[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Tuesday, April 23, 1996
.1535 
[English]
The Joint Clerk (Mr. Armitage): Honourable senators and members, I see a quorum.
Pursuant to its order of reference adopted March 12 and 19, 1996, the special joint committee on a code of conduct is to undertake its study. The first order of business is the election of the two joint chairs.
I am prepared to receive nominations for the election of the joint chair from the Senate.
Senator Di Nino (Ontario): I would like to nominate Senator Oliver as the joint chairman for the Senate.
Motion agreed to
[Translation]
Mr. Laurin (Joliette): I nominate Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay for the position of Vice-Chair.
The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Ms Savage): Just a moment, please.
[English]
The Joint Clerk (Mr. Armitage): I declare Senator Oliver duly elected.
The Joint Clerk (Ms Savage): I am prepared to receive nominations for the election of the joint chair from the House of Commons.
Mr. Epp (Elk Island): I nominate Mr. Milliken.
Motion agreed to
The Joint Clerk (Ms Savage): Mr. Milliken, I declare you the joint chairman.
[Translation]
I declare Peter Milliken duly elected Co-Chair of the committee and I invite him to take his position as Co-Chair for the House of Commons.
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): Thank you, Madam Clerk.
We have some routine motions to pass now. Would someone care to move the motions that appear on our agenda? First, we have to fill the position of Vice-Chair of the committee.
Mr. Laurin: I move that Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay be elective Vice-Chair, please.
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): Mr. Laurin moves that Ms. Suzanne Tremblay be elected Vice-Chair of the committee.
Mr. Boudria.
Mr. Boudria (Glengarry - Prescott - Russell): How many Vice-Chairs are there?
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): No Vice-Chair was elected at the last organization meeting of this committee. It is up to the committee. Is there any debate on the motion?
[English]
Senator Di Nino: Do we have an agenda? Are you reading from an agenda that I can share?
[Translation]
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): We do have an agenda.
[English]
Yes, it's an order, but this particular motion came out of the blue. It's not the one that's on the agenda.
[Translation]
Mr. Boudria: I would like to have some clarification. At the moment, we have a Joint Chair from the Opposition in the Senate and a Joint Chair from the House of Commons on the government side. We're just about to elect a Vice-Chair, who is a member of the Opposition in the House. I think we should also have a second Vice-Chair from the Senate representing the government. Accordingly, I will move such a motion after we have voted on this one.
Motion carried
.1540
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): Do we have another motion? Perhaps a little later,Mr. Boudria?
Mr. Boudria: No, right away.
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): Right away!
Mr. Boudria: Mr. Chairman, I would like to move that senator Jean-Robert Gauthier be elected Vice Joint Chair from the Senate.
Motion carried
[English]
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The first order of business on the agenda
[Translation]
is the following motion: that the committee retain the services of one or more research officers from the Library of Parliament as needed, to assist the committee in its work.
Moved by Senator Di Nino.
Senator Di Nino: Is Mr. Robertson here?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes. The Co-Chairs doubtless agree that Mr. Robertson should be our researcher.
[English]
Motion agreed to
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Next is that the joint clerks of the committee be authorized to receive documents and that such documents be translated before being distributed.Mr. Boudria moves the motion. Is there any discussion?
Mr. Epp: I have a little point to make, Mr. Chairman. Occasionally when witnesses come to our committee they bring us speaking notes, and I think that it really is in the best interests of the majority of us that we receive those things, if they have speaking notes.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Speaking notes are one thing, but documents that we receive in advance would normally be translated before distribution.
Mr. Epp: But it doesn't say in advance, it just says authorized to receive documents and then it says that these are to be translated before being distributed. I would like to avoid the possibility of having a witness come to us, distribute notes and then say that they can't distribute them because they haven't been translated.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The witness is free to distribute his or her own documents at the meeting if the witness brings documents with him or her. What we have not generally allowed is the clerk to distribute those documents unless they are translated. The practice seems to work, Mr. Epp, if that's okay with you. If a witness comes with a document in either of the official languages and the witness chooses to distribute the document, it gets around, and that's that.
