Evidence of meeting #1 for Bill C-11 (41st Parliament, 1st Session) in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was going.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
It's “members of the committee or members of Parliament who attended the specific meeting”.
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
Thank you.
Is there any discussion?
I will call the question.
(Motion agreed to)
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
Remember that I read the green book on this, so that's why I have all these questions.
All right. I'll hand it back to Mr. Lake.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I move that 48 hours' notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the committee, and that the notice of motion be filed with the clerk of the committee and distributed to members in both official languages. Motions that are received by 5:00 p.m. shall be distributed to members the same day.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Mr. Chair, would that retain the ability, if you have a motion that is germane to the subject being discussed at that time, of the motion to still be receivable?
I suppose the question is really for you and the clerk. Would this motion preclude such a motion being receivable?
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
After consulting with the clerk, I have found that it's for the committee to decide whether it would be something they would like to move forward on.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
It wouldn't apply for the clause-by-clause portion of this committee's work, or at least I assume it would not. Obviously you're going to have motions to amend and so forth during that period, but I like to have clarification.
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
The people around me don't believe so.
Os there any further discussion?
(Motion agreed to)
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I move that the committee adopt the following weekly schedule: Monday, 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Tuesday, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; Wednesday, 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Thursday, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Del Mastro and I are both at a committee that runs at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesdays and Thursdays, so I would suggest that on Tuesday we meet from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. in order to accommodate that other committee schedule.
NDP
The Chair NDP Glenn Thibeault
Okay.
Is there any discussion?
I have Mr. Del Mastro and then Mr. Lake.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Notwithstanding the comment just made by Mr. Angus, I have contemplated this challenge. There are two options. One would be to bring a motion at our committee. The scheduling of committees is a recommendation by the whip's office. It's not a requirement that the committees meet at that time. We could simply move the ethics committee meetings from, say, 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Alternatively, we could make this committee one hour earlier, but we were trying to be mindful of people's morning schedules.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
When we were looking at the morning times, we were considering the fact that a large number of the members of this committee are members of the industry committee and the heritage committee. Industry meets at 8:45 a.m. on Tuesday and Thursday mornings, and heritage meets at 11:00 a.m. on the same days. We figured that the timeframe was probably the best one to at least get two of our four weekly meetings in.
NDP
Tyrone Benskin NDP Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
In actuality, the heritage committee has voted to suspend its meetings until after Bill C-11 is done. We're good with respect to 11:00 a.m. times. We're clear.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I believe our experts who make you look so good, Mr. Chair, are also doing double duty on the ethics committee. I'm concerned about the ethics committee being able to carry out its work, even if it was pushed back. I would think we should leave ethics where it is. I think we can get through this bill, but it's going to cause another committee a lot of trouble if we decide to walk over that committee time.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
I realize that government members aren't following orders from the PMO and the ministers' offices on this issue and on the number of meetings. The fact is that all members of Parliament will have lots to do. I don't know if any of them were here when the Conservative party had only two members or when it had 12, when there were much smaller caucuses on their side, but they would have found that it was a much busier time. There is a lot of other work to do, in addition to a committee, for a bill that they're in a hurry to pass, although they have four years to do it.
It's interesting that there's this great sense of urgency all of a sudden. I don't know if they're moving towards prorogation or what makes them want to do this in such a hurry. Normally committees meet twice a week for two hours so that members can do other work.
This seems to be a rather intense schedule that they've foisted upon us today, and I frankly find it unreasonable. It seems to me that they're trying to proceed with undue haste. It's an indication of their approach to this bill in general. I expect that we'll see them trying to ram it through committee just as they have through the House.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Notwithstanding the comments that were just made, I think if the member reviews the records of the previous legislative committee, he will find that both Mr. Lake and I continuously pleaded with members on the other side to meet more often, to sit more hours, to work diligently to get through the bill as quickly as possible, and to listen to witnesses. This motion is consistent with the efforts that we made at that time.