Mr. Saxton.
Evidence of meeting #1 for Public Accounts in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #1 for Public Accounts in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
I think we now also have to insert that if there is a tie vote, then the chair does not cast the deciding vote; it comes back to the main committee.
4 p.m.
Liberal
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Just one speaker at a time, please.
Mr. Saxton is making the point that the chair wouldn't vote, and I think I agree with him. There's no question about that.
Having said that, Mr. Christopherson is right; I don't recall ever having a vote. But we can insert that if that's the wish of the committee's honourable representatives from all parties.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, has the subcommittee ever had...?
I'm sorry, did you have me recognized?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
Just going to Mr. Christopherson's amendment in terms of the chair, I do agree with that. Actually, we had that discussion this morning at another committee. We couldn't convince your colleague that this was the right way to go. I agree that you have a chair who is independent, who is neutral, and then each of the parties have their input.
So I do support that.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Then can we just put “non-voting” in front of the word “chair”? So it would be composed of the non-voting chair and one representative from all parties. Do you think that would clarify that?
4:05 p.m.
An hon. member
Sure.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm fine with it, but just a thought: do we really want to tie the hands of the chair?
Let's say the committee is caught up in something and we have debated it. It came here from the subcommittee, we debated it, we're still nowhere, and we send it back to the steering committee to work on some details to try to make some sense of it. Given that it's controversial, it may not have unanimity available to it. We may be tying the hands of the subcommittee to at least have a vehicle of a recommendation that would come. By tying their hands, we may....
It's not that big a deal, but I'm just saying, as a small detail, that I'm not necessarily that keen on it. There are times when we want the committee to act in a leadership role and make a recommendation, but most of the time we don't get into that. I'm just saying, do we really want to deny the chair the right to cause a positive recommendation to be denied? That's all.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
If I may, Mr. Christopherson, before I go to Ms. Ratansi, I think we're probably overplaying the role of the steering committee. If it ever came to that stage, I would feel uncomfortable voting. It can go back to the whole committee to have a discussion, vote upon it, and the committee decides. I just don't see that dynamic playing out in the steering committee. It never did before, and hopefully it won't. So I don't personally have any problem with it.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
I think the consensus building is to create a very independent chair. To create even the impression that he or she may vote takes away from that.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
I'm looking for clarification. I have just one “if” position.
On the two vice-chairs, in this particular case we would have a member of the government as a vice-chair. If that member could not attend, can that member be replaced by the parliamentary secretary, other members on the committee, and so on?
I just want to ensure that validity is there. I just want to ensure that, for example, the parliamentary secretary could replace me should I not be able to be there.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
That's a separate issue, though, the parliamentary secretary. I know on some committees it's an issue of whether they're to be part of this or not.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
But for example, if I'm a vice-chair and I can't be there, we have no representation. How is that representation replaced? That's my point.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
When you use that example, I don't know if that's the right one, but--
