Evidence of meeting #7 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transport.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
It's a public document. If you look at it, it refers to no individual person--
Conservative
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
It is as soon as it's written, which wouldn't be that day. In 24 hours it would have to be written and translated.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
So prior to the in camera meeting, the report that came from the subcommittee was a public document?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Right. It's a document that comes to the committee as a whole to be voted on, and we voted on that at the Tuesday meeting.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
So the date and the fact that we were looking at doing the review of this particular aspect was public information. Really, the germane issue is the all-party support, I think, as mentioned in the letter.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
There are three things in particular.
The first is who supported it, which is obviously not to be divulged. The second is whose motion it was. The third is when the hearings were going to take place--“in the next very short while”.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Would that information be indicated within the report that was given out?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
No. The report is not published to anybody but the committee members--
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
--and you have it now. You can access it within 24 or 30 hours of the meeting.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
I'm just trying to get that particularly straight, because it was actually a point I was interested in.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
If I may, Mr. Chair, I just want to deal with Mr. Laframboise's question—
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
So basically what we're down to, then... On scheduling the hearings shortly, I would say that once the document is released showing the committee is willing to look at this issue--if that's what was released--that statement is not as damning as the statement on all-party support. I'm just trying to see what part of this I can support in terms of a release from an in camera meeting. I want to get down to what is actually part of a motion that I could support. If there are things in it that are on the public record, or should be part of the public record, for a committee member then to be able to indicate—
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Mr. Chair, with all due respect to Mr. Bevington, who is beginning to discuss the substance of the matter, I did ask whether it would be more appropriate if this were discussed in the presence of Mr. Kennedy, who is obviously not here. You were going to make a suggestion once there had been some interventions. I believe Mr. Laframboise made a procedural intervention. Now we're going into a substantive intervention.
Is it your ruling that we will debate this thing substantively or that you will take into consideration my intervention regarding the procedures?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I thought it was fair for the chair to allow each party to be represented with its comments, and then I would make a decision on that.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
If I can continue, I would ask that the chair rule on each individual item of privilege, rather than simply ruling on the motion.