Public Accounts Committee on April 22nd, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'll bring our meeting back to order.

That was a little longer than five minutes. I apologize for that, but there were some helpful discussions.

Mr. Osborne, I'll note that the member is going to proceed with his motion.

I'm sensing some broad possible goodwill here. Since we're still well within the two hours, I'm going to ask the witnesses to hang tight, and we'll see how it goes. If we can resolve this in the next little bit, we'll come back to you. I know that many members would like to get through their questions. Some of them have not had the chance to do so yet. That would be easier than having you come back at a later date.

There is no speaking list. I assume we don't want to go right to a vote. Is there anyone who would like to speak to the motion or make any amendments?

Go ahead, Mr. McKinnon.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I think it's a very interesting motion. It's something I could get behind, but I have some issues.

One concern I have is about the independence of the Auditor General. We cannot be seen to be directing her to do anything. I have no problem making a request of her to take action. I would move to amend this motion in a paragraph that says, “and the committee further write to the Auditor General to undertake”. I think it would be clearer if we change that “undertake” to “request”.

Second, at the end, it says, “and the committee report this request to the House”. I would move to drop that line .

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm going to break those in two. I'm going to give you the floor. We're going to deal with that.

On the first one, I'm going to make a friendly amendment. Could we make it that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts “request”? I don't need to write “the Auditor General” right here. The Auditor General's team watches everything this committee does, and we will, of course, send the motion over. You'll clear out my inbox a little bit if we have, in the first paragraph, that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts “request” that the Auditor General expand the scope, and then, in that paragraph you mentioned, that the committee “request” the Auditor General....

I have to work on this.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Mr. Chair....

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Hold on for one second.

That second paragraph could read, “And that the committee further request that the Auditor General undertake an additional audit”.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I have a problem with “undertake”.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay. Let's say, “that the committee further request an additional audit”.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I'll accept that.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Mr. Osborne, do you want to speak to that? Could I just get a remit on that, and then we can move to Mr.—

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

I was going to suggest the wording we just arrived at.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay. That's great.

Could I have a show of hands if you agree to that change?

(Amendment agreed to)

Thank you.

Mr. McKinnon, now you have a second amendment, which is to remove “and that the committee report this request to the House.”

In French, “et que le Comité fasse rapport de cette demande à la Chambre.”

That amendment is on the table. Would anyone like to speak to that?

Go ahead, Mr. Danko.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

To be consistent with the various other committees, we want to keep committee work in committee and House work in the House. We have a fairly substantial, full House calendar. We want to make sure that we don't inadvertently bring committee business to the House. This is consistent with the other committees. It speaks to the efficiency of government that we want to keep the committee discussions at the committee level.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

First, I have Mr. Stevenson.

[William Stevenson, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I'll let Mr. Redekopp go.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

The only thing that I would suggest to the committee is that, in this particular case, the Auditor General has indicated that she prioritizes her work based on where the requests come from. When they come from committee, they have a certain amount of weight, and when they come from the House, they have more weight. In this case, it has a practical application in terms of getting the attention of the Auditor General and the priorities she might set. I just wanted to make that point.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Osborne, I think you are first, and then it's Mr. McKinnon, at least according to the clerk. You're welcome to swap up, if you like.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To the last point made, I agree that committee work should stay at committee. This doesn't stop individuals from asking questions in the House or putting forward a motion in the House. Let's not be presumptuous about what the response of the Auditor General will be. I think we can remove this. If we don't get a response from the Auditor General that is favourable for the committee, there can be a motion in the House to do the same thing as this.

Committee work should stay at the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. McKinnon.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I was just going to say that I don't think the Auditor General needs something to catch her attention on this. I agree with my colleagues.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Stevenson.

[William Stevenson, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I will just emphasize that, in the past, the Auditor General has stated to us that her priorities are always weighted by the House versus what the committees say.

The public accounts committee is not exactly like some of the other committees, but I would say that it's still important for us to keep that in there—to have that value and to emphasize its importance for the Auditor General.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

I will call the roll on this amendment.

It's to remove the following sentence: “and that the committee report this request to the House.”

You're voting yes if you would like to have it removed, and no if you would like to maintain the motion as is.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Natalie Jeanneault]

It is a tie. You have the casting vote, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

It is four to four. I will cast a vote to maintain the motion as it is. I vote no.

(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)

We will now vote on the motion as amended.

It is four votes to four. I will vote in favour of the motion.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4)

I will now return to the rounds of questioning. We are just at the end of the second round.

Mr. Osborne, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Thank you. Let me gather my thoughts for a moment.

I guess this is for IRCC.

For a small province like Newfoundland and Labrador.... The Auditor General has pointed out that they were disproportionately impacted by the decision of IRCC. I was a member of the provincial legislature when this transpired.

Can you speak to what has been done to rectify this difference, where Newfoundland and Labrador should have seen an increase but instead saw a decrease?