Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on May 9th, 2006

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I just wanted to make a small correction. No unanimous decision was made by the subcommittee yesterday. I asked you the same question on this four times, and on four occasions, you gave me the same answer: you said that if were we unable to reach a unanimous decision, the matter would be referred to the full committee for discussion. Therefore, when Mr. Poilievre states that a unanimous decision was reached at yesterday's in camera meeting, I, with regret, believe that he is mistaken — an innocent mistake, I am sure.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, that's what we're doing. We're having a little debate here.

Does anyone else have any comments on the amendment?

Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I think I was on the speakers list, and I wasn't identified.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Oh well, you are now, sir.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I don't think I've ever been on a committee where there's an open-ended list of witnesses. I can't imagine how we could operate if, on some whim and notion, at the end of hearing one group of witnesses we decided, well, we should probably hear this group as well, or that group as well. That's why there's always--always--a finite agreed-to list of witnesses, subject to unforeseen events or unanimous consent, where we might decide it's absolutely crucial that we expand the list to include one extra special person.

But the idea that you can keep sending in names and adding to the period of time that we dedicate to hearing witnesses is a guarantee that you'll undermine and hijack this committee into endless, fruitless naval-gazing, and I declared when I first got here that I wouldn't be a part of that.

In fact, I'm inclined to serve a notice of motion at the end of this speech that we do not meet in televised rooms, because I'm embarrassed that the people of Canada are witnessing this kind of grandstanding already. It's started already. I mean, what we predicted, our worst fears, are here; they've been realized. We have nothing but grandstanding and pontificating about how our party embraces accountability more than your party does, without any--I don't think--sincere interest in getting started on this committee. I don't sense it.

I don't think we should be televised if that's all we're going to be doing. We should be behind closed doors and getting this stuff out of our system, at least.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

If there are no other questions, I'm going to ask that we're clear as to what the amendment is, Ms. Jennings.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

It is as follows:2. It was agreed, — That the final time limit for the submission of a preliminary witness list and for preliminary witness requests to appear expires at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 9, 2006, after which witnesses may begin to be invited to submit a brief in writing.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment to the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I move that additional names added to the list after the deadline must be unanimously supported by committee members to be included.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We have an amendment to the amendment.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes, and I'll speak on my amendment. The reason we need this amendment is that if Ms. Jennings is sincerely interested in having a flexible system that allows members to expand the list on a need-be basis, then clearly members of this committee--

Are you on the list?

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

No, I have a point of order.

Was Mr. Poilievre's motion in favour of limiting speaking time to one minute adopted?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I don't know what motion you're speaking of.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We haven't got to that yet. It's going to get better.

Please continue.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

The reason is that if there is some legitimate reason to add a name to the speakers list, I'm sure committee members will not object to adding that name. If we find there is some additional need to add a new witness, then we'll add a new witness. We'll just do it unanimously. But what we don't want is for one or two committee members to have the power to extend the witness list infinitely, into perpetuity. The only reason anyone could possibly want to empower a single member of the committee to add infinite numbers of witnesses is if they were intending to delay the work of the committee.

So why not just agree that unanimously we can all, on a reasonable basis, extend the witness list where necessary?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Monsieur Sauvageau.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Owen.

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and colleagues.

I would like to perhaps put a bit of a finer point on our discussion. We seem to be talking about cutting off the list completely today or tomorrow, and then only extending it with unanimous consent. It seems to me that might be too restrictive.

Mr. Poilievre has suggested that it be on a reasonable need-be basis, if there's unanimous agreement, but I'm not sure that properly qualifies it.

I would suggest, colleagues, that it be a majority. If a majority of the committee feels that another witness is necessary to do our work properly, that should be the test for expanding the list after today.

[An hon. member]

Hear, hear!

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Martin, on the amendment to the amendment.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

My sense is that we have witnesses here waiting to testify. Maybe we should have this fight at a later date, whether it's in camera or not in camera. Why don't we deal with the witnesses and then make these rules after the fact? We're wasting everybody's time.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Indeed.

On a point of order, Madame Guay.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I would ask that you call the question.