Evidence of meeting #1 for Bill C-35 (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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
March 29th, 2007 / 3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
I see a quorum.
On the agenda today is the legislative committee on Bill C-35, and the orders of the day are pursuant to Standing Order 103(3). It's an organizational meeting.
You've all received the orders of the day.
The first item on the agenda is the appointment letter of the chair by the Speaker of the House, and it's dated February 22, 2007: “Dear, Dr. Patry, pursuant to”—
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
We can dispense with that. We're happy to receive the letter.
I move that we receive the letter of appointment. All those in favour? All those opposed? It's carried.
Thank you.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
You're faster than I am.
You all have the routine motions. We have 11 routine motions.
The first one is that the subcommittee on agenda and procedure be composed of the chair and one member from each party. Is it agreed?
3:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
On the services of analysts from the Library of Parliament, that the committee retain, as needed and at the discretion of the chair, the services of one or more analysts from the Library of Parliament to assist it in its work. Is it agreed?
3:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
On a reduced quorum, that the chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence—
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB
On a point of order, on the reduced quorum, I'd like to add “plus one member of the government”, if that's okay with everyone.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
It is that the chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least three members are present, including one member of the opposition.
Mr. Moore.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB
Yes. I would like to add “plus one member of the government”.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
Do you mean three plus one, or three including one member of the government?
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB
I mean “at least three members are present, including one member of the opposition and one member of the government”.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
Okay, plus one member of Parliament. It's three, and it could include at least one member of government. That's fine.
3:35 p.m.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
Mr. Chair, first of all, congratulations.
We believe that if witnesses are travelling and if we go to the trouble of creating a legislative committee, the reduced quorum should be set at five. We are twelve in total, plus yourself, so it should be five, out of respect for witnesses. We are not against having government members, obviously, but we believe that three is not enough. We are proposing that the number of members required for the reduced quorum be set at five.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bernard Patry
Okay. I only want to tell Mr. Ménard that I'm not part of a quorum. It's to let you know that he wants five, and it doesn't include the chair.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
I'll make a point to Mr. Ménard.
On reducing the quorum, it's out of respect for the witnesses that we have reduced the quorum. When witnesses show up and members don't show up, we then show disrespect to witnesses.
I believe a quorum of three, plus the chair, is more than ample to accomplish the minimum quorum requirement. We can hear witnesses when we invite them and they show up, when members inadvertently fail to show.
3:35 p.m.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
With all due respect, it is not a logical argument. First of all, the reason why we want five members of the committee to be present is precisely because we do not want witnesses to appear in front of an empty room.
Secondly, I am told that in all legislative committees that have been created since the beginning of this Parliament, we have always applied the rule of five. We can put this to a vote, but this is what we are proposing.