Mr. Epp: Okay. I would just like to then add an amendment saying that provided that sufficient time is given. In other words, if they receive the document in enough time that it can be translated before being distributed, fine. I'm thinking specifically of a witness coming, not having the foresight to send the speaking notes beforehand, but having brought them along.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): But the witness can still distribute them in that case.
Mr. Epp: I guess I speak from experience in another committee, Mr. Chairman, in which members of that committee refused to allow the distribution of the documents because they weren't available in both languages, so then neither of us could have them. I want to avoid that.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We always have, as has been our practice in this committee. I recall specifically some witnesses coming with documents in one or the other language. I think they had it actually in both languages at one time, one time it was in French and another time in English, and we allowed the distribution by the witness. This motion doesn't stop that.
Mr. Epp: Okay, then let the record show explicitly that this motion will not stop that.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): It does not.
[Translation]
Mrs. Tremblay (Rimouski - Témiscouata): We have to be quite sure that the minority will not be penalized by this motion. As you know, very often documents are distributed in English. We have to wait for the French translation 99% of the time.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): That is correct.
Mrs. Tremblay: I prefer your policy. The amendment put forward by the Reform Party could mean that the committee itself might have to distribute some things in English only, because it did not receive them in time to have them translated.
Everything that comes from the committee must be in both official languages. In exceptional cases, someone could come before the committee and distribute a document in one language only. I would have no objection to that, because in that case, it would be the witness who would be distributing his or her text. However, the committee must always work in both languages.
.1545
The Joint Chair (Mr. Milliken): Does everyone agree?
Motion carried
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We have the following motion as well: that reasonable travelling expenses be paid as per the regulations established by the Committee on Internal Economy of the Senate and the Board of Internal Economy of the House of Commons, to witnesses before the committee, and that such payments of expenses be limited to one representative per organization.
Moved by Mr. Langlois.
Motion carried
[English]
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Next is that the subcommittee on agenda and procedure be composed of six members, the Senate co-chair and another Liberal senator, who would be the vice-chair, and the House co-chair and one more member from each of the three parties of the House. I don't know how that adds up to six.
The Joint Clerk (Ms Savage): Neither do I.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We need to fix this motion a little.
The Joint Clerk (Ms Savage): Or the NDP.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): They're not recognized parties.
Yes, Mr. Laurin?
[Translation]
Mr. Laurin: Mr. Chairman, when mention is made of the Sub-Committee on Agenda and Procedure does it refer to the Sub-Committee that will be dealing with the code of conduct?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): No, that will be the job of the full committee.
Mrs. Tremblay: The sub-committee is the steering committee.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): That is correct, it is the steering committee.
Mr. Laurin: I understand, but the House Committee on Procedure and House Affairs is going to set up a sub-committee. I don't know what type of sub-committee we're talking about here.
Mr. Boudria: All committees have a Sub-committee on agenda and procedure.
Mr. Laurin: So this is a sub-committee meeting?
Mr. Boudria: No, this is not a sub-committee, Mr. Laurin. We are a joint committee of the House of Commons and Senate.
Mr. Laurin: Excuse me.
Mr. Boudria: This is a committee that combines Members of Parliament and Senators. This is a joint committee established by a special order of reference from the two Chambers...
Mr. Laurin: I'm beginning to understand a little better.
Mr. Boudria: ...and there is a Sub-committee on agenda and procedure to guide the committee in preparing its agenda.
Mr. Laurin: So the sub-committee in question comes under the joint committee.
Mr. Boudria: Yes.
Mr. Laurin: We're talking about this committee.
Mr. Boudria: Yes.
Mr. Laurin: All right, I understand now, Mr. Chairman.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Senator Di Nino.
[English]
Senator Di Nino: Deputy chairs. Should that not appropriately read the two co-chairs plus the two deputy chairs and then whoever else will be appropriate, since that was not foreseen, obviously, prior to the execution of this?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes, good point. I think it should be the two chairs -
Senator Di Nino: Would you like me to make that motion?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): - two co-chairs, one Reform Party representative and one additional Liberal Party representative from the House.
