Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 6th, 2014

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Is Mr. Mulcair suggesting that it would be only one hour? Is that what he would like?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

No, I am. I'm raising it, as a member of the committee, and I'm just seeking fairness. When we bring in ministers at virtually every committee, it's for one hour, so I'm just saying Mr. Mulcair is paid at the rank of a minister. I am assuming he'll be shown at least as much respect as we, as the official opposition, offer to every minister of this government. That's the least they can do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Reid, on this point.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Chair, on this exact point, I recall no such solicitude from the New Democrats when they were purporting that the Conservative government was in contempt of Parliament in the last Parliament over the issue of supposedly having a $1 billion off-budget prison building program for that, as well as a number of other purported contempts of Parliament, all of which, of course, were completely unfounded. As I recall, they summoned ministers back from the airport for multiple hearings, and so on.

I'm glad to see that Mr. Christopherson has developed such a finely tuned sense of solicitude for the well-being of his leader, who, no doubt, like brown sugar, would simply melt if confronted with the second hour of hearings, but I only wish that the same level of concern had been expressed on previous occasions.

I'll stop there.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

No, listen. In fairness, we just did Bill C-23, a 242-page bill. We accepted that the minister came in for one hour.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

On the same point—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's exactly what I'm talking to. We could have easily kept him there.

I'm just about done, and then you can have the floor, Scott.

We agreed. Why? Because that's the tradition. Would we have loved to have him here for two hours or more to grill him? Absolutely. But we did respect the fact that it is normal procedure. It does happen—and I've been part of public accounts in minorities that have called ministers back, etc.—but the normal procedure most recently followed by this very committee on Bill C-23 was that the minister came in for one hour. That was it.

We are just seeking the same fairness for Mr. Mulcair that this very committee and which this very opposition extended to Mr. Poilievre.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I'll go to Mr. Reid and then Mr. Julian.

Let's try to finish this up.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I'm just going to observe that Mr. Christopherson demonstrates his own example that one can talk for six hours without end if one is tough enough.

With regard to the other point, look, if he's to be taken at face value, Mr. Christopherson is confident that at this time two years from now, Mr. Mulcair will be prime minister of Canada. At that point, we can worry about giving him his one hour.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Mr. Chair, I've been here for 10 years and I've never seen a minister of either the former Liberal government or the current Conservative government be present for more than an hour. I think we have an understanding that ministers have schedules. Even under minority governments, Mr. Chair, under which committees could have compelled ministers, I gather, I cannot recall a single instance where a minister was called in for two hours. One hour meets the criterion of the House order.

Mr. Christopherson is underscoring what has been the tradition and practice of this place. We bring in ministers for an hour, because we understand that is their availability. The Leader of the Opposition would have about the same availability as any minister, I think. In fact, I would argue that his willingness to be there on the 15th—we just voted for the amendment to make it the 15th—already does mean some changes to the schedule.

Mr. Christopherson reminds me that he is also a member of the Privy Council.

My assumption all along has been that Mr. Mulcair is happy to come to answer questions in the same way he has as a minister in Quebec city—

[Brad Butt, Conservative, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

That's when he was a Liberal.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Yes, but—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Ignore him. Everybody else does.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

I can only assume that we're talking about an hour, because that has been the practice in the 10 years that I've been here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

On the motion.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Can we get a clarification?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

My clarification is, we have an order from the House to call him to committee, and when we're done with speakers on the list, we'll let Mr. Mulcair leave, just like we would with any other witness.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'd like to move an amendment that Mr. Mulcair be invited for the traditional one hour.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I think it's a new motion.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

It is. I just said so. It's an amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Where are you adding it in the motion?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

At (f).

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Okay.

On the amendment.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

A recorded vote.