Evidence of meeting #27 for Science and Research in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was institutions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
I believe we'll need to schedule, as part of one of our next meetings, some time to go through that clause by clause.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Yes, for consideration of the report.
We have the calendar here. Next week, we are not sitting.
After today's meeting, we will be back on the 9th. On the 9th, we will have the governance and accountability of federal science policy and institutions study. That week, on the 12th, we will have that meeting, and then again there is a break week. In March, we are on and off. We are back on the 23rd. We will have one hour left for that, because we will have done one and a half hours. If the members want, we can go through it in the second hour. On the 23rd, we will have one hour on the governance and accountability of federal science policy and institutions study, and that will complete the four meetings. Then we can do the consideration of the draft report on AMR.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
On the 23rd, we'll go through the draft report on AMR.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Yes.
What should be the deadline to submit the list of the witnesses so that we can start preparing and getting in touch with the witnesses?
Is there any date you have in mind, Mr. Clerk?
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
Madam Chair, the plan is for that study to begin on the 26th, right?
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
I'm sorry. Let me go back.
Next week, we're not sitting. The week after that, we have—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
The next week we are sitting is the week of March 9. Both of these meetings will be on the topic of governance and accountability. Then, again there is a sitting week. We come back on the 23rd. We will have the last one hour on this study. That will complete four meetings. The second hour, as we decided, will be for consideration of the draft report. Then we come to March 26.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
For witnesses, I think looking at March 10 would probably be a good time. It gives the clerk two weeks.
The Clerk
Yes. Again, it's the committee's decision, and the sooner the better. If I may, sometimes even two weeks is not enough for them to prepare, because they have to prepare their opening remarks, their travelling schedules and everything.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
We'll try for earlier, but the deadline will be the....
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
We'll do a deadline of the 10th. That gives us all of next week to come up with witnesses.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
The deadline for all parties to submit their witnesses for the EV study will be March 10 at 5 p.m. It's before the end of the day. Is that good with everybody?
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
Excellent. Get to McMaster before I do.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Okay.
We will go through AMR on the 23rd.
The next question is on the translation of documents received from the three agencies. On Tuesday, February 17, the clerk sent you a letter from the translation bureau regarding the translation of the documents received from the order adopted by this committee on October 20, 2025.
Is there any discussion on this?
Yes, MP Noormohamed.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
We passed the motion on the funding councils on October 1. We asked for the materials. We received a letter back, saying the cost would be what it was. The translation bureau came back to all of us on February 16 and said the cost of the 88 million words we were asking them to translate would be somewhere between $4.9 million and $16.5 million, and it would take approximately 400 business days.
I think it would be helpful for us at this committee to claw that back and see if there's a way we can put a motion forward that effectively says we withdraw this data request. If we don't, frankly, we all need to be able to step out there and say to taxpayers we're prepared to put $15 million or $16 million on the table to translate these 88 million words. If that's what we want to do, that's great, but I think most reasonable people would look at us and say, “You guys are bananas.”
My suggestion is that we put forward a motion that reads:
Notwithstanding the motion adopted on October 1 and amended October 20, given that the translation bureau has written to all members of the committee sharing that the translation of the 88 million words required by the motion would cost between $4.9 million and $16.5 million, and could take up to 400 business days, the committee withdraw this data request out of respect for the Canadian taxpayer, and because it is fundamental that any information received by the committee is available in both official languages.
Stuff has to be available in both official languages. To me, it is grossly irresponsible for us to say we can have it in English, but not in French. We have to weigh out the cost of making sure that it appears in both official languages for our consumption.
I leave it to my colleagues and I'll see what their views are on this.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
Madam Chair, I'm comfortable with the language that's been provided.
In fact, talking to our colleagues, we thought we disposed of this issue at the last meeting, but I guess we did not present a formal motion to actually decline it. In fact, the reason we're doing the current study was to create that governance framework to avoid situations where we would need to ask for materials like that.
I'm fully on side with us adopting that motion. Spending that amount of money is not required.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
If I may, Madam Chair, to my colleague's point—and I have to figure out procedurally what may or may not have happened—my understanding was that the whole purpose of undertaking this study was so that we would not have to do this. I thought this had been dealt with. I'm pleased that we're dealing with it now, but I want to make sure that, from a process standpoint, we understand what happened for the future such that we can avoid having to do this in this way.
I don't know who has the right answer for that.
February 26th, 2026 / 12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
Yes, it probably happened during those discussions that we would have had when we were determining to say, “Yes, okay, we'll do this study now, and because of it, we no longer require that type of material.” In fact, we just never came to moving a formal motion.
I believe there's consensus here so that we can dispose of this quickly.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm just trying to understand the current discussion. When did you receive this information about the amendment?