Senator Di Nino: I'm happy to make that motion. I think that covers all of the parties.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): I think it covers everybody.
Mrs. Tremblay: Do we have two?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): You have one.
Mrs. Tremblay: Senator Gauthier?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The two chairs -
[Translation]
Mrs. Tremblay: What of Mr. Gauthier.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes, Senator Gauthier, yourself, and another Liberal.
Mr. Boudria: I would like to move that Dr. Pagtakhan, another Liberal, be elected.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): And Mr. Epp.
[English]
Mr. Epp: I have a bit of a problem with this because you're saying that you're going to have a Senate co-chair, then the Senate deputy co-chair, then another Liberal senator.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): No, a Liberal member, Dr. Pagtakhan.
Mr. Epp: Has he been selected already?
Mr. Boudria: I just offered his name.
Mr. Epp: Okay, but it doesn't say that here.
An hon. member: Senator Di Nino has amended the motion.
Senator Di Nino: So that we include the two deputy chairs.
Mr. Epp: The Bloc then will have a deputy co-chair and also another member on the subcommittee?
Mr. Boudria: No.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): I'll give you the list. There'll be the two chairs.
Mr. Epp: Okay.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): There will be the two vice-chairs.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): That's Madame Tremblay and Senator Gauthier.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Then there will be one other, Dr. Pagtakhan and you. That's six. Is that okay?
Mr. Epp: Yes, sure, that'll be fine.
.1550
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Senator Di Nino moves that those persons comprise the subcommittee on agenda procedure.
Motion agreed to
[Translation]
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The next motion reads as follows: that the committee authorize the Chairs to take, in conjunction with the co-clerks, the appropriate measures to provide meals for the committee for working purposes, and that the cost be charged to the budget of the committee.
Moved by Mr. Boudria.
Mr. Boudria: That would only apply in cases where we are meeting at mealtimes, I hope. We don't order meals...
Mrs. Tremblay: Does the committee usually meet at mealtimes?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): No.
Mr. Boudria: Only if necessary. We will have to draft our report very soon. We will have to sit for long periods, but we have almost finished.
Motion carried
[English]
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Okay, we will go to other business of the committee.
I think the co-chairs would probably appreciate any information from members as to any witnesses the committee would like to hear, bearing in mind the testimony taken by the committee during the last session has been referred to us. That was included, as I recall, in the motion adopted in both houses.
If there are other suggestions for witnesses, we'd be pleased to hear them. We could take it up in the agenda procedure committee and do a work plan.
Subject to that, if I can be a little bold and go out on a limb here, I think we need a meeting of the committee to discuss the procedure in the committee for long-term - and I say long-term knowing we have a deadline of June 23 or something like that - planning of our agenda in terms of asking what decisions we're making on these items and whether we can instruct our drafters to go to work on a draft report. Clearly we're going to have to refine the report, but if we can establish some general guidelines, we can move quite smartly on this.
As co-chairs of the last committee, we prepared some working documents that were ready to bring to the committee once the witnesses were finished. So we're close to being in a position to table these with you and start those discussions on documents we believe outline all the issues that need to be decided by the committee, without having made those decisions in the documentation.
If you have other witnesses let us hear who they are, and if we need to hear them we can proceed. If not, we're prepared to call a meeting to get going on the substance of the thing.
I suggest we need some time. I think it will take either several meetings of 90 minutes duration or one long meeting where we go through the whole thing. We can start working through a report once we have a draft of it. Again, your suggestions on that would be appreciated.
[Translation]
Mr. Laurin.
Mr. Laurin: At this point, Mr. Chairman, what business has been referred to the sub-committee?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The drafting of a code of conduct. All the testimony heard by the previous committee has now been referred to us by the House of Commons.
Mr. Laurin: That's what I was asking before. I was asking whether the sub-committee was going to deal with the code of conduct issue, and I was told no.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The committee as a whole will be studying that matter.
