the House of Commons.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I have a question. I don't want to take the floor away from you.

Is it fair to say that the list you read out is exactly the same list that's in your motion--just for purposes of reference?

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

With the addition, I believe, of the Deputy Minister of Public Works.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Point of order, Madame Gallant.