Committee
Consult the new user guides
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the new user guides
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 212
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Through you, I'd like to direct my attention to Mr. Tromp, if I may.
Mr. Tromp, I had an opportunity to skim through some of your book, and I'd like to note your comments about how the Harper government in 2006 had pledged to “provide a general public interest override for all exemptions”. It did not fulfill that promise. In a subsequent paragraph, you talk about the contemplation by the Conservative Party to look at ATI exemptions and put them to a “harms test", which also wasn't fulfilled.
You then go on, in chapter 8 of your book, to state that the Liberal Party kept its 2015 pledge to grant the Information Commissioner the power to order the release of government information under Bill C-58.
We see that in the Harper years, the media actually complained that they really didn't have a lot of contact with the Harper government in disclosures and discussions, and in 2015, the government came in with a promise to move forward in an open and transparent way, and you cite Bill C-58.
Where are we in the consideration of exemptions now? Have we moved ahead? We've heard the comments from Mr. Beeby about proactive disclosure and where it's not meeting this mark.
I'd like to have your thoughts on that, if I may.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you for that.
I'm sorry to interrupt, but I really want to go into the cabinet confidence. You mentioned that South Africa and Canada are the only ones with complete exemptions on cabinet confidence—
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Sorry, yes, thank you for correcting me on that.
It's quite common throughout the Commonwealth, I understand, to have exclusions of cabinet confidence. Where else in the world is there an open access to cabinet confidence? Can you cite one example?
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you for that.
In your opinion, who should be the czar to determine if there could be an override?
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
How much time do I have, Chair?
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Beeby, you say that much of what's on Open Government is irrelevant, which includes contracts, ministerial briefings, and any funding over $10,000, so what would be relevant if that's not relevant?
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In the effort to make this quick and to find collaboration among all of us here, it's been made clear by many members of the committee that this issue is important to them. I think it's an issue that's really important to Canadians.
That's why I would like to propose an amendment “That this study be the committee's next order of business, and that the committee undertake no other business until the study is complete.”
I'd like to just clarify this. We dismissed witnesses today in order to debate this, so it's clearly an issue of concern to my colleague from the Bloc and my Conservative colleagues across the way. All parties agreed to table this study. We're here. We're debating it. We're making sure that we get a study that is comprehensive.
As I mentioned in our last meeting, I'm not a fan of doubling up work. I would like to see work—and I'm willing to stay all night to do it—that makes sure we really get through what Canadians are asking us and instill trust in our democratic institutions. I think that's what this really is about.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes, I can read it into the record, Mr. Chair.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
I have it in French, if needed.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'll send it right now.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
As I mentioned, Mr. Chair, in the PROC committee both the Bloc and the Conservatives voted against a motion to extend the foreign interference study by four meetings. They wanted to focus specifically on the CCP interference. We've gotten some agreement here about widening and broadening the scope of the study and making sure that we get a comprehensive view, both historically and what's currently happening; so there clearly is an interest in prioritizing this.
There's clearly an interest in looking at this in depth. Since it seems to be a priority for me, colleagues here and across the way, I really feel strongly that this is the business of the day that we should be engaged in. We should get through it and leave no stone unturned, as many of us like to do in this committee, to make sure we have a comprehensive and fulsome review. That's really all I have to say on the subject. I'm happy to open it to debate.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
If I may, through you, Mr. Chair, I'll respond to Mr. Green.
I noted this in a prior meeting, that witnesses who were quite vulnerable were brought to committee without a lot of planning and timing.
I agree with you, Mr. Green, that I'd like to hear from Amazon as well, and we haven't heard from them yet. Perhaps in prioritizing this, since this is the issue of the day, it will allow us to really build the schedule out on issues that are important to you like Amazon and make sure that we give witnesses the time to respond and plan.
As we saw in the last round of the ATIP, we had some vulnerable folks here and testimony that was quite quick in the turnaround.
I think we can be mindful and careful in our planning, and I believe that this is really the issue of the day to committee members and to Canadians.
Mr. Green, I'd be happy to see us work on a well-planned, scheduled work plan for after the break.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Chair, my hand is up.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Chair, respectfully, it's a little bit challenging sometimes with the room and the back-and-forth. Just for clarity, I hadn't realized you had called a vote.
View Ya'ara Saks Profile
Lib. (ON)
I appreciate your point. It's just to clarify.
Thank you.
Results: 1 - 15 of 212 | Page: 1 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data