NDVA Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA DÉFENSE NATIONALE ET DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Wednesday, October 4, 2000

• 1532

[English]

The Clerk of the Committee: Good afternoon, honourable members. I see a quorum.

Your first item of business is to elect a chair of this committee. I'm ready to receive motions to that effect.

Mr. Hec Clouthier (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, Lib.): I nominate George Proud to be the chair.

Mr. David Price (Compton—Stanstead, Lib.): Seconded.

The Clerk: Are there any other motions?

It's been moved—

Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton Centre-East, Canadian Alliance): No, no. I have a notice of motion.

In recognition of the Herculean effort and marvellous display of true democracy and true grit, I'd like to nominate Art Hanger for the position of chair.

An hon. member: We have a letter of acceptance to hand.

The Clerk: A member can be elected as chair or vice-chair in absentia. But first we have to deal with the motions one at a time. The first motion, which has been moved by Mr. Clouthier and seconded by Mr. Price, is that Mr. Proud do take the chair of this committee. Is it the pleasure of this committee to adopt the said motion?

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin (Joliette, BQ): Madam Clerk, I have a question for you. This is by no means a tendentious question, but is it possible for a member to chair more than one committee or to chair an association and a committee at the same time?

The Clerk: That depends on the members of the committee.

Mr. René Laurin: I see. There is nothing prohibiting this in the Standing Orders?

The Clerk: No.

[English]

It has been moved by Mr. Clouthier, seconded by Mr. Price, that Mr. Proud do take the chair of this committee as chairman. Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the said motion?

(Motion agreed to)

The Clerk: Then I invite Mr. Proud to take the chair.

Some hon. members: Hear, hear.

The Chair (Mr. George Proud (Hillsborough, Lib.): Thank you very much.

I would now ask for a motion to elect a vice-chair from the government side.

Mr. Tom Wappel (Scarborough Southwest, Lib.): I move that David Price be the vice-chair.

• 1535

Mr. Janko Peric (Cambridge, Lib.): Seconded.

(Motion agreed to)

The Chair: Now an election of vice-chair for the opposition, Mr. Goldring.

Mr. Peter Goldring: I withdraw my last motion and replace it with a motion for Art Hanger to be elected as vice-chair of the committee.

Mr. Roy Bailey (Souris—Moose Mountain, CA): I second that.

(Motion agreed to)

The Chair: Congratulations.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, Bill C-41, an act to amend the statute law in relation to veterans' benefits, has been referred to this committee. There has been an agreement reached, as I understand it, by all of the House leaders to give this bill a fast passage through the House and on to the Senate by Friday. There is an amendment that I'll ask the parliamentary secretary to deal with at this moment.

Mr. Provenzano.

Mr. Carmen Provenzano (Sault Ste. Marie, Lib.): Yes, Mr. Chair, just a couple of prefacing remarks.

Bill C-41 would do two things. It would extend veterans' benefits....

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin: Mr. Chairman, the agenda we received prior to today did not indicate that we were going to entertain any business other than the election of a chair and vice-chair. There was no other business listed. Therefore, I don't think it would be wise to get into a subject that we are not prepared to discuss.

I have no objections to discussing Bill C-41. However, I would like us to be informed in advance so that we can prepare our arguments and properly present our parties' ideas to the committee. I think we need a motion in order to add an item to our agenda.

[English]

The Chair: Yes. The reason there was nothing on the notice, Mr. Laurin, is that the clerk didn't have the authority to put anything on the notice except what was sent out. We have been asked, because of the fact that the House leaders and the whips of all parties have agreed to this, to do this.

I would ask Mr. Provenzano to continue.

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin: There's been no indication, either from our whip or from our leader, that an agreement to this effect has been reached.

[English]

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: Mr. Chair, perhaps if my colleague would just hear me out, then if there's some doubt there might be a way to have that doubt resolved.

I have just a couple of remarks, as I said, about the legislation, Bill C-41. It would do two things: it would extend veterans' benefits to civilian groups who served overseas in support of the war effort; and it would allow Canadian Forces members who have service-related disabilities to collect the disability pensions while they're still serving. Now, there was a problem with the legislation, in that the RCMP was excluded.

