QUESTION PERIOD — Aboriginal Peoples
Business of Committee
May 27, 2019
Honourable senators, my question is for the chair of the Aboriginal Peoples Committee.
Senator Dyck, a few weeks ago, before the break week, you asked me a question after I spoke on UNDRIP and Bill C-262. You asked me whether I had, in fact, reached an agreement with Senator Sinclair on when this bill would go to committee. I assured you I had.
Part of that agreement, Senator Dyck, was that Minister Lametti and Minister Bennett would appear at committee. As a matter of fact, they would be the first witnesses at the committee. That was part of the agreement. I assured you I would keep my end of the bargain and I did.
I’m told today that the ministers are not on the slate of witnesses. Can you assure us, Senator Dyck, that both of those ministers will appear at committee and testify as to why they have chosen to take ownership of a private member’s bill and are insisting that the Senate move forward with it?
Thank you for your question, Senator Plett. There’s no way I can assure you that they will appear. They have been invited, but we can’t force a minister to appear. They were invited and they declined. I understand they’re sending senior officials to testify with respect to the various departments.
They were invited, but I don’t know what agreement you had. There’s no way we can force someone to appear as a witness.
You’re certainly correct there; you can’t force them to come. However, the deal was that they would be on the list before that bill would go to committee. I was assured that they would be. That invitation could perhaps have been sent out well ahead of time so we were assured that that part of the agreement would in fact be followed.
Now government officials are coming to testify at committee on a private member’s bill — something that the government has had no part in drafting. They will come and testify to a private member’s bill. In the first place, I find it very strange that these officials would come. Again, Senator Dyck, the agreement prior to the bill going to committee was that the ministers would come.
Why was that deal not honoured? We made sure before the committee meeting started that those ministers would come.
The agreement that you’re referring to is an agreement that you made apparently with Senator Sinclair. It was not an agreement made with the committee nor with me. I can’t speak to that agreement. I had no part in that agreement.
With regard to officials coming to testify on a private member’s bill, we haven’t had a lot of private members’ bills at our committee. We did have one in the past. At that point, I am quite sure we did not have a minister testify. Even on some government bills, we don’t necessarily have a minister appear either. It seems kind of odd that we require a minister to come for a private member’s bill. To me that is as odd as you requesting that they be there. That’s all I can say.
I rise on a question of privilege.
Senator Sinclair on a question of privilege.
Your Honour, I will look to your ruling on whether it’s a question of privilege or a point of order.
It has been suggested that I reached an agreement with Senator Plett to require two ministers to speak. I did not reach such an agreement.
I’m sorry, Senator Sinclair, but points of order and questions of privilege cannot be raised during Question Period. As soon as Question Period is over, you may rise on that.
