Evidence of meeting #26 for Public Accounts in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was projects.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Madam Chair, I have a point of order.
That matter was settled with the vote we just had. The three projects are part of the motion, so I think these remarks are off topic. I'd like to ask you to call the vote, please, then.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
On a point of order, I would observe, to Mr. Lemire's comments, that while the amendment was defeated, it doesn't stop the member from offering her opinion on the motion itself.
Liberal
Liberal
Kristina Tesser Derksen Liberal Milton East—Halton Hills South, ON
Point taken from my colleague, but what I was saying was that the amendment failed, so now we have this verbiage in here. Whereas I was fully prepared to support the motion with the amendment, I'm now faced with a bit of a dilemma. I have folks who are asking about how resources are spent. Particularly with our colleagues in other committees, we're getting questions about the amount of time and resources being spent debating particular items. I'm finding it very difficult to answer those questions, particularly with the incredible amount of time and resources already spent on two of the things in this motion.
I hope my colleague understands where I'm coming from. I think it has put all of us in a difficult situation. Again, on principle, this motion makes perfect sense. It's important to have accountability and transparency and for the public to see the work we're doing, so they understand that we care.
This is a non-partisan committee. I don't have a problem with IT overruns being investigated. The problem I have in supporting this is that I fear there will be additional resources directed to things that have already run their course—excessively run their course. I'm in a bit of a tough situation.
With respect to benefits modernization, I'm having trouble understanding why this keeps coming up. These are three very old systems that are eating up valuable resources and not getting adequate results because they're aged. We're trying to replace them with a modernized system. Canadians have asked us to do this. They've asked us to modernize, to be efficient, to find efficiencies and to use their tax dollars in productive ways. We're trying to do that. We're trying to move forward with a modernization program for these three very old benefits systems. I'm not sure where the disjointedness is and why it's difficult for people to understand what we're trying to do.
I'm sorry; I was going to say that I have two elderly parents, but my father died last month. I have one elderly parent left. In dealing with benefits, my mother doesn't use the computer a lot. She's not all that tech-savvy, so my siblings and I step in to assist. We see gaps in those systems. We see problems with how they're used. Even we can see opportunities for modernization and efficiencies. To think the government, Parliament, the House of Commons or representatives wouldn't be onside with that type of modernization and would try to paint it in a light of being wasteful or misguided is disappointing.
I'm afraid I'm not sure I'll be able to support this motion, which troubles me greatly, because I agree with the concept. I agree with the principle, but I feel it's misguided. It's distracting. Unfortunately, I think it's being overly politicized.
I'm sorry. I don't want to eat up all the time.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
I have a point of order, Madam Speaker.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
I didn't want to interrupt my colleague. That was very interesting. I know that for a newbie, it's very challenging to be exact on time. We do respect her position. On the other hand, it's past one o'clock and I have to go, so I will give my vote to Madame Lewis.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Jean Yip
As the member mentioned, it is one o'clock, and I did mention that we would end the meeting at 1 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC
Yes, but we can get unanimous consent to go on.
Liberal
Tom Osborne Liberal Cape Spear, NL
Madam Chair, I have commitments as well. Can we pick this up at the next one?
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Jean Yip
Yes, we can do that.
I will adjourn the meeting, then, and we will continue at the next meeting.
The meeting is adjourned.