Evidence of meeting #73 for Public Safety and National Security in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, Mr. Motz.
We'll suspend for a few minutes while the clerk gets caught up with our motions.
Dane, can you get with the clerk to make sure he's captured your amendment?
We'll suspend for 10 minutes.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
I know that the clerk did circulate my subamendment, but I just want to clarify for everyone at the committee that there were two key parts that were—
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I'll come back to you on that. I'm aware of them. If I forget, let me know.
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
I just want to make sure that everyone is aware.
We're still discussing my subamendment, are we not?
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Yes.
To recapitulate, the main motion was moved by Mr. Shipley, and we all have copies of that.
Ms. O'Connell has proposed an amendment to that motion, which basically replaces it all with what you see on the paper that you've been given.
Mr. Lloyd has proposed a subamendment to that, which is as you see it on the paper, with two things missing: One is that we also request the findings of the study to be reported to the House, and the other is that we also invite officials from Public Safety.
Is that correct?
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
It's the Minister of Public Safety's political office or the minister.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
It's the political officials from the ministry of public safety.
Is that correct?
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
To clarify for Mr. Julian, my intention—because it's well known that there was a breakdown in communication between the bureaucracy and the minister's office—is to have a representative from the Minister of Public Safety's office, and it could be the minister himself, to answer to why there was this breakdown in communication between Correctional Service Canada and the public safety minister's office.
As the previous public safety minister testified, he wasn't aware of this transfer until right when it happened. I think victims would like to know why the Minister of Public Safety was not informed of this transfer when CSC originally raised it with his office.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Let's not argue the point yet.
Are we clear about the change? Okay.
The debate continues on Mr. Lloyd's subamendment.
I have Mr. Julian, followed by Ms. O'Connell, followed by Mr. Lloyd.
Mr. Julian, please go ahead.
5:55 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We have the responsibility of public safety. We've always worked together, I think, effectively. This is an important issue. I support the amendment that Ms. O'Connell just offered in terms of bringing forward the commissioner of Correctional Service Canada, the deputy minister, and officials from Justice and Public Safety to appear.
I would suggest, as well, in a separate motion, that we really need to request that the new Minister of Public Safety come here. This is on a mandate that obviously touches this issue. It would give us a couple of hours with officials. I would go beyond the officials and say that the minister himself, as the new Minister of Public Safety, would understand the importance of coming before this committee to be questioned on a number of issues.
Since I can't move an amendment, Mr. Chair, I'd like to suggest that we drop Mr. Lloyd's subamendment and revert to Ms. O'Connell's amendment. Immediately thereafter, I would be prepared to move another motion inviting the Minister of Public Safety to appear before the committee as soon as possible to answer all our questions on his mandate, which will also include this very important issue.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I think your points are well taken.
A motion of that kind would be useful, although we can't make it at this point. We can't just drop Mr. Lloyd's subamendment; we have to vote on it.
If everyone is ready to vote on it, we can do so. Otherwise, we have Ms. O'Connell, followed by Mr. Lloyd to speak. If they want to speak to Mr. Lloyd's subamendment, then we need to go ahead. If they don't, and if they wish to speak on the main motion, maybe we could vote on Mr. Lloyd's subamendment.
Do you want to speak to the subamendment?
6 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I can wait, Mr. Chair. I can remove my name, but I'd like it put back on for the main motion. However, if this does turn into a filibuster.... If Mr. Lloyd wants to speak to his subamendment and we can get to a vote, I'm fine with that. Otherwise, if this is turning into a filibuster further, then I'd like to make sure my name is back on that list.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I've put your name next, after Mr. Lloyd.
Mr. Lloyd, did you wish to speak to your subamendment?
6 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Yes. I'll just try to reiterate the subamendment.
I believe we should have three meetings. I believe that these meetings should include representatives from Correctional Service Canada and Public Safety Canada, as Ms. O'Connell said. I believe that we need to have some sort of representation from victims to illustrate the impact this had on victims. I understand people's feelings. Of course, we want to protect victims, but it's important for victims' rights for victims to have a voice—an appropriate voice. I'm sure this committee could find an appropriate voice to pass on their concerns over what happened in this case and in other cases that may be related to this.
I believe we need to have representation from the Minister of Public Safety's office to illustrate what happened with this breakdown in communication between Correctional Service Canada, Public Safety Canada and the minister's office. The committee should report to the House, because I believe that if we don't collect our observations and our conclusions and make recommendations, then we're really failing in our duty to try to improve this situation so that these things don't happen again.
With that, I'd be happy to move the subamendment to a vote, so we can move it along, but I think there are others who wish to speak.
6 p.m.
Liberal
6 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Yes, I want to raise just one point.
In terms of the findings going to the House, this is a committee decision that I'm open to, but it's not one we would normally make at this point. A motion to refer something to the House is normally either the content of the motion itself or after, when we have a report or recommendations.
I guess I wanted to reassure Mr. Lloyd that ultimately the committee can decide to forward recommendations to the House, but it's not really germane to the motion that is before us.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
We can certainly decide to send it to the House later on if we wish, but it is common procedure, when we pass a motion for a study, that we report our results to the House. I think it's pretty standard language.
Are there any further comments on the subamendment?
Mr. Shipley, go ahead, please.
6 p.m.
Conservative
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Briefly, this is all a matter of trying to negotiate the right situation to make sure everybody is heard here. We started off at zero. We were asking for five, we went down to one and now we're up to three. I think, in good faith, we're somewhere in the middle.
We didn't meet last week. We could have had a couple of meetings, so we can't talk about not having enough time. I really think that three is a good compromise. I think we'd do good work at three. I'm hoping that the rest of the committee can see that we don't want to be rushed. As Mr. Lloyd said, if they're willing to come, if we can get some representation of the victims, they need to be heard and not rushed.
I think three is a good compromise. Let's see who is willing to compromise in our first meeting.