Evidence of meeting #32 for Veterans Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
We are now resuming.
After discussing it with the clerk, I'd like to provide some clarity.
Mr. Desilets, here's the available option. You can move an amendment to remove the last two paragraphs of the motion, and then, the committee will vote on it. Then, you can move an amendment to change the “30 days” to “45 days” in the first two paragraphs and to remove the parts of the first paragraph you want to do away with.
First, though, I'm going to give the floor to Mr. Richards.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
If I understand the situation correctly then, Chair, we seem to have a situation in which committee members want to support a portion of the amendment and not support the other portion.
Could we not just make the decision as a committee to split the amendment into two votes? In other words, we could have a vote on the 45-day portion and then have a separate vote on the second portion of the amendment, which would be to remove the last two bullet points. That way, committee members would be able to vote on each separately.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
I think we need to have two different amendments for that, don't we?
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
If there's agreement, we could split it and have a vote on the 45-day portion, and then we could have a vote on the deletion of the last two bullet points separately.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
That's why I'm asking Mr. Desilets if, first of all, he can change his amendment to say the two last paragraphs, that's over, and we're going to vote on that, and after that—
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I don't want to drag this out, Mr. Chair, since I, myself, have talked about the importance of using the committee's time wisely.
I have a small question for the analyst or the clerk.
The motion refers to “documents related to the deletion or destruction of phone calls”. Does the department have a system that would indicate whether someone deleted document X or Y?
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
There is no such system. That is precisely the problem I see with the third and fourth paragraphs of the motion. If those kinds of documents don't exist, why ask for them?
Thank you for that answer, Mr. Casey, but perhaps the clerk could shed some light on this for me.
11:55 a.m.
Jean-Rodrigue Paré Committee Researcher
Usually, when public servants ask for something to be deleted, whether by email or another document, they are supposed to keep that email or document. If there were any such requests in this case, I suspect they'll be fairly easy to find because I don't think we are talking about 500, here.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
11:55 a.m.
Committee Researcher
They can exist, but obviously, there isn't a system that tracks when documents or information is deleted.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
That's reassuring to hear, Mr. Paré. I wouldn't want to ask department staff to do anything that was pointless, because I have just as much respect for them as I do for veterans. If you're telling me that it shouldn't be a difficult undertaking, I will withdraw my amendment altogether. That will make things easier.
I can, however, move an amendment to change “30 days” to “45 days” in the first two paragraphs of the motion. That would give the department until February 1, 2023.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Thank you, Mr. Desilets. Please be advised that withdrawing an amendment requires unanimous consent.
11:55 a.m.
Bloc
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
I see that other committee members wish to comment.
We have Madam Wagantall and then Mr. Richards.
Go ahead, please.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
Thank you, Chair.
The analyst was reading my mind. That was my concern, and we will reveal that by asking these questions, so I would encourage us to accept Mr. Desilets' recommendation and go to the vote. We're good.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
On his proposal to remove the second two paragraphs and go with the 45 days....
Did I hear that right? I believe so.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
My understanding of what Mr. Desilets was suggesting was that he had withdrawn his previous amendment and was moving a new amendment to change all instances of “30 days” to “45 days”.
I think what Ms. Wagantall is suggesting, and I would agree, is that we go to a vote on that, because it seems like there's some agreement to do that.
Noon
Liberal