Mrs. Tremblay: It's a real committee.
Mr. Laurin: I will repeat my question. We have just set up a sub-committee.
Mrs. Tremblay: It's like a steering committee.
Mr. Laurin: What has been referred to this sub-committee? All the committee's work?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): That is correct, and it is just a steering committee. It can recommend the names of witnesses we might hear from and other such things. It should be noted that in the motion establishing the committee there is a paragraph that reads as follows: that the documents and evidence adduced in the first session of the 35th Parliament...be referred to the committee. So all the evidence is now before us.
[English]
Mr. Boudria: Given that we've listened to so much evidence but not all of our members, as the committee is constituted now, have listened to that evidence, I wonder if it would be worth while to have a researcher give us one or two hours where we could almost lock ourselves up, undisturbed by those millions of things that disturb us from time to time, and go through the highlights of what we have been given.
.1555
We have members with vast experience in this area - I'm thinking of Senator Oliver in particular - but we also have members coming to this meeting today who will not have had the benefit of listening to any testimony before. In order to put everyone on a similar wavelength, something like that would be beneficial.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Is that agreeable?
Senator Di Nino: Mr. Chairman, if I recall correctly, prior to proroguing there was an attempt to get together for a day or half a day - a retreat, if I can call it that. At that time I thought it was a good idea, if we could find enough of our members who could attend. I still think it's a good idea. What Mr. Boudria just said could be accomplished at that time, and perhaps we could start to get involved in the deliberations necessary to lead to a report. I would recommend, if my colleagues agree, that we should consider that option again.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We had suggested going off the Hill and having a day where we could work through this subject, because I think there's going to be a fair bit of discussion on various aspects of the issue of a code of conduct. I think it will take us a bit of time to come to some rough decision on the direction we're going, at least, so that the drafting can get going. I have no doubt that there'll be refinements in it as we work through it, but we have to get started on the major drafting portion of our report, which is significant.
If members could make themselves available, I'd suggest we take a Friday or a Monday. Members could come to town early or stay late, as the case may be, and we could have a day. If we have it here, I know what will happen. The whip is very knowledgeable on this subject, as are the deputy whip and some of the other members. We're going to get called upstairs for this and that and we will not get through the material.
Mr. Boudria: Mr. Chairman, there's another problem. If we're not on the Hill and we're sitting, obviously we're not going to be there at all.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): That's right. It's a day off.
Mr. Boudria: But you will know from our work together that I don't leave the Centre Block if the House is sitting - ever. I don't even go to the West Block.
If we booked this room on a Wednesday evening and at 5:30 or 6 o'clock we all came in, ordered a platter of sandwiches and we go through it until maybe 10 o'clock - what if we do it that way instead?
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): Were you suggesting two procedures, the first being a briefing by the Library of Parliament so people can understand some of the transcripts, and second, having this meeting where we sit here and...?
Mr. Boudria: I don't know. I have a feeling that this briefing on all the testimony, particularly for some members who weren't here before... I know the subject will quickly become familiar to them, but we must give them a chance. If we could gather in this room and go through some of the highlights of what we heard... And as I say, immediately when the House adjourns we could order a platter of sandwiches and just go through it, even if it takes three hours. We get everyone up to snuff and then we start talking about what kinds of recommendations we're thinking of, and then we organize a second one or whatever. But we should at least put everyone on the same wavelength.
I have a hard time myself remembering all the things we've heard. Some of our members have not listened to any testimony.
[Translation]
Mrs. Tremblay: This point leads me to a question regarding what Mr. Boudria just said. I would like to start by speaking to my colleague who was on a previous committee, Mr. Bellehumeur. I have spoken briefly to the people on my left and right, and they did not follow the previous committee's proceedings either. I'm sure we can get a copy of the testimony on PubNet. In addition, we should have access to the documents that were tabled, so that we can familiarize ourselves with them. Are the hearings over? Have all the witnesses appeared before the committee?
.1600
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): One witness was supposed to be invited to appear. It is the association of spouses of Members of Parliament.
