Evidence of meeting #1 for Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was staff.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
I said “and that each party be allowed to be accompanied by one member of its party staff.” It could be your assistant or someone you choose to work with you during the study of this bill.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Albina Guarnieri
Could you read the entire motion so that we can understand what you are proposing?
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Guay Bloc Rivière-du-Nord, QC
Of course.
That, unless otherwise ordered, each committee member be allowed to be accompanied by one staff person at an in camera meeting and that each party be allowed to be accompanied by one member of its party staff.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Raymonde Folco Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
It is not clear to me. It seemed to me that the intent of this sentence was for each committee member to have a member of his or her staff. The first sentence here reads: “...each committee member be allowed to be accompanied by one party staff person...” We could simply change it as follows: “...to be accompanied by one staff person at an in camera meeting.”
I think that is Ms. Guay's intent.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
We have our own staff in our offices. But we might want to be accompanied by someone from the whip's office or someone from research who is not on our staff, but on the party's staff. This is why we wanted to make this broader so that we could be sure that we could be accompanied to in camera meetings at least by someone from the whip's office or the research office.
That is the intent. We do not want to be limited to a member's staff.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Raymonde Folco Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
What I have just been told is not clear to me. I understand the second part moved by Ms. Guay. I agree with that. But, in the first part, it would not be “each member of the committee” but “each party on the committee” who would be allowed to be accompanied by a staff member.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Chair, to make sure I'm quite clear, what Madame Guay is suggesting is that each committee member can bring one staff, and in addition, the party can assign one staff.
I see a nod from Mr. Murphy.
4 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Albina Guarnieri
The next motion before us is for in camera meeting transcripts.
It reads as follows: “That one copy of the transcript of each in camera meeting be kept in the committee clerk's office for consultation by members of the committee.”
Do I have a mover for that motion? Madame Guay.
Is there agreement on this motion?
(Motion agreed to)
We're proceeding nicely.
This is on notice of motions. The motion is that except for amendments to bills--and the number of hours has been left blank, so it's at the will of the committee--hours’ notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the committee, that the notice of motion be filed with the clerk of the committee and distributed to members in both official languages.
Do we have someone moving that?
Go ahead, Mr. Martin.
4 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I'd like to recommend that the notice of motion be 24 hours rather than the customary 48. Many of us have found it useful to have that more reasonable burden, viewed as one sleep. I think 24 hours plus an hour is roughly enough time to give adequate notice and to allow the clerk and staff to circulate it to the other committee members.
March 3rd, 2008 / 4 p.m.
Liberal
Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC
I would like to speak against that and go for the 48 hours. I think quite often it doesn't give a member's office staff time to circulate that to the member and for the member to consider it.
I am not speaking for you, Mr. Martin; I am speaking for some of us. We find that makes it quite difficult, especially if the member is at committee all day and doesn't have the opportunity to come in. I would like to go with the 48 hours. It's the usual.
4 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
As this is a legislative committee studying a bill, it may very well be that, at the end of this process, we will be sitting several days in a row. We would then be squeezed by the 48 hours notice required for motions. Our party thinks that 24 hours is perfectly reasonable in the case of a legislative committee studying a very specific bill. This is different from a standing committee. We would agree to a period of 24 hours.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Albina Guarnieri
You know that, with unanimous consent, you can make motions at any time.