What has happened, Mr. Chair, colleague, and everyone around the table, is I understand from the minister that the House leaders of all of the parties have agreed to the following procedure. What we're going to need is agreement by the committee to follow a certain procedure to see this matter processed accordingly. The minister will today go to the cabinet to obtain the approval of the cabinet for the necessary funds to pay the extra costs of including the RCMP in the legislation.

• 1540

To include the RCMP in the legislation will require an amendment that, according to the agreement of the House leaders, will come on Friday at report stage. If we can get this through this committee and we have an all-party agreement at this point, what hopefully will happen on Friday is that we do the report stage, with the amendment and third reading on Friday, so that it can be sent immediately to the Senate.

What all of the parties represented here at the committee would have to agree to is to do the clause-by-clause on this bill tomorrow. We wouldn't do the amendment, because it involves an expenditure of additional moneys, which requires royal proclamation. That will be in place provided that we follow this procedure by Friday so that it can be done in advance of the report stage and third reading. That's a procedure that has to be followed.

So what we're really looking for, Mr. Chairman, is the cooperation of the parties represented here to reflect the agreement of all of the House leaders that we proceed tomorrow to do immediately the clause-by-clause and to report by tomorrow evening on the bill.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gordon Earle (Halifax West, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, congratulations on your new position.

Like Mr. Laurin, I'm a bit concerned that we did not know we were going to be discussing this today, but I can understand the explanation given as to why it wasn't on the order. I guess the concern that I have—and I don't want to misinterpret it, because, certainly like the others, I want to see that the veterans have the benefits that are due to them—is that I don't want us to get into rushing this through under what I suppose is the possible threat of an election, just to get it through without having proper consideration.

You mentioned that the minister will be going back to cabinet to try to get additional funds to include the RCMP. That's something I would be supportive of, but I think there is also a question about retroactivity. That issue was raised by many of the legions concerned about it, and it would also entail additional money. Is that a part of what the minister is going to be looking at as well?

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: I don't really know the answer to that question, but I can get that answer. I think not at this time, but I don't know.

The Chair: Elsie Wayne.

Mrs. Elsie Wayne (Saint John, PC): Well, Mr. Chairman, my major concern is that at the present time we have only sent out 60% in each cheque that we have sent to the merchant navy. That's 60% of what they are entitled to.

Also, I was just talking to them today. I get hundreds of calls—and I mean hundreds of calls—just about every week with regard to the merchant navy situation. They have not completed their review of the applications as yet. They've hired, I think, fourteen people because they're doing shift work to try to do this. But, as I asked the minister, where is the money for the other 40%? Because they have more people who qualified than they thought they would have. He said, “Elsie, I don't have the money for the other 40%, but I'm working on getting that.”

Now, I'm not for saying we can't add the peacekeepers and the Red Cross and the firefighters and all those who worked in the conflicts and all that. What I'm saying to you is something about what this body here has to endorse and has to know. We have to have the information we require. First and foremost, we have to know we have the money to send out the other cheques that were supposed to be gone and finished by the end of July but haven't gone out at all. Then, how much are we talking about here when it comes to adding the other groups to the merchant navy agreement? I mean, what are we doing here? We have to have the dollars and cents.

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: Mr. Chair, to my colleague, I think we should be careful not to mix the two processes. I would suggest that the comments she is making are valid and beg an appropriate response, but I'm also going to suggest that what we're doing with this bill does not run counter to the process that has already been initiated with respect to the merchant marine. They're separate processes, and nothing we do here in the consideration of this bill will prejudice that process.

• 1545

As far as the money is concerned, Mr. Baker has given me his undertaking that he will appear here tomorrow if this committee agrees to proceed as requested. He will appear, and that's certainly one question that can be put to the minister.

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: We have to get it resolved.

The Chair: The other thing is that he's getting money approved today for this bill for the cost of the RCMP.

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: But you see, Mr. Chairman, that's my concern.

The Chair: I know, Mrs. Wayne, but as Mr. Provenzano said, the concern is that we don't want to mix the two of them together. This is a separate item altogether, and I think we should leave it at that. If we can agree to take this bill on and put it through the mill in due process, then we should do that as quickly as we can and in the best way we can in order to get it into the House by Friday and then on to the Senate.

