Evidence of meeting #108 for Veterans Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cannabis.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Neil Ellis
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are studying medical cannabis and veterans' well-being.
For witnesses today, we have appearing Kyle Atkinson by video conference from Halifax, Nova Scotia; James MacKillop from McMaster University, who is the Peter Boris chair in addictions research at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton; and Andrew Freedman, senior director of Freedman and Koski Inc., by video conference from San Francisco, California,
We'll start with witness—
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
On a point of order, Chair, I have a motion to move.
Witnesses, I know you're here as experts in your field, and I appreciate your being here. However, there is some very important business that this committee needs to address before we get to you. I thank you for your patience and understanding in that matter.
Chair, this motion is urgent and will require unanimous consent in order to proceed to a vote. I will read the motion, but first I have to put it in context.
The context of this motion is that we had a full-time Minister of Veterans Affairs who was called to appear before this committee. It is the tradition of the committee that when expenditures for government are scrutinized, each committee is charged with the task of reviewing the spending. The committee has the ability to ask.... In most of the protocols that have been used in the past, it would be the Minister of Veterans Affairs who would appear before the committee. That has been the tradition of this committee up to this point in time. However, given the circumstances of the chaos that exists at Veterans Affairs with the fact that we lost our full-time minister—she resigned from the position after having been appointed to the position—and given the fact that we have a very tight time frame for the scrutiny of the expenditures for Veterans Affairs in what is called supplementary estimates (B), which we were prepared to look at and it's our responsibility as a committee to look at, I'm putting this motion forward.
Based on getting unanimous consent around the table, the motion reads: “That the committee invite the acting minister of Veterans Affairs to appear on the Supplementary Estimates (B) on February 25 or 27, 2019.”
Those dates are in the motion and are specific because supplementary estimates (B) will go back to the House as deemed reported by this committee without scrutiny at the end of next week if we do not call the minister to come and answer the questions we have about the expenditures at Veterans Affairs Canada.
It's of utmost importance to this committee to do its work, and to be able to do its work amongst the chaos that is happening within the cabinet and within the government. We are still responsible for reporting—if we choose to report as a committee—on the estimates, and making our thoughts known to the House of Commons through the process.
I know the rules for putting motions forward are set out in the standing orders as having to be delivered with some advance notice, but this is so urgent and so important to this committee that I would first of all put the motion forward, seeking unanimous consent of members.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
Thank you, Chair.
I want to voice my support for this motion to go forward. The fact is that this committee has the responsibility to deal with the estimates, and we have a very tight timeline due to what's been happening within the government with the circumstances around the newly appointed Minister of Veterans Affairs , who found herself in a scenario where she needed to resign. We are now facing circumstances in which we have an interim Minister of Veterans Affairs.
I think it's really important that we do our due diligence and give proper scrutiny to the supplementary estimates (B) and determine that it take place on either February 25 or 27. We are on a tight timeline to the end of next week, when they will be deemed reported whether or not we have the interim veterans affairs minister come. Due to the circumstances the government is in right now, I think it's very appropriate that this be done properly, as the committees—as we all know—function with independence from what's happening within the government. We have the responsibility to do that.
I would just say that even though the motion wasn't delivered with advance notice, I think there is clearly a reasonable explanation for that, and it is really important. I believe we have unanimous consent to move forward with this and have the interim Minister of Veterans Affairs come before the committee on February 25 or 27.
February 20th, 2019 / 3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Gordon Kitchen Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Chair, I'd like to speak in support of this motion.
It's important, in particular on this motion, that we do have dates, because as was indicated by my colleague, if we don't have a chance to scrutinize these estimates by that date, they will go back to the House and be deemed as if we had scrutinized them, when we have not had that opportunity.
The Prime Minister today reiterated that committees are independent. Therefore, we make our decisions, and we need to make certain that when we make those decisions, we're making them with full information, full authorization and full understanding of what they entail. At this point in time, we don't have that.
I do recall that when Minister O'Regan was here, he indicated he would be back to this committee to talk about supplementary estimates (B). We haven't had that opportunity. We had a new minister who was brought into play and has since resigned, and now we have a new minister again.
Because of how important it is to our veterans, I think it behooves us all to make certain that when we're dealing with this issue, we've had the opportunity to have those discussions.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
I reiterate what Mr. Kitchen just said. It was expected that the minister would be back before the budget and the break, so that's our understanding. We were told just a few weeks ago that the minister would be back before this committee to report on the estimates. I think that expectation is still in place. I think veterans expect that we are going to have the minister here to have that full scrutiny that needs to be applied here.
The new minister has said that veterans are a priority and that he will be representing them, so I expect he will be here. I support the motion wholeheartedly with that expectation.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
I move that the debate be now adjourned.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of clarification, I'm not moving the motion. I'm moving for unanimous consent to move the motion.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I'll admit I put the cart before the horse. I should have asked for unanimous consent to put the motion, but I wanted you to understand the content of it.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Neil Ellis
Yes. Okay. I apologize. I will put it to the committee.
Do we have a unanimous commit for this motion?
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS
May I speak to this for a second, or not? No? I don't have—
3:55 p.m.
Liberal