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

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Petit.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Since I was not at the meeting of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure yesterday, I would point out that we received the first report of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure this morning. I would like to thank you for your question, Mr. Owen, because it allows us to clarify certain things and to determine whether we are headed in the right direction. The first paragraph of the report reads as follows:That the Committee authorize the Clerk to contact witnesses and attempt to find groupings that reflect the overall desire of each party, and that each grouping be focused by subjects to the extent possible;

So we are going to be giving the clerk this power. I think it is very broad. Paragraph 4(a) states that each witness or group of witnesses have a total of 10 minutes in which to make an opening statement. I think this would be long enough, because some preliminary work has been done. The clerk assumes responsibility, and when she presents the group, our questions will focus on an aspect of the subject that is different from the one the clerk looked at. It is my opinion, therefore, that the amendment put forward by my colleague, Mr. Owen, should not be adopted. It is as though we assume that every individual chosen by the clerk has a different idea and is entitled to 10 minutes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ms. Jennings.

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

Very briefly, this is not to participate in this debate but to ask a question of clarification. I would like to know what exactly are the rules, if any, for legislative or standing committees regarding witnesses and the amount of time they're given. I'd like to know what the current status quo is.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I don't think there are any. I think each committee sets out its own rules, which is what we're going through now. In fact, as we all know, rules can change in the middle of a committee. So in answer to your question, unless someone can draw something to my attention, I don't think there are any rules on this particular topic. We're trying to set forth a rule.

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

If I understand you correctly at this point in time, in fact, the status quo is that witnesses would have unlimited time within the time limit at the beginning of the session and at the end of the session.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Well, you've had a lot more experience in this thing than I have. My observation is that the clerk goes back and says, do you want to make a few preliminary comments? I think what got this discussion going—and I'm nervous about talking about it because the in camera proceeding was confidential—or my recollection of why we got into this was that we were talking about the topic of groupings. That's how this debate has surfaced.

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

Thank you for the clarification.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I have Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

I think it might be helpful for the committee to take into consideration some of the research that our whip's office has done. If I could just have two minutes of your time, the aboriginal affairs committee has 10 minutes. These are the rules they've adopted.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm going to repeat what I said to Ms. Jennings: the rules could be all over the map, as each committee can have its own rules.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Yes, but the point I was going to make is that they're not all over the map; they're all at 10 minutes. I've got about 18 committees here.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay, sorry, Mr. Martin, you're right. You finish what you want to say.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you.

I think it's helpful. The rules of the access to information, privacy and ethics committee from the last Parliament read:

That witnesses be given 10 minutes to make their opening statement, and if they have additional information it should be deposited with the Clerk of the Committee.

The rules from the agriculture and agrifood committee read:

That witnesses be given up to 10 minutes for their opening statement; that at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of the witnesses....

The Canadian heritage committee states that witnesses be given up to 10 minutes for their opening statement. The citizenship and immigration committee states that an organization be given up to 10 minutes for their opening statement. The environment committee states that witnesses be given 10 minutes to make their opening statement.

The rules of various committees are as follows: the finance committee states that witnesses be given up to 10 minutes for their opening statement; for fisheries and oceans, that witnesses be given 10 minutes for their opening statement; for foreign affairs, 10 minutes; for government operations, that witnesses be given five to 10 minutes for their opening statement; for health, five minutes per member, and that the chair direct the first two questions to the members of the official opposition; and for human resources and skills development, that in the hearing of evidence, witnesses be allowed a maximum of 10 minutes for their presentations

Industry gives 10 minutes maximum; justice, 10 minutes maximum; national defence and veterans affairs, 10 minutes maximum; official languages, 10 minutes maximum; status of women, 10 minutes maximum; transport, 10 minutes maximum; and the Library of Parliament committee gives 10 minutes for their opening statement. Scrutiny of regulations has none

So that's all of them. It's not only common, it's ubiquitous. There are not “no limits”, as Marlene pointed out. The standard is that there are limits in every committee. If we have to go around this again, I don't know if I can stay. It's driving me mental.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I know.

Monsieur Sauvageau.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I would like to ask Mr. Martin a question, through you, Mr. Chairman. I agree with him one hundred per cent, without the slightest doubt or hesitation, and I am convinced that Ms. Jennings does as well and probably the Conservatives too. So on this point we have unanimity.

I want to know whether we are talking about 10 minutes for each presentation by a witness or for each group of witnesses. We agree, as is the case with all committees, to give each witness 10 minutes. That is what is done in all committees, and we thank you for reminding us of that.

However, my question...

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

That's wrong. You're deliberately misconstruing what I said to you.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

No. I want to ask you a question.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm losing control here. We don't want that to happen.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

The question I want to ask Mr. Martin through you is this: is it 10 minutes per witness or 10 minutes for each group of witnesses? That is my question.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

If I could answer--and this is not my whip's language, this is the language from the actual rules of the committee. Let's use access to information as an example. It states that witnesses be given no more than 10 minutes for their opening statement--so multiple witnesses, one statement.

Agriculture and agrifood states that witnesses be given 10 minutes for their opening statement. In other words, the opening statement may have multiple witnesses associated with it. So I read that to mean 10 minutes total for the opening statement of the witnesses.

Canadian heritage states that witnesses be given up to 10 minutes for their opening statement. They all use similar language. Maybe I'll table this.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Someone's going to say it's not in both official languages.

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

Call the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Are you ready to vote on this, or do you want to go on again?

[Some hon. members]

Go on again.