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.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
I'd like to ask for a clarification. If a member is replaced, is a distinction made between a permanent member of the committee and a non- permanent member of the committee? My question is for the clerk.
The Clerk
Mr. Bigras, on a legislative committee, if a member is replaced, he or she must be replaced by a permanent substitute. The rules are not the same as they are for a standing committee. If there is a replacement, it must be by a permanent substitute, but a further substitution can then be made later to allow a member to become a permanent member of the committee once again.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
We will go to the vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas, 9; nays 2)
(Motion as amended agreed to)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
As we said at the start, this is going to be a controversial process, with lots of points and emotion on all sides. As chair, my aim will be to keep it moving along as fairly as possible. If we find that whatever we're doing doesn't work and doesn't satisfy the majority, then we always have the option of changing the process.
The next routine motion relates to witness expenses: “That, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses not exceeding 2 representatives per organization; and that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the Chair.”
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
I have a question, Mr. Chair. Is it at all possible that we are going to be using technology like video conferencing? Is that going to be considered for witnesses if possible?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
The next routine motion is distribution of documents: “That the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute to the members of the committee only documents that are available in both official languages.”
Do we have a mover? It is moved by Ms. Redman.
(Motion agreed to)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
The motion concerning working meals reads: “That the clerk of the committee be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.”
Do we have a mover? It is moved by Mr. Watson.
(Motion agreed to)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
The motion concerning notice of motions reads: “That 48 hours' notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the committee, unless the substantive motion relates directly to business then under consideration; and that the notice of motion be filed with the clerk of the committee and distributed to members in both official languages.”
This is moved by Mr. Warawa.
Is there any discussion? Monsieur Bigras.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Chair, I wish to move an amendment. The motion would read as follows: That 24 hours' notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the Committee [...]
This committee is important. It will be sitting regularly, and very likely holding two or three consecutive meetings. They may not occur on one single day; this committee may very well sit on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Therefore, it is possible that things will progress very quickly, and we want to have the possibility of tabling an amendment with 24 hours' notice.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I agree with the amendment. The only part I'd stipulate—I suppose this is for the clerk—is that we've been finding on some committees that someone will submit a motion at 5 p.m. for a 9 a.m. meeting, and that's assumed as 24 hours. We have to be a bit more strict with what we mean by that. The intention is to give enough time for members to see the motions.
So I agree with the 24 hours if we have some rigour and in a sense authorize the clerk to push back and say, “You're outside of the window; it's not enough time.”
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Mr. Cullen raises the issue of why we use 48 hours.
The 24 hours is defined as being by six o'clock the day prior. So if the motion is presented to the clerk's office by six o'clock, before the office closes, then it's deemed acceptable as the 24 hours. The way that plays out, as Mr. Cullen pointed out, Mr. Chair, is that it's not 24 hours; it's overnight. The members of the committee would not realize that there is a motion to be dealt with until the next morning.
The 48 hours, the way it plays out, is that instead of just overnight, you have a day and overnight. The 48-hour notice provides accountability. it provides adequate notice of a motion that will need to be dealt with, and it's a very practical way of dealing with it.
The 24-hour notice, the way it actually works out, created a lot of problems, as Mr. Cullen is aware, at the last committee. The 48-hour notice, I think, will bring a lot of cooperation and hopefully good will.
I would support the normal 48-hour clause, considering that 48 hours is not 48 hours; it's only one day plus a night.
December 14th, 2006 / 11:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Okay, I'll just ask the clerk to clarify the normal practice in the House and committees.
Le greffier
The 6:00 p.m. limit that Mr. Warawa refers to is the time that is normally used by the Journals Branch. To put it rather simplistically, a 48-hour notice essentially means two sleeps, a 24-hour notice means one sleep. I don't like to put things in such colloquial terms, but that is what it means. If the committee wishes, it may decide that the deadline is 1:00 p.m., but 6:00 p.m. is the deadline used by Journals Branch of the House of Commons. If you wish, you may decide that the deadline will be 1:00 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I was just going to say that 48 hours means no surprises. Unanimously, we can decide to entertain any motion at any time. I think there's no question that in this piece of legislation there should be no surprises, and 48 hours is appropriate. If we want to change that as a committee, we can change it as a committee. But that means that no individual, no party, is going to be taken by surprise.
Liberal
Blair Wilson Liberal West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
If I could offer a friendly amendment to allow it to be 24 hours but that notice has to be provided by 3 p.m. the day prior, so it doesn't come in at six o'clock at night but comes in at three o'clock. We could be meeting within multiple days—Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday—and we need to get something moved quickly and 48 hours may delay it. I'm saying, well, if we have it by 3 p.m. of that day, and we're meeting tomorrow, I think that's more than enough time to be able to review it.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
But Mr. Wilson, we can do that as a committee. We can do it. We can entertain any motion anytime. This just makes sure that nobody is taken by surprise and we suddenly find at three o'clock every day or six o'clock every day, on a continuous basis, that there's a new motion set for the next day.
Liberal
Blair Wilson Liberal West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
I just offered 3 p.m. as a friendly amendment, if it's acceptable to the person who moved it.