Finance Committee on Nov. 21st, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I will not be reading the amendment. I will be asking the committee to vote on the amendment.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chair, if I may, I will refer to this book you are very familiar with. It clearly stipulates that, pursuant to the orders of reference to committees, the House Standing Orders apply. In the House, whenever he is asked to do so, the Speaker reads the provisions committees are asked to dispose of.

I don't know what right would allow us to not follow the House Standing Orders. To my knowledge, no rule or proposal has been adopted regarding this. So we have to follow the rules, Mr. Chair. I would like you to read the amendment before us, especially for the benefit of new members, such as myself and others, who are arriving....

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

May I ask which page you're referring to in O'Brien and Bosc?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Certainly, Mr. Chair. I can even read it, if you like.

I am talking about page 1045, under the title “Orders of Reference, Instructions and the Standing Orders of the House of Commons”:

Orders of reference and instructions issued by the House to parliamentary committees are a vital source of procedural rules for committees. They provide a framework for committee proceedings. Orders of reference can be adopted for a specific purpose [...]

To my knowledge, this has not been done. I will continue:

[...]—in which case they are recorded in the Journals—or consolidated in the Standing Orders.

This implies that the House Standing Orders apply to committees.

Mr. Chair, I could go on like this for a long time—there are pages and pages. However, I don't want to slow down the committee's work needlessly.

I request that you read the provisions and amendments we are being asked to dispose of.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Jean, do you want to comment on this point of order?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I understand the member's concern, but of course he wasn't here when we passed the motion to deal with this matter. As a result of the passage of that motion, we have conducted our business in a certain way. That business sets a precedent based on the failure of the Liberal member who was here before to object to the way we were doing it.

I would suggest that it is the understanding of all committee members that motions or amendments would not be read. The motion that the committee agreed upon does not specify whether or not motions will be read.

Up to this point, they have not been read. Our motion does not ask for motions or amendments to be read. It says that the question shall be put on each and every amendment. If you look at O'Brien and Bosc on page 1044 or 1045, it says that the committee can agree to change certain things and that's what we did. We voted on it and it was passed.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Jean.

Mr. Bélanger, you wanted to respond?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chair, I agree with the majority of Mr. Jean's comments. A committee can amend the Standing Orders and can adopt a resolution to that effect. However, if you reread the resolution that was proposed and adopted, you will see that it makes no reference to whether or not the provisions and amendments before us should be read out.

If the committee does want to ignore the obligation to read amendments or provisions, all it has to do is propose a resolution to that effects. We can then debate it, if the members wish. And that could take some time. Otherwise, unanimous consent is needed, and you currently do not have it.

My colleague who spoke before me may have consented to this. That's his right, which I recognize. However, I also have the right to not consent to this repeal of rules.

So, I invite you, Mr. Chair, to read the amendments and provisions we have to dispose of.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I think what the member is referring to is the section in chapter 20 in O'Brien and Bosc that deals with House of Commons procedure and practice. It says a committee cannot make a decision or vote unless there is quorum when debate on a motion ends or when a non-debatable motion is moved. The chair reads the motion and asks the committee members if they agree.

However, there is a footnote that the clerks have pointed out to me. It says that the atmosphere in which committee meetings are conducted is less formal than in the House and motions are sometimes carried without being read by the chair. The clerks are advising me that it is not incumbent upon the chair to read the motions.

The way I have been proceeding for the last five hours is an appropriate way for the chair to read it. That's my decision on your point of order.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chair, one moment, please. This wouldn't be a problem if no one had made the request, but otherwise, you have to read them. You can check the Standing Orders regarding that, and I would also ask the clerk to confirm. I think that, if the clerks were aware of the facts, they would advise you otherwise, Mr. Chair. Can you ask your clerks whether you have to comply with a request when someone submits it?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I actually asked the clerk. You may want to ask the clerks, if the clerks do want to comment, but the clerks did advise me as to what I should say in response to your point of order.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

But that's in the absence of a member—

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Bélanger, can I respond to your point?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Sure.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

I asked the clerks how I should respond to your point of order, and this is how they advised me to respond. Therefore, I've made a ruling on your point of order. If you want to challenge the chair, you can challenge the chair, but I've made my ruling based on advice from the clerk.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Yes, but I've asked the clerk to consider what I've just said, and you can see there's a little perplexity among the clerks around the table, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

If a member asks for the motion that's before us to be read, does that apply? That's the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I'll have the clerk respond since my word is not good enough for you.

[Mike MacPherson, Procedural Clerk]

Basically, the general test that we try to follow, and the practice that's followed in committees, is that the question is clear and that the members have all of the necessary information in order to come to a decision.

We're provided a package of amendments submitted by all the members. The chair reads the motion, shall Liberal, NDP or government motion whichever carry? That's the question he's putting. If there's any ambiguity or clarification required, the chair can point to the package and say that it's NDP-39, LIB-10, or whatever.

Aside from that, this is the practice in committees. I've been a legislative clerk for seven years. I've never seen that.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

There's not a lot of confusion there. It's not very confusing at all.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay, thank you.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

It's just that I've never seen a request to have a motion read denied. I'm learning, and we'll have to check the rules out at some other point, and reinforce them for the betterment of the procedures of committees.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

All right, we will move to LIB-116.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chair, I call for a recorded vote.