Public Safety Committee on March 30th, 2010

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

I'm being told by the chair that I don't have very much time. Let me just ask one more question.

I apologize to the other witnesses.

Is there anybody who would disagree with the following statement, yes or no? Given the fact that there's no evidence whatsoever put forward by departmental officials showing that this program is anything but effective, cost efficient, and highly effective at rehabilitation, would you agree that at the very least, the very minimum, the government should hold off on its decision until an independent third party is able to assess the veracity and effectiveness of this program?

[Voices]

Yes.

[A voice]

Agreed.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

I'm seeing a consensus on that point. I'll leave it at that, Mr. Chair. They did say yes, on the record.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay.

I have to deal with just one issue. We had a motion raised here today. I have to get the consensus of the committee on it.

On Thursday, we already have a very full agenda. You've received your notices on that. When on Thursday should we deal with this motion? Do you want to put it on at the very end of the meeting or...?

Mr. MacKenzie, you have a suggestion?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

No, absolutely not, Chair. The other side filled up the agenda.

We wanted Bill C-391 to go ahead sooner rather than later. They filled the agenda and now, all of a sudden, they want to move people around. We have witnesses scheduled. It's an important issue and something that we've been working on. If they hadn't been so adamant about filling up the committee's schedule, we would have been dealing with some of these issues sooner. As I say, we wished to have Bill C-391 sooner, but they wouldn't listen to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is common practice for this committee to deal with motions at the end; there's no reason why we can't finish our work with the witnesses earlier to deal with the motion. I can't imagine that we're not ever again going to leave any time for motions. That would be a rather horrible precedent. Given the fact there probably isn't going to be a consensus, probably the best way to deal with it is to bring the matter to a vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Well, we need a proposal.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

It was their motion. These are their witnesses. If we were going to cut it off, we should have cut it off today. These are witnesses who we've asked to come forward on a study that we've been doing for months and months--

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

If we're willing to go directly to the question, we can move the matter right now. I'd be happy to do that as long as we're willing to suspend debate, just move the motion, and have the vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I need to know clearly what the motion would be. Are we going to cancel these witnesses, then? What are we going to do with the motion? Are we going to do the motion at the end of the meeting or...? I need some direction on this.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Chair, the normal practice of the committee when a motion has been raised is to finish 15 minutes early and allow the opportunity to deal with the motion. That has been the normal practice of this committee in the past. I'm not sure why this normal practice is causing such angst--

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Because that would mean that we'd have to cancel witnesses. You've received the notice already. In the notice, we have three witnesses for the first hour, then we have another witness for the next half hour, and then finally a witness for the last half hour. So if we're going to do that, then we're going to have to start cancelling witnesses.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

No, Chair. The simple solution is to have them on the hour and to finish 15 minutes early. We have never, ever had a problem with this in the past.

There's a very simple solution. You have one group of witnesses at the first hour and one group of witnesses at second hour and you finish 15 minutes early. I'm sure the witnesses will understand. These are the last of, I believe, nine hearings that we've had on the issue of corrections. I think of the nine meetings we've had, with some 18 hours, we can afford 15 minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Well, they're your witnesses.

Mr. Kania.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

I actually would like to raise a point of order, please, briefly. this is the second meeting in a row where the Conservatives have mentioned the rationale behind the setting of the committee's agenda. Those are all in camera discussions. It should not be mentioned ever.

I would also indicate that I disagree with the characterization. No request was made for Bill C-391 to be done earlier. In fact, there was no legislation on the agenda when we were discussing it, because it was all killed through prorogation. So I would ask that these be held back and these rationales not be raised before committee unless it's in camera, based on these in camera discussions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Private members' business is not killed at prorogation.

Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I want to say that I think if we're rational about this, the eminently sensible thing is to leave 15 minutes at the end. I would point out that on Thursday we're finishing up the last witnesses for the mental health and addictions study, and I believe they're the Conservatives' witnesses that day--

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

No. They're...[Inaudible--Editor].

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Or they're the Liberals' witnesses.

I want to point out that when my witnesses were brought in last week, we had to suspend the meeting 15 minutes early because there were votes held. I don't remember anybody else complaining about it on that day when my own witnesses were cut short.

So what we know is that sometimes there are legislative issues that come up. As we all know, this is nothing unusual. I think it's eminently sensible to simply stop 15 minutes earlier than normal to deal with this matter. That's customary.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Desnoyers, do you have a brief comment?

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I agree with my colleagues. At the next meeting, in the last 15 minutes, we'll deal with the motion and the amendment. I think the motion is important to the people who are here. So we will have to deal with it at the next meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. MacKenzie, you had a brief comment.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Chair, first off, the time is up. The witnesses are still sitting here at the table. I think it's--