Public Safety Committee on March 1st, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

How many groups are there? There's public health and public safety. I don't have the motion in front of me, so I don't know how many sets of officials you're inviting.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

There's public health, the RCMP and the CBSA. From what I understand, the health committee has just recently done this. They limited the overall time slots just to maximize—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Essentially, it's five minutes per group. Okay.

I think I saw Mr. Harris next.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

That's fine. They can explain what they do so we know what their role is. Then we can ask the questions. I think that's fair enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Madame Damoff.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Chair, I think you and the clerk have direction from all of us that we'd like it as soon as possible, but I also recognize that you're constrained by things like the House administration, interpretation, availability of ministers with two days' notice and all those kinds of things.

It's pretty clear that everybody would like this as soon as possible, but I don't think it's realistic to require you to do it this week. There are a lot of elements that are completely out of your control in doing that. I think we would trust you and the clerk to do it in a timely way.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Well, I won't expose myself to a metaphorical flogging. I'm just worried about trying to put together a pretty serious emergency meeting with all of these moving parts. I have no idea whether both ministers are available. We will try our best.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Chair, I have another technical question. In terms of the other work of the committee, would we have some time when we could discuss how we can get moving on that as well?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We can discuss anything up until 5:30. I would just note for members of the constituency that the clerk and I have reserved Wednesday afternoon for two hours. We have not published any notice on that time period, but it's possible to do. Potentially, then, you might be able to.... You wouldn't achieve getting it done this week, but you could put this meeting over to next week.

Still, I'm taking the clear direction from the committee that this is a very high priority.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

I would like us to try to get the systemic racism study done. I mean, if there's any way we could find the time....

I also know that witnesses who were invited to come today were unceremoniously told not to come on the Levesque study. Even moving them over to Wednesday afternoon, if that worked, would wrap up that study. Then we could return to the systemic racism report on Monday, when the House returns.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Is there any appetite for a meeting on Wednesday?

There are multiple hands up.

Jack, you can go first.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

We've just had a two-hour meeting; we're hoping to have a three-hour meeting, and it's a constituency week. It's not a break week, as some members of the public have been led to believe over the years. We started calling it a “constituency week” about 10 years ago, and there are a lot of people who have demands on their time as a result of that.

Much as I would like to get the work of our committee going, I don't know if having a meeting on Wednesday and having to organize all of that, as well as doing something on Thursday or Friday for this study.... I think that if the Minister of Health and the Minister of Public Safety are attuned to the emergency that is being presented, they should make themselves available, unless they already have major commitments that can't be changed.

I would hope that at some point we could have a closer look at our schedule, Chair, because I too think we have to prioritize the committee's report on systemic racism. We've already started considering it, but we haven't any other meetings scheduled to do that. I would think that ought to be a priority of our committee as soon as we can get to it, until we have it done, because we put in a lot of time on that. We've been at it since last July. It's a matter of extreme importance to this country, and we need to give it priority. Expecting us to have three meetings this week is probably not realistic.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Madame Michaud, please.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

I'm not sure I've understood: Are we sitting for two hours on Wednesday, if possible on the emergency motion, are we spending those two hours on something else, or are we putting it off until Monday?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

There was no translation of what you just said, Madame Michaud.

Okay. It's there now. That's good.

Do you want to repeat yourself, please?

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

You said you had set aside a slot this Wednesday. If it's possible to devote it to the emergency motion, that would be ideal, but what are the options if it's not possible? Are we putting this off until next week or are we taking the time available on Wednesday to continue other studies? I'm somewhat of the same opinion as Mr. Harris. It's a constituency week, there are a number of things on the agenda, but I think we could take the time to debate an emergency motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

All I was saying, just for a point of clarification, was that because time has been so precious and so difficult to set aside, we had set aside some time on Wednesday afternoon for a potential meeting. Jack makes a good point that three meetings in one week is a bit rich, but having said that, there is also no assurance that we can pull off this emergency meeting this week.

I'm hesitant to let go of what is precious committee time in those circumstances. If we are not able to arrange this three-hour emergency meeting this week, is there any appetite on the part of the committee to use the two hours to either finish off the Levesque study or do something else?

I was just canvassing. There is nothing fixed or firm here.

Madame Stubbs.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Thanks, Chair.

Just on one point of clarification for a previous study, did you accept the concept of that 15-minute time allotment for presenters?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Yes, that's fine. Well, I accepted it, which is to say I got no push-back or resistance. We're going to be hard pressed to get all the rounds of questions in at the best of times.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Yes. I just wanted to make sure that part had been wrapped up.

Also, just as a general comment, it ought to go without saying that Conservatives certainly want to complete the study about Marylène Levesque, who was murdered while an offender was out on parole, because it was a Conservative initiative to extend that study to have further meetings. I know that certainly the Bloc member on our committee is deeply concerned, as are we all, with completing that work.

Conservatives also supported—in the very beginning, when all of us joined this committee as new members—the prioritized completion of the study on the RCMP. As has been mentioned, that report has already been completed and is now in the revision and report and recommendations stage.

Through our actions on both of these issues, Conservatives have clearly demonstrated our commitment to these as priority matters for our committee. The key thing is probably just to make sure we're booking meetings when we're all available, which was part and parcel of the discussion we were having yesterday. I guess we can continue to have that conversation as we figure out the schedule, but certainly know that there is no opposition to the actual content or idea of completing this crucial work sooner rather than later. We agree.

I feel for you, Chair, with all the time interventions, the voting interventions and all that has happened with our scheduled meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I'm truly touched.

I see that Mr. Harris's “raise hand” function is on permanent raise.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you. It's raised for a particular purpose, Chair. I want to say that on Wednesday, there's a significant commitment that cannot be changed. Nor can a sub be provided, because there's a caucus meeting between 1:00 and 2:30 p.m. Eastern standard time. My ability would be limited.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unless other people have comments, the clerk and I will do our best to pull this meeting together this week, if for no other reason than to make sure we can get back to regular business, if you will, next week.

We also realize that this is a bit of a high-risk enterprise, because pulling together a meeting of this magnitude with this number of officials and a couple of ministers is going to require some clerk magic. I don't know that we'll be able to pull it off. I'm saying to committee members that we risk not having any other meetings this week if in fact we can't pull this one off, having let go of Wednesday's time slot.

There we are.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

John, can I just speak to that? We have missed so many meetings because of votes, on both Mondays and Wednesdays. I think our committee is a bit unique in this. I'm sure there are other committees that meet on Monday and Wednesday afternoons, but certainly we've been hit with having to miss numerous meetings. If for some reason the clerk and you are unable to get the ministers this week, I would be in favour of going ahead with the meeting on Wednesday afternoon, from 3:30 to 5:30.

To Jack's point, their caucus is over at 2:30, I think he said. That would still give an hour between that and a 3:30 meeting. I would be in favour of doing one if we couldn't get the ministers. If we can get the ministers, then obviously that's a priority.

Our witnesses were prepared to present on Levesque today, so they're ready to go.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Of course, because there was no consultation, the actual proponents of the motion—the Conservatives and our Bloc member—were not available for that, as we discussed yesterday, Pam.