Members, let's reconvene.
Mr. Ménard, you may introduce your motion. Go ahead whenever you're ready.
Evidence of meeting #33 for Public Safety and National Security in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Members, let's reconvene.
Mr. Ménard, you may introduce your motion. Go ahead whenever you're ready.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Chairman, in accordance with standing order 122, I move the following motion:
That the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security consider and report to the House of Commons of the security issues raised by the relationship that the former Minister of Foreign Affairs had with a person with ties to organized crime, by inviting witnesses to appear, including: Prime Minister Steven Harper, Maxime Bernier, Julie Couillard, the Privy Council officials responsible for appointments and the RCMP officials responsible for security screenings, the Minister of Public Safety and Michel Juneau-Katsuya.
This is a recent matter which has developed very quickly, but which led to the resignation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. It is therefore a very serious issue. There is no doubt that there was a breach of security. Thus, it is important for us to understand the scope and limits of that breach as quickly as possible.
That is why I am asking that the committee proceed with this investigation quickly.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Thank you.
I have one person who has indicated they want to comment.
Ms. Thi Lac, please.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree with my colleague, Mr. Ménard. However, I would like to amend his motion by adding the following: "and that the study begin on Monday, June 9."
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We have an amendment here to suspend our study of tasers and all the business before the committee and to instead do this examination.
Ms. Priddy.
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We vote on the amendment first. If you want to speak generally, you may.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
So we don't have to vote on the movement of the date before we can move to the motion, or move to speaking to—
Conservative
Liberal
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
I'm just wondering whether the member would add a friendly amendment to the amendment. That would be to add “by inviting witnesses to appear before the committee, including”, and then all the witnesses who are mentioned.
There might be other witnesses we might want to hear from, and we should not be limiting ourselves.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
That's another amendment, so maybe you just want to rephrase that. How does that go again?
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Chairman, that is not an amendment, but would be a translation error. The French text does contain the word "notamment", and I pointed out earlier that that word had not been translated.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We're going to go with the French motion, then, which mentions “including”. So your suggestion is not necessary.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Actually, that was my same point, that we shouldn't be limiting it to just the people listed. So that deals with that.
Conservative
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Mr. Chair, if we're going to talk about timing, the clerk has a table or a schedule of what the committee had already set.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I think we should, because I think people should know what will happen.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
This schedule starts next week. Today we were going to deal with the drafting instructions for the taser study, and then Wednesday....
I wish to inform the committee that our witnesses for the next meeting have all been confirmed, the six witnesses from the various first nations. That may help in your decision here.
Also, the clerk informs me that the people from the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board have been confirmed. They were to come next Monday.
Mr. MacKenzie.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
My only comment, Mr. Chair, in looking at this is that if we've asked these people to be here on Monday.... I know that everybody talked about how important the taser study was before, but if we're prepared to move it off on the Wednesday....
I'm rather reluctant to tell the folks whom we've asked to attend before this committee on June 9 that now we don't want them to be here on June 9. That's my only concern. It looks to me as if no other witnesses are scheduled on Wednesday.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We were going to continue our consideration of the draft report.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
But it's not causing a problem for witnesses whom we've already confirmed and asked to be here on June 9; that's my point.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I should point out that if we go ahead with this, then in all likelihood we would not complete our taser study, because we'd have to have that to the people here to submit to the House. We wouldn't get it done if we put this off.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
If that's the wish of the committee, then that's the wish of the committee.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
All right, so the committee realizes that if we go ahead with this, we're not going to get the other priority that was so important, that we were pushing for.
Ms. Priddy, are you finished?
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
No. I have two things. I am also waiting to actually speak to the motion, but I realize we're speaking to timing because the amendment takes precedence.
I need some clarity on what you are saying. I heard earlier--as a matter of fact, at the last meeting I was at--that people were prepared to sit extra meetings for all kinds of other reasons that were being suggested.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
I would be reluctant to call the first nations and say we are delaying their appearance for a variety of reasons. I'm not as concerned about other witnesses who might be booked, but they have been here several times and made a number of requests, and I think they are central to that particular discussion.