[English]
That organization had been invited but was not ready. I don't know whether they want to apply. Do any members here have any idea?
[Translation]
Mrs. Tremblay: In Quebec, there is a group of academics called ETHOS, which, for close to20 years, has been doing all of its research on ethics. Have these professors been contacted? It might be interesting to hear some university researchers who have spent their life studying this topic, to see what they have to tell us. If they have nothing to say, then...
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We have some suggestions, and there were also two witnesses...
Mrs. Tremblay: I would ask that we be informed as quickly as possible at a meeting.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): When should we meet? Should your joint chairs organize a meeting for Monday evening? The committee used to meet on Monday evenings.
Mrs. Tremblay: From what time to what time?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): From 6:30 p.m. or 7:00 p.m. until 9:00 or 9:30 p.m. Next Monday, we could hear the witness from the Library of Parliament, who would summarize the testimony presented so far. Then, if we have enough time, we could invite professors Langford and Tupper, who were invited before, but whose appearance had to be cancelled because of some scheduling problems. We could also invite the parliamentary spouses' association and the group that you mentioned. Is it located in Montreal or in Quebec City?
Mrs. Tremblay: In Rimouski.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Rimouski? I see!
Mrs. Tremblay: They've been doing research on ethics for about 20 years now.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Senator.
[English]
Senator Di Nino: Mr. Chairman, one of the problems the senators are going to have, particularly those who come from farther than Toronto or Montreal, is that Monday is very inconvenient, in that most of the participation is on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. This coming Monday I cannot attend because I already have commitments in Toronto. If you did it on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, when senators are here as well, we would get better attendance from that group.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): I'm open to that suggestion. We suggested Monday because so many other committees meet on the other days that we were having trouble getting members too.
With respect to this Monday, as I recall, you heard the bulk of the evidence in the last -
Senator Di Nino: I wasn't that good an attendee, but thank you for being so kind.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): He's read the transcripts.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Madam Tremblay.
[Translation]
Mrs. Tremblay: Since my days begin very early, I'm not very keen on working in the evening. Is it really impossible to hold our meetings at 3:30 in the afternoon?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): On Mondays perhaps, but what will we do on the other days?
For instance, this afternoon, one of the senators is at another Senate committee meeting, and I have another committee meeting right now. What can we do?
[English]
I'm in the hands of the committee. When are we going to sit?
[Translation]
Mrs. Tremblay: Monday is really not a good day.
Mr. Boudria: What do you think of Wednesday evening? We could begin at 5:30 p.m. If there were a vote, we might have to postpone it until 5:45, but we would all be aware of that. Wouldn't that work?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Not for the assistant whip.
[English]
Ms Catterall (Ottawa West): I prefer Monday night, but that's okay. We have a whole committee to satisfy.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): How about Thursday, May 2?
Ms Catterall: Thursday night.
.1605
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): How about Thursday at 5 p.m.? Will members stay?
Mr. Boudria: I will.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): What about Thursday afternoon?
Ms Catterall: We're five-day-a-weekers, you know.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): Yes, I know. I'm quite prepared to sit on Friday.
Mr. Boudria: That's okay too. This Friday I'm not available, but next Friday, May 3, I'm totally available.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Why don't we aim for Thursday, May 2, at 3:30 p.m.?
Mr. Boudria: Okay.
[Translation]
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Thursday, May 2 at 3:30 p.m. Is that all right?
Mrs. Tremblay: That's all right with me.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The meeting will probably go until 6:00 p.m.
Mrs. Tremblay: On Thursday May 2, I can stay as long as you like.
Mr. Boudria: Until exhaustion sets in.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We will probably sit for more than an hour and a half.
[English]
Thursday, May 2, will be the briefing meeting.
A voice: What about the parliamentary spouses? If they're available, do you want to take them?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes, if we can get the parliamentary spouses. Phone the other two groups. I think we should aim for the Thursday afternoons of May 2 and May 9, and try to wrap up all the witnesses by that time.
Mrs. Tremblay: May 9 is impossible for me.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Can you send somebody?
