Evidence of meeting #33 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was investigation.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
No, I have not; I'm not diminishing it. But if there is an existing investigation ongoing within the ministry to determine what the cause of the security failure was and what steps should be taken, for us now to get involved in a parallel process, which will simply delay other work at this table, bothers me.
Perhaps you could explain what the scope of the inquiry you're looking at is.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Well, Mr. Chair, I would be pleased to answer, but I will make the comment that, as the member well knows, the report stage amendments were largely brought forward by the government, so there was no delay yesterday in the House. Indeed, if anything, it was the minister's own bringing forward of motions that led to the report stage motion, as the member knows—
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
—so I'll correct him on that, and I hope he understands the difference.
Secondly, you've heard from members on this side of the committee what the scope is, to begin with. Certainly, the minister and a couple of the members have mentioned CATSA, and that is, I think, the scope to begin with. Members of this committee have the opportunity after that to decide whether they want to enlarge the scope or whether they're satisfied with the answers.
Liberal
Paul Zed Liberal Saint John, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I simply want to remind all honourable members that this is our job: to review ministerial decisions, government decisions. Our names were on the ballot, and at the end of the day that's our responsibility.
So in fact there would be no parallel process. This is the ultimate responsibility for the people of Canada, and I call the question on Mr. Julian's motion.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
When I look at this, as Mr. Zed said, this is our job. In fact, I would go even further; it's our duty to answer to Canadians, and this is the best way. I don't see anything...because when there's a major breach in security, it is not a matter of delaying the process; in fact, it is answering the Canadians for whom we are elected. I personally think we should support this unanimously and let the answers be here so that we can report to Canadians.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I'm certainly prepared to call the question. Does anyone else have any other comments?
The vote is on the motion put forward by Mr. Julian.
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
In anticipation of Mr. Julian's motion, I asked our analyst to prepare a briefing on some of the issues that we will now be looking at following this motion. It will give us a background and a history on it.
February 7th, 2007 / 3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I'm just going to circulate it so that you have it. You certainly don't have to comment on it today. It will come to you electronically as well.
Now, as I stated earlier, with the committee business that we're going to discuss, I think we will go in camera for the rest of the meeting, if that's suitable to the committee. We can discuss the committee business and the witness list.
[Proceedings continue in camera]