Mr. Paul Mercier.

[Translation]

Mr. Paul Mercier (Terrebonne—Blainville, BQ): I pass.

Mr. René Laurin: I'll go along, since I've just been advised that an agreement was in fact reached between the party representative to raise the matter today. I've just been informed of this fact, Mr. Chairman. Therefore, I apologize. I have no problem with our considering this matter tomorrow.

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gordon Earle: Yes, I want to add my voice to the record along the lines that Mrs. Wayne mentioned, recognizing the point that you're making about not mixing the two.

The fact is that we did start the merchant marine issue before this issue, and it's one the merchant marine people have been waiting to have resolved for over 50 years. I have many people contacting me, both merchant mariners and spouses of deceased merchant mariners, concerned about their applications. Some have not received anything yet, and some have been denied, and they ask about what kind of appeal process there is.

I think we had better be careful about what we're doing here. It looks like we're rushing something else through that does entail getting money. Even though it's a different issue, it does entail getting money, and we still have not completed our obligation to merchant mariners. That is not right. So I think we should be careful of that.

The Chair: Mr. Provenzano.

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: I have just a short response.

I honestly believe you're going to be satisfied with the minister's answer to that question. They've been working overtime on those applications under that legislation, and I believe he will have an answer that you will consider quite appropriate.

The Chair: Mr. Bailey.

Mr. Roy Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My understanding is simply that, first of all, the minister has to get the approval to have an amendment placed before this committee in order that the RCMP benefits be part of the total package, and that requires dollars and cents. I don't know whether it's an amendment or whether you're just going to change the bill, but I think we have agreed in general on that principle.

The second thing is that I think we're mixing some issues here. This bill entails providing benefits to civilian groups. It's a different issue from the merchant marine, in that, if I understand it correctly, the government says that to date it will pay about 60% of the $50 million allocated—and I'm quite sure it could be more than the $50 million.

If we get off on the tangent of other bills—and there's more than the merchant marine—we could get way off and we would never get to Bill C-41. Thus, by holding up the bill we could deny some eligible people some benefits. I'm very concerned, as I'm sure every member of this committee is, about those named within this bill who may lose out if we hold this particular bill up.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Bailey.

Mr. Provenzano.

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: Mr. Chairman, this is just to correct one aspect.

I agree with your comments completely, but there is one item that needs correction. The committee would not deal with the amendment under the procedure. The amendment would be done on Friday.

Does that help, Mrs. Wayne?

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: Mr. Chair, I'm just wondering if it would be possible for us just to table this until we meet tomorrow when the minister comes before us. We'll then have no further concerns. This is what you're telling us. Everything will be worked out and then we'll have no problems whatsoever.

• 1550

The Chair: Mrs. Wayne, I think what I'd like to do today is get agreement from the committee that we would proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-41 tomorrow morning and that the minister will be appearing here at approximately 9:30.

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: I have no problem with that. If that's what you're asking, I'll move it.

Mr. Roy Bailey: Agreed.

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: Mr. Chair, the motion is that we move to clause-by-clause consideration tomorrow with the view of reporting by the end of the day so that we can accomplish this timeframe.

The Chair: Yes.

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: On a point of order, Mr. Chair, might I clarify something?

The Chair: Just a second, Mrs. Wayne.

Do you mean that we do the clause-by-clause tomorrow, finish the bill here tomorrow, and report it to the House tomorrow?

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: Yes.

The Chair: Okay. In order to table it tomorrow afternoon, we'd have to have unanimous consent of the House, or we could wait till Friday morning.

Mr. Carmen Provenzano: We have to follow this procedure.

The Chair: We will follow the procedure and finish it here tomorrow and hopefully be able to get the unanimous consent of the House to table the report tomorrow afternoon. Okay?

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

As you know, Mr. Price used to be our representative for any meetings or trips when it came to NATO. Right now he doesn't represent the PC Party any more, so I will be the representative on the committee with regard to the PC Party and anything dealing with NATO.

The Chair: But that's another organization.

Mrs. Elsie Wayne: I just want to correct it for the record, because that's the way it is now.

The Chair: Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.

I'll adjourn the meeting until tomorrow morning at 9:30.