NDVA Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS
COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA DÉFENSE NATIONALE ET DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS
EVIDENCE
[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Wednesday, May 17, 2000
• 1535
[English]
The Chair (Mr. Pat O'Brien (London—Fanshawe, Lib.): Okay, we have a quorum. I want to go to Mr. Hanger's motion. He gave notice of motion yesterday, as required.
Mr. Hanger.
Mr. Art Hanger (Calgary Northeast, Canadian Alliance): Yes. I think it would be advisable for our committee, given the fact that Mr. O'Reilly presented a motion to this committee offering support to the ombudsman and continued commitment, and given the fact that his mandate is expiring this year.... I'm certainly prepared to give him any support, since he has offered a number of statements in his last presentation condemning the Judge Advocate General's office for interference and a number of other things, and I guess making his life rather difficult.
I don't think it would be wise for our committee to offer any kind of support to the ombudsman without hearing from the JAG's office. Obviously there's a difference of opinion between the ombudsman's office and the JAG's office, and I would dearly love to hear what the JAG has to say. There may be some legal arguments involved too, and traditional matters dealing with the JAG's office that might not be readily overcome by statements given by the ombudsman, what he would like to see.
On that premise, I believe the JAG should be called before this committee and questioned over some of the comments the ombudsman has made and his view.
The Chair: Thank you.
Discussion? Mr. O'Reilly.
Mr. John O'Reilly (Haliburton—Victoria—Brock, Lib.): Thank you very much.
I welcome Mr. Hanger's intervention, because the fact that the ombudsman was indicating to us previous to the meeting that he wasn't getting the support he wanted was the reason for the motion to show support. Certainly during the meeting and after the meeting there was lots of reason for everyone in the meeting not to offer that support, and that is why I asked that the motion be tabled. But I wanted it read into the record and then to be tabled at the bequest of the chair, if he wants to bring it out again.
I agree 100% with my colleague Mr. Hanger. I think there were a lot of issues raised at that meeting that should be explained and questioned by the committee, and I think we owe it both sides to make sure we hear all sides of the story.
The Chair: Sure. I imagine there's unanimous agreement, isn't there?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Any problem? Okay. It's carried unanimously.
There's just one questions, Art. Did he call? Did he express any interest, or was this initiative your own?
Mr. Art Hanger: Yes, a definite interest.
The Chair: He did? Because of course any time the JAG or any other person expresses an interest to the committee, I imagine this group's pretty receptive to hearing from these people.
Mr. Art Hanger: I agree.
The Chair: I appreciate you bringing that forward.
Mr. Art Hanger: As an interesting point, I don't think this committee has heard from the JAG's office at any time.
The Chair: No, I think you're right.
Mr. Art Hanger: And I'd certainly like to know a little more of how they function and what some of their concerns are.
The Chair: Yes, that's right.
The clerk says he has been before us on certain legislation, but not in his role description.
I have an indication here that he'd be available the first Thursday in June. So tentatively, look for that meeting. You'll get the proper notice, of course.
Mr. Art Hanger: The first of June, is that it?
The Chair: The first of June, which is a Thursday.
All right, so we've agreed to bring him and not deal with Mr. O'Reilly's proposed motion until we hear from the JAG.
I'm noting that what we just did is an open session, which is at it should be. Now I'd like a motion to go in camera to consider the report.
Mr. Jim Hart (Okanagan—Coquihalla, Canadian Alliance): I so move.
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: So we'll go in camera now to deal with the third draft of our procurement report.
[Proceedings continue in camera]