Evidence of meeting #142 for Public Accounts in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was going.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Committee Researcher
Also, there's the one on heritage property. No, it's the other one—on asylum seekers.
Liberal
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC
Before you go on to how many reports will be ready for Tuesday, if we actually agree on getting the Auditor General back, it will have to be on Tuesday, ideally, will it not?
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
It would have to be. If we're going to pick up on Tuesday as to where we are going, Thursday would be the earliest, wouldn't it?
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Today is Thursday. Tuesday we would decide whether or not we would be having a meeting.
That's according to Mr. Whalen, and that was one of the things I was going to articulate. If we keep talking, we're going to waste the opportunity to do that work. I want that work done too.
What's been suggested is that I would stand down my control of the floor right now and agree that we would go into committee reports. In this case it would be on the legacy report. Between now and next Tuesday, Madam Mendès, the chair, Mr. Kelly, our researchers and I would sit down and try to come to an agreement on a letter that we would then collectively recommend to the committee.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Yes.
Probably we would first send the invitation to the Auditor General. That's one piece of correspondence that would have to leave. The other one would probably be to either the President of the Treasury Board or the Finance Minister. I'm not sure which one. Budget is under finance, so undoubtedly it would be cc'd to the president—or to the department anyway—to the deputy minister or to the minister.
That would be spelling out exactly what Mr. Whalen and all people would come up with.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If we worked on that letter and, assuming we had agreement that the letter worked, we did confirm that, because we have time now to confirm that the Auditor General could come in for Thursday.... The whole purpose of waiting until Tuesday was to give me that time rather than having to negotiate. As an old negotiator from the auto worker days in the 1970s, I know that you try not to make too many snap decisions in negotiations, so a little time to think would be good. I think there's the possibility. I'm not committing ahead of time that it's a done deal and that we just have to pro forma it. It's really going to depend.
I'm going back and forth, but I do think that's a positive way, as long as it's understood that Tuesday I get the floor and that the first thing I will be given the opportunity to do will be to say that, yes, we have an agreement and we will move forward on that, or that, no, we don't have an agreement and I will just launch in again.
Is that the understanding?
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I'll do that.
Again, it's coming from the committee, so it's important that all the committee hear the letter. I am putting confidence in Ms. Mendès, Mr. Christopherson and Mr. Kelly and our staff here to come up with a letter. We just cannot afford to have it wordsmithed over and over again when Tuesday comes. Doing that takes away goodwill, to be quite honest.
Do we have a consensus on that? I see government.
Mr. Kelly...?
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
Yes, I do.
If I may add another point of order under our protocol, I want to suggest that, when the invitation is sent to the Auditor General to appear, can we not also invite the deputy minister of finance to come for an explanation?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Yes. I took it that you said the letter should go to....
I think we would offer—
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Hopefully, we can have the whole two hours with both sides there. We can ask our questions and see if we can get to the bottom of it. At least we have a common starting point. We're starting, and I'm the first one to suggest this, to get off into rhetoric and move far away from.... That's the nature of filibusters, isn't it?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Moving on, do we have agreement? Do I hear a consensus on this to move forward?
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I will get the floor, but you're going to work with the clerk to confirm that we can get the deputy and the AG for next Thursday and have that information for Tuesday.
