Status of Women Committee on Feb. 25th, 2016

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

In terms of the 48-hour notice, my understanding is that's for substantive motions or motions that aren't related to the current topic. For instance, if our topic is on what the business of the committee is going to be, then a motion that comes during the course of that discussion would be okay even if there's not 48-hours'...?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That's right.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Okay, I just wanted to clarify.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

The suggestion of the clerk, which I always follow, is to read specifically what it says:

That forty-eight (48) hours' notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the Committee, unless the substantive motion relates directly to business then under consideration; and that the notice of motion be filed with the Clerk of the Committee and distributed to members in both official languages; and, that completed motions received by 4:00 p.m. Monday to Friday be distributed to members the same day.

There you are.

The other discussion we had was about whether to go in camera or not. Basically, the steering committee would like to have the default mode be that we are in public view. Typically the only exception to that is when staff come to bring briefings to the committee we go in camera because the thinking is that they are reporting confidentially to the committee as opposed to the public.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Staffing?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Staff reports, so librarians, analysts, that sort of individual. That's the typical practice, as I understand it.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Okay. Just, again, for clarification, in one of my other committees we had a number of library reports and we didn't go in camera.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

This is the common practice; however, if the committee decides that they don't want to do the common practice and they want to be in the public view all the time, I certainly am able to go with a motion for that.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Before we make a decision on that, I respect what Anita is trying to say, but as you're indicating there could be some things there. We're studying in a committee where it could be very confidential. Before we move forward, being all new members, we might not recognize the confidentiality level of some of these reports coming in, so I would recommend having those in camera.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Any other discussion on that?

Ms. Malcolmson.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

I'd also like to default to be in public. I think that's what our constituents and voters expect. When there is information that might relate to a personal action or a privacy issue, the exception should be that we go in camera and that there be a justifiable reason. In my local government work I've never had staff reports delivered in camera, and I don't think our constituents would expect that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Right. We had a similar discussion at another committee that I was on. That committee decided that they also, for the same reason, wanted to be in the public view. They were going to defer to the chair when we got into the danger zone, or when there were materials that were presented that would be of a sensitive nature, or when witnesses who were going to come would have sensitive information. That would be at the call of the chair.

Could I have a motion of any kind regarding this?

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

If I may, I think if there's unanimous consent from the committee to go in camera, I think that would be no problem at all, if we all agree.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Are you sure you mean in camera? In camera really means not in public.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

By default we would be in public, and then if there's unanimous consent of the committee to go in camera, we can do that as an operational thing.

This is before another committee as well in terms of what a good practice would be, but I think here it sounds like on an issue like the one you raised, if things are not controversial at all, there would probably be unanimous consent from the committee that we would go in camera.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Okay, there's a motion on the floor.

Let's discuss the motion.

Ms. Vecchio.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

It's not a motion; that's just a comment.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I fully respect where Anita's coming from with this. I think it's very important, but then again I believe in full transparency as well and we have to respect some of our colleagues and witnesses and reports.

I think it's great to have that, but we need to have an exemption rule in there. Before we put any rule or any motion through, I think it's very important that we respect that there will be circumstances in which, due to the confidentiality, we may want to step back.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

If I might suggest, I know that the procedure and House affairs committee is looking at this very issue and perhaps we should wait and see what happens, since the procedure committee is often a precedent-setting committee for others.

However, in the interim, in our own work, if we all agree to go in camera we can go in camera, but otherwise we would operate in public.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I'm fine with that.

Is there consent for that?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I think there still needs to be an exception to that rule. I fully respect what you're saying, but I think there needs to.... It's great to be in camera but we do need to make sure that we're protecting anything that comes out. It's not about not trying to be transparent, but I think we need to have a default clause for that 1% chance that it may happen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Would you be comfortable if we set our default mode as being open to the public and if any individual on the team had a concern they could move for a vote to go in camera and we would take a vote and by majority we would go in camera?

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

I respect that.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

What if one of the witnesses doesn't want to be in public?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I think that's certainly—