I'd like to know from you how it could be accommodated. Somebody was saying something about moving them....
So we would not have to do that?
Okay, fine.
Thank you.
Liberal
Liberal
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
I will move an amendment to change the date from Monday to Tuesday, and I understand that my colleague from the Bloc is in agreement.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Is there any more discussion before we have the vote?
Okay, your amendment, then, is to begin these hearings on June 10. That's contingent on whether the main motion passes.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
My only comment is let's make it for certain that we're talking about one day on June 10. Do you want to have an extra meeting every Tuesday from now on?
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Well, you have to make up your mind. You can't have it both ways.
Liberal
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
We should consider Tuesday, June 10, the first meeting, and every Tuesday thereafter there'd be a special meeting of this committee to deal with this issue until fully exhausted. It may be two, three, or four weeks. That way, we won't interfere with other work that we're doing and we'll be able to pay attention to this at least one meeting per week and deal with it.
Conservative
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
The reality is that you haven't anything scheduled most other Mondays. I don't know why you want to add a Tuesday when the regular scheduled day is Monday. There's one day that we have witnesses coming.
Liberal
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
I'm happy to reverse and say, when Monday becomes available, Tuesday folds. I don't have a problem with that. We're now talking mechanics.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Yes, you are, but you have to be fair to the clerk who is going to have to tell people when to be here, or ask people to be here.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
And book rooms. If it's so loosey-goosey as “Let's meet whenever we can meet”, in all fairness to the way things are run on the Hill here, that would not be very orderly.
Are there any other comments or questions? Mr. Cullen.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
I wonder if, presumably, we could have some assurance from the clerk or yourself, Chair, that we could get a room on a Tuesday.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
This is what I mean. If it's so loosey-goosey that we're going to meet whenever we can meet, how can you give a directive like that to the clerk? He can't set anything up if we're not even sure what we want to do.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
No, there's nothing happening around here. I mean, how could you have a problem?
I don't even know if it's fair to ask him to comment on that. How does he know what rooms are available, Mr. Cullen?
Roger Préfontaine Clerk of the Committee, Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security
We don't have priority.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Chairman, we have nothing scheduled for June 16 or for June 18. We could therefore set aside our meetings on Thursday, June 10, Monday, June 16, Wednesday, June 18, and if necessary Wednesday, June 19, for these proceedings.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Can you repeat that? Wednesday is June 18, not June 19. There was something lost in the translation here, because the dates didn't match the days. Please say it again.
Bloc
Bloc
Bloc
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
All right. The proposed dates are June 10, 16, 17, and 18.
Mr. Ménard, do I have that clear?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay, four days.
Is there any further discussion? Mr. MacKenzie.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I have just one more question. I'm wondering if the other side is prepared to sit if the House rises.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay. Coming back to our discussion--I'll come to Ms. Priddy in a moment--the way I understand the motion is that we're going to meet on June 10, 16, 17, and 18 at 3:30 in the afternoon. Is that clear? It's the same time that we currently meet. Okay? The clerk has to know this in order to set up the rooms and so on.
Ms. Priddy, please.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I do support the motion, and I'm clear on the dates. I just want to be very sure that we are not going to then hear, “Oops, we can't finish the taser report because, gosh, there was that one more meeting needed.” I just want to put on the table that it's extremely important and urgent that the taser report be finished.
I expect it must be, because nobody has said we need those meetings or those days for that, but I need to have that reaffirmed for me.
So it will not in any way interfere? We will not hear back that it will interfere?
Okay.
Conservative
Colin Mayes Conservative Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
Madam Thi Lac has made a motion. She has to withdraw her motion before we move into a motion to have those days set aside.
We already have an amendment on the table that hasn't been withdrawn. That has to be withdrawn first before we get into a new amendment to the motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
What I'm doing here, Mr. Mayes, is going by consensus. Does anybody object? I hope Ms. Thi Lac goes along with what we're planning here. Please say so if you don't.
