Evidence of meeting #1 for Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Okay.

Mr. Bigras.

10:25 a.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Chairman, the clerk is quite clear. Yes, I agree with the parliamentary secretary. To some extent, the committee is free to set its own rules, but I will remind you that this committee is subject to the Standing Orders of the House, and as such, we cannot amend such a motion. The Standing Orders apply here.

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Mr. Godfrey.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON

In practical terms, it's unlikely that a Conservative chair, even if he isn't part of the quorum, would call a meeting without notifying the government members. In the real world, that would be a very strange set of events. Of course, things happen in this place.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

I'm advised that the committee on its own cannot change a standing order; it has to be advised to the House.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Does this legislative committee not have the authority to require a quorum to include a member of the government being present?

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

According to the standing orders, my understanding is no.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

We do not have that authority.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

No.

Mr. Cullen.

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

This is the point I've been trying to make, similar to Mr. Bigras'. What's different about a legislative committee, from my understanding--and I can be corrected--is that there are standing orders guiding us much more so than a standard committee of the House. So Standing Order 118 says what it says. In order to amend or change that, we have to bring something back to the House, and it gets very complicated.

I agree with Mr. Godfrey's point that the likelihood of the government not being made aware or being present at a meeting is not fathomable at this point. So I think we should just accept it as is and move on.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

I thank you for that clarification, and I agree we should move on.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

There is no motion to that effect, so the definition of quorum stands. Okay, that wasn't so tough.

On speaking times, the motion reads: “That witnesses be given (10) minutes to make their opening statement; that at the discretion of the chair during the questioning of witnesses there be allocated (7) minutes to the first questioner of each party, starting with the Opposition parties; and that thereafter, (5) minutes be allocated to each subsequent questioner alternating between opposition parties and government.”

This one may engender a fair bit of debate. Should we stand this one until the end? You want to go for it? Okay.

Do we have a mover for the motion? It's Mr. Cullen.

Monsieur Bigras.

10:30 a.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wish to propose an amendment to the last two lines of this motion. The motion would read as follows: That witnesses be given ten (10) minutes to make their opening statement; that at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated seven (7) minutes to the first questioner of each party, starting with the opposition parties, and that thereafter, five (5) minutes be allocated to each subsequent questioner in keeping with this exact same order.

Therefore, the second round of questioning will follow the exact same order as the first.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

We will discuss the amendment to the motion.

Mr. Jean.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Mr. Bigras, the word “subsequent” in English means that everyone would have an opportunity to ask questions before anyone got a second turn. Is that the purpose of your amendment?

10:30 a.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

No. It is clear that during the first round, seven minutes will be given to the first questioner of each party, beginning with the opposition parties. After that, five minutes will be given to each questioner, according to the order established during the first turn. This, by the way, was the format adopted by the Standing Committee on the Environment. This allows for a better discussion.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Mr. Jean.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

I find the opposite. I think all Canadians have an opportunity here today to be heard through their members of Parliament, and every region of this country deserves to be heard.

That means everyone should have an opportunity to question the witnesses until someone has a second turn. Then all of our 100,000 constituents will get to be heard before possibly one particular person gets three or four turns. It's not fair. Everyone should have an opportunity to question and represent their constituents properly.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Mr. Warawa.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Just to bridge onto what Mr. Jean has said, what's being proposed is quite contrary to the normal practice. What's being proposed is that when we have the second round...speakers in the third round and fourth round. The NDP has one member, Mr. Cullen, and he would get four opportunities to question before all members on this side were able to question.

What we had in the last committee worked well. It wasn't a problem. The order of speaking wasn't a sore spot in the last committee. It is the norm in Parliament. The original recommendation is what we should stay with. We shouldn't provide one party with multiple opportunities to question a witness, while some members at the table have no opportunity.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Monsieur Bigras.

10:35 a.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

I understand the parliamentary secretary's arguments, but one must bear in mind the very reason we are here today. If we are sitting around this table today, it is because the government believes that the opposition can help improve Bill C-30. Our contribution is directly proportional to the opportunities given to the members of the official opposition to ask the witnesses questions. In order to acknowledge the commitment of each political party here, and to make a constructive contribution to this process, we must adopt the format that I have suggested, which will allow for the members of the opposition to fully participate.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Ms. Redman.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Karen Redman Liberal Kitchener Centre, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The few things I would offer in hope of resolving this is that rounds of time can be split between two members of the same party. I see Mr. Watson shaking his head, but I've never been on a committee where you couldn't, provided you were within the prescribed time limit.

The other issue is that as much as Mr. Jean is talking about regional representation, I doubt that any of us are here as free agents. I would think there are discussions within each party as to how to improve this piece of legislation. I would think your voice would be heard amongst your party group and that's probably the position you would bring forward. I think the need for regional distribution will make itself evident as we go through this, regardless of who's asking the question.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn

Mr. Wilson.