[Translation]
Can someone replace you?
Mrs. Tremblay: If you are always sending alternates, no one will know what is in the report.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): You will have a bird's-eye view.
Mrs. Tremblay: If there are two briefing sessions and I miss one of them, it would be better if I don't come to the first one.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The briefing session is the most important thing. We will probably have other witnesses on the 9th. The next most important meeting will be the one at which we make our decisions.
Mr. Laurin: So the briefing will be on the 2nd?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes, on the 2nd.
Mrs. Tremblay: I have no problem with the 2nd, but the 9th...
[English]
Ms Catterall: We're trying to settle on May 2 for next week. That's fine, but that doesn't necessarily mean that on the following week it has to be a Thursday.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): No.
Mr. Boudria: We'll deal with it then.
Ms Catterall: It could conceivably be the Tuesday.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Or the Wednesday night maybe, May 8.
Ms Catterall: Yes.
Mr. Boudria: Why don't we decree an extra day, like two Thursdays in one week, or something?
Mr. Epp: Get your party discipline going or we could have an eight-day week.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Could we settle on this? Could we organize a meeting for May 2, in the afternoon on Thursday, and for Wednesday night, May 8? That way I think we could force our witnesses into that schedule and wrap them up.
The Joint Chairman (Senator Oliver): On Wednesday starting at around 5 p.m.?
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes.
Mr. Boudria: Wednesday, May 8.
A voice: How long do you want to give each witness?
The Joint Chairman (Milliken): We'll hear who they are first, then we can decide. Not very long. I think an hour apiece would be sufficient. We've been through this quite a lot.
[Translation]
Mr. Laurin: Mr. Chairman, if we plan to meet on Tuesday or Thursday, we will have to deal with votes that may come up in the House. There are often votes on Thursday. If we sit in the afternoon, we may have to suspend our work to go and vote in the House.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): Yes, but that's not until 5:30 p.m. at the earliest.
Mr. Boudria: On the last day of the estimates, there's no vote on Thursday.
Mr. Laurin: Yes, but does that fall on May 2nd?
Mrs. Tremblay: No, there are 19 days left.
Mr. Boudria: No, we're not yet at the end of the period. It might happen three times a year that we have votes on Thursday.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): There is always that danger.
Mr. Laurin: We are lucky, because we had them all at the same time. We also mentioned Tuesday. But the same problem occurs on Tuesday.
Mrs. Tremblay: Thursday, May 2nd.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): That's right.
Mrs. Tremblay: So we agree on that.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): The sub-committee on agenda and procedure could meet to discuss a date to study all the testimonies heard so far.
Mrs. Tremblay: If we need a day for a long discussion... In order to talk about this, we will have to start by getting up to speed.
.1610
Since Mr. Boudria never leaves the House when it is sitting, could we not try to find a day, perhaps the first Monday of the break-week in May, to lock ourselves up somewhere for a full day's work? Since the House would not be sitting, Mr. Boudria would be free.
Ms Catterall: Would you be prepared to sit on Saturday?
Mrs. Tremblay: I would be prepared to begin on a Friday, immediately after the adjournment of the House.
Mr. Boudria: We've already scheduled two meetings, on May 2nd and 8th. On May 8th, we will be close to the break-week, and we will be in a better position to determine how much time we will need to complete our work.
Mrs. Tremblay: So the briefing session is on the 2nd and the hearings are on the 8th. So far we have not started to talk about what will be in our report.
Mr. Boudria: Right.
Mrs. Tremblay: We set our schedules quite a bit ahead of time. You never leave the House, but we do, for all sorts of reasons. I'm quite prepared to consider meeting on a Saturday, provided it is not the 10th of May. I won't be going to my riding on May 3rd, and I already have a commitment on the 10. All sorts of things of this type that we have to take into account. The sooner we know, the better.
The Joint Chairman (Mr. Milliken): We will have a meeting of the Sub-Committee on program and procedure to arrange all that. Is that all right?
Is there anything else?
[English]
The meeting is adjourned.