Evidence of meeting #1 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Mr. Chair, my experience at committee has been that it's not that often that we actually get the minister here.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Do you? Okay. Well, that's an exception to other committees I've served on.
My point would be that the seven-minute round on the first round is designed to get more participation. It seems to me that other members, even those who are the first ones up questioning, might benefit from hearing the different lines of questions that come from other members of the committee and be able to ask very scintillating questions later in the round.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Bob Rae Liberal Toronto Centre, ON
I think it should be up to us in the opposition, in a way, because we're the ones.... Everyone wants to get at the minister. If we want to go ten and we want to allocate that time, I think we should be able to do that. I think the proposal would be that when the minister is here, at the opposition's discretion, the first round can go to ten minutes, everybody understanding what that does, but in other circumstances it would be seven. That seems to me a reasonable compromise.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Mr. Chair, I would like to speak in favour of the motion to move it to seven minutes. I haven't sat in committee before. I guess my question would be, is there any control over how long the minister has to answer? If the minister is going to take whatever length of time he wants to respond, then it does cut back on the number of questions that can be asked. A seven-minute time period would ask for far more information to be brought forward.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
The point is well taken. The seven minutes or the ten minutes, regardless, include the question and the answer. If the opposition uses up the entire ten minutes, the minister may not give much of an answer. On the other hand, the chair will very often encourage them to get to their point so that we can hear an answer. It's just a little bit of give and take. But your point is well taken.
The problem can be on splits. When you get two people who want to be on the record asking a question, it just doesn't leave a lot of time for the answer.
Are we ready for the question on Mr. Lunney's subamendment?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
I was going with seven and five, but I think I'm hearing a consensus, perhaps, that when the minister is here we would have ten for the first round and for all other occasions seven. If that were a friendly amendment to my amendment, maybe we could make that the question and vote on it.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
I just want to make sure that I fully understood. Are we saying ten minutes when the minister appears, seven minutes for others, and a second round of five minutes?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Now we'll vote on the main motion.
(Motion as amended agreed to)
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
The next one is straightforward housekeeping: that, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation, and living expenses be reimbursed.
We need a mover.
Thank you, Mr. Abbott.
(Motion agreed to)
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
The next one is that the committee be authorized to purchase documents for the use of the committee.
Again we need a mover.
Thank you, Mr. Patry.
(Motion agreed to)
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
On the next one, Madam Brown moves that the clerk of the committee be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.
(Motion agreed to)
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
The next motion is that unless otherwise ordered, each committee member be allowed to have one staff person at in camera meetings and that one additional person from each party be allowed to be present.
This is moved by Mr. Lunney.
Mr. Obhrai, do you have a question?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary East, AB
Are we saying “one staff person” irrespective of the fact that the member is not there?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Wait. Let me read this. Yes, if you are a member of the committee.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
At an in camera meeting? You're still a member of the committee, so if you were not available, you could still have your staff member at an in camera meeting.
Mr. Lunney.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC
Just as a point of clarification, Mr. Chair, I guess this question would then come up. Let's suppose that member is there and you have another member subbing in. Would they also have a member present representing them?
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Bernard Patry Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
No, it's just one member. You could have the one. That's the person you replace. It's one or the other.