If anybody has some strong objections.... I'm trying to draw together what we're saying here, and have everybody agree. It's probably not the best way to do things.
Mr. Dosanjh, please.
Liberal
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
I was going to respond to what Ms. Priddy was raising.
I'm not concerned that the taser study won't be completed. If there is any fear that it might not be, we can add extra meetings to make sure it happens.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Yes. Okay.
The way I understand it is that the amendment is to meet June 10, 16, 17, and 18, at 3:30 in the afternoon, to fulfill the motion that Monsieur Ménard has brought forward, which we will vote on right after we're done this amendment.
Is there any more discussion on the amendment?
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
Could the clerk try to book a room where the hearings could be televised, please?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay. That's a suggestion for the clerk.
Is there any more discussion on the amendment?
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay.
Ms. Thi Lac, can you revisit your amendment? They want to clarify what the amendment is.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
When I moved the amendment, we had not received the schedule. The date of June 9 is no longer correct, since we are being told that we will be hearing witnesses on that day. My amendment was aimed at moving things forward quickly by establishing dates for the meetings that could be set aside to continue the study. I believe that June 10, 16, 17 and 18—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I just need your amendment. I don't need a long explanation.
I think your amendment—as we drew a consensus—was on four dates and times, so that's all I was asking you to do, just put it together so that you are clear and the rest of us are clear.
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
The amendment would read as follows: "and that the study begin on June 10, 2008, and continue on the 16, 17 and 18 of June, and that the meetings be held from 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m."
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Now the discussion, if any, will proceed to the motion.
Is there any discussion on the motion?
Ms. Priddy.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I support the motion at the table, but I do have to preface my support with one or two comments.
My preference would be that this was dealt with by the RCMP. I know it has been referred to the RCMP, but I also know there hasn't been a response. I know there is not a great eagerness, probably, on the part of the RCMP to accept these kinds of referrals, so I don't know what the answer to that will be. Therefore, not having any assurance that the RCMP, which I think is a much more appropriate body to be doing that, will do it, I will be supporting this.
The second point I want to make around this is that it is extremely important that Canadians, all Canadians, can trust that the security of their country is being dealt with, with dignity, respect, and thoughtfulness. I do not want to see this turn into—particularly with Ms. Couillard included in the list—some kind of circus where we find ourselves diverging off into what is in her wardrobe and what she wore where. I don't think this is about satisfying a prurient interest on the part of the public that seems to be fairly well established at this time out there.
So when the discussion is at the table, I, and I'm sure others, will be making every effort to ensure that it stays focused and that it does not turn into a circus, because that does not in any way establish in the minds of Canadians that we can look at these issues and do this in a serious, thoughtful way that respects the democratic process and respects the security of Canada.
Thank you.
Liberal
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
Mr. Chair, thank you.
First, I wholeheartedly support this motion.
Let me explain what the preference of the Liberal Party of Canada would be, what the best option would be.
The best option would be, number one, for the RCMP to investigate this matter. But understanding that the RCMP only engages in a narrow investigation to determine whether or not there has been criminal activity, that in itself would not be exhaustive enough to deal with all the issues that have been raised. Therefore, a full public inquiry is appropriate.
We know that, so far, the Prime Minister has refused to call that full public inquiry. Therefore, in the interim, we support this motion. We know and we recognize that these committees, by their very nature, don't have all the tools and the structures necessary to fully pursue all the issues in an exhaustive fashion. Therefore, with the reservation in mind, with the fact that the Prime Minister has not called a full public inquiry and may never do so, this committee will do the work that it can do in the interim.
Thank you.
Conservative
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Well, the Prime Minister is taking this matter very seriously and has asked Foreign Affairs to review the situation. That's what needs to be done and that's where it should be.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
If there are no more comments, I'll call the question.
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
This part of the meeting is over. We will now clear the room and go in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]