Evidence of meeting #67 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was point.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I call the meeting to order.
Welcome to meeting no. 67 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
First of all, I want to thank Ms. Yip for filling in for me yesterday on the subcommittee with respect to the committee business. I had a conflict and I appreciate your being there.
We have several motions before us, at least three by my count, as well as committee reports to get through.
I'm going to recognize Garnett Genuis.
Go ahead, please.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Thank you, Chair.
We experienced a number of efforts to delay or block motions, and I'm hoping that today will be the day we get something done.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
We've had our hands up. It was very clear that we wanted to speak. I don't want to raise a point of privilege here, but we've been here, and you've seen our hands. For some reason you haven't recognized us.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Just let me hear this one first and then I'll come back to you, Mr. Genuis, on the point of order.
Go ahead.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
We had our hands up first. We would like to speak. It is our privilege to do so and it is well understood that the member who has their hand up first should be recognized first.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I'll hear the point of order on this side, Mr. Genuis, please.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
It seems that Mr. Fragiskatos may have been sitting here for half an hour before the meeting started with his hand in the air. There is no precedent for the claim that a member can raise their hand to speak prior to the meeting beginning. I had my hand raised when the meeting was beginning and I called for the chair's attention, and it's up to the chair to identify who caught his eye first.
The idea that some precedent is established by raising your hand prior to the beginning of a meeting is absurd and has no basis in the rules. There is no doctrine of privilege that one member who wants to be recognized ahead of another member who has caught the chair's eye first has that right. I think the member might wait his turn.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
That is my view. I'm going to check with the clerk here, but I have members who approach me all the time about committee business and raising issues, and my view is that when the gavel is dropped, it's the first person who catches my eye. I do see that all the government members want to speak to this, but I'm just going to double-check this to make sure I'm on solid ground, because if it is challenged, I at least want to be in the corner with the clerk. Just wait one second, please.
I am going to maintain my ruling here and return the floor to Mr. Genuis.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
It's not my intent to continue to raise points of order. However, we did speak before. You saw us as you came in, and you committed to us that we would have the opportunity to speak. It's clear you saw our hands. You knew our hands were in the air. You knew we wanted to speak.
This is a point of privilege now. This is something I have not seen before at committee, when we have members who have expressed an intent to speak and made that clear to the chair in advance of the meeting. Granted, it was not a day ago. It was at the beginning of today's meeting. When you walked in, you saw our hands and committed to us verbally that we would have the opportunity to speak first. Now, suddenly, you have turned around. I would have expected more. I'm quite surprised at the approach that has been taken. I think this taints, without question, the way this committee will operate from here on out.
Mr. Chair, you've been fair as chair of this committee. You say Mr. Genuis caught your eye first. You looked at us with our hands in the air. Clearly, we caught your eye first, but you made the decision—and I emphasize “decision”—to look towards Mr. Genuis when it was very clear we had your attention. I can't help but emphasize this point. I will continue to argue it until our side is given the opportunity to live up to our roles here as members of Parliament, in keeping with the established precedent that I've seen at committees and that we have all lived by. When members have their hand up, they are recognized.
We did catch your attention. We did “catch your eye”—if you want me to use your words exactly—because you looked at us and told us we would have the opportunity to speak first. Then, you changed your decision. It's not fair. It's not in keeping, again, with the role of a chair, who is supposed to be a neutral arbiter of procedural rules relating to committee.
I respectfully ask that I be allowed to raise the point I wanted to raise, followed by Ms. Yip, Ms. Bradford, Mr. Sidhu and Mrs. Shanahan. They came here in advance, had their hands up, were ready to speak and wanted to speak. You committed to us that we would have the opportunity to speak, and now there's been a different course taken.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
You will have the opportunity to speak, of course.
I take exception to.... You seem to think that my talking to you before committee means I committed that you would speak first. I did not say that. We were having an informal discussion. I asked you whether you wanted to share with me what the business at hand was. You chose not to do that, which is your right, but you made a statement that I challenge: that I committed to your speaking first. I did not do that. I had another opposition member speak to me in the House of Commons, who was also looking to speak first. I do not commit to anyone about speaking first in this committee. You can come here 10 minutes or 10 hours before and put your hand up. Until the gavel goes down, I see nobody. I see nobody until this meeting begins.
Now, you can take exception to whom I saw first, but I'm recognizing Mr. Genuis, because he caught my eye first.
All right, I'll stop there, because I see there are a few other people who want to speak to this point. I'm not sure whether Mr. Genuis or Mr. McCauley was first.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
I'd be happy to proceed. I think we're seeing delay tactics from the Government of Canada, which doesn't want to allow us to get to the bottom of what happened with the Trudeau Foundation. I have a lot to say on this matter, but I'd be happy to just move on, because—
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Thank you.
I'd like to move that the committee resume consideration of the motion—
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. Genuis, I have another point of order.
Yes, go ahead, Mr. Sidhu.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
You're going to have a lot of points of order.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Maninder Sidhu Liberal Brampton East, ON
To my colleague across the way, it's not a tactic to delay. It's about a level of respect among colleagues. I believe that's what the issue is here.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative