Evidence of meeting #33 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was standards.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
At some point we have, but it would be good to have a package.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
I presume it is Mr. Atamanenko's second motion that he is talking about.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I have Mr. Bellavance on before you, if this is discussion, Francis.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
I want to clarify something. When I spoke earlier, I was not trying to push ahead of everyone with my motion. Furthermore, I did not raise the issue at the steering committee meeting because Mr. De Schutter was supposed to appear before the Standing Committee on International Trade. He could testify on October 27. Today is October 20. That is the reason I wanted to deal with it right away. If we consider a series of motions, one after the other, and the debate goes on a long time, we will not get to my motion. Although I can bring it up again on Thursday, I am asking the committee today.
I want that to be clear. Do I have the unanimous consent of the committee to debate my motion after Alex's?
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Well, you'll have to ask the rest of the committee. I wasn't in any way trying to say that we needed to discuss the other ones. If you have unanimous consent, obviously we can stray from the normal order. The past practice has been that as motions come in we deal with them in that order, in fairness.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
But at the same time, if we have unanimous consent we can stray from that. I have no issue with that.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Bev Shipley Conservative Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON
I thought you were talking about bringing a witness forward.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Mr. Chair, does this actually have to be done through a motion? It's just a question of your scheduling as the chair, is it not?
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
If the committee agrees here today, with or without a motion, to bring him forth, absolutely the witness can come forth.
Am I hearing unanimous consent to bring Alex's motion forward?
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Hold on. I think there is confusion here.
Mr. Bellavance wants to bring his motion forward and he is talking about bringing other motions forward. If Mr. Bellavance wants to bring just his motion forward, then that can be up for discussion, and we can see whether there is consent for that. If Mr. Atamanenko wants to bring his motion forward, he should do that separately, and we should see whether there's consent for that. But I don't think we should link the two together. I think that's what's causing the confusion.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
They are not linked, to my mind. Mr. Bellavance is requesting his at this point. We either have unanimous consent or we don't. If we do have it, we deal with his. Then Mr. Atamanenko has the same opportunity to ask, and we can deal with that then.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
I'll just finish my comment, if I may.
Mr. Bellavance's motion is time-sensitive, because it's very date-fixed. When we start moving other motions around, though